We seek to be transparent, ethical and aboveboard, so we go out of our way to point out our flaws. (What other industry points out its own errors daily?)

In holding ourselves to a high standard, we sometimes flog ourselves unnecessarily and incessantly. Our economic problems have led some to believe that few people read newspapers anymore, and that newspapers are dropping like flies.

Neither is true. Newspapers are still well-read. The Dispatch's paid Sunday circulation tops 300,000 homes, and dispatch.com is easily the top-read Web site in central Ohio. Newspapers don't have readership problems. They have advertising problems fueled by the economic slump and a structural change in their economic model.

Some newspapers have folded. How many? One percent.

A couple of months ago, when the Rocky Mountain News and Seattle Post-Intelligencer closed, editors here were curious about what happens when a city loses its daily newspaper.

Denver and Seattle weren't the best case studies, because they had been two-newspaper towns. Both still have major newspapers.

When word came that Advance Publications would close its paper in Ann Arbor, Mich., to experiment with an all-digital newspaper, we perceived a good opportunity to see the effects on the city, home to the University of Michigan.

Joe Hallett's story about Ann Arbor appears to the left of this column. It may be too early to discern the full impact, but residents already have strong opinions about the loss: They feel disconnected.

"A community won't know how valuable a newspaper is until it no longer has one," said Kenneth A. Paulson, former editor of USA Today and chief executive officer of the Newseum, a museum dedicated to the First Amendment. "Daily newspapers do more than report events in the neighborhood. They're voices for progress and a unifying element in an increasingly diverse society. Newspapers remind us of how much we share and tend to offset the polarizing impact of contemporary politics."

"Go back and look at the history of newspapers in towns big and small, and newspapers were always the voices pushing for better schools, more-accountable government and important civic projects. A good newspaper has always been a constructive nag for progress, and that cannot be replaced by any number of tweets or Facebook postings."

What frustrates newspaper people is that some readers expect to get news free. Certainly, some news is available free. But you get what you pay for.

Good journalism takes time and money. Having people work all hours to cover, edit and package the news is expensive. Basing reporters throughout central Ohio and in Washington costs money. So does covering sporting events across North America. And employing world-class photographers and artists comes with a price, as well.

If advertisers can't or won't pay for it, readers must -- in print and, eventually, online.

As Paulson says: "How comfortable would you be going to a doctor who didn't charge you a fee? How willing are you to entrust your finances to an accountant who's going to do your taxes for free? Journalism is a profession, and somebody has to pay the bill. If Americans don't want to invest in news and information, then they're going to get very poor coverage and unreliable information."

Thanks for supporting The Dispatch. We will continue to strive to make the newspaper worth your time and money.

Benjamin J. Marrison is editor of The Dispatch. You can read his blog at dispatch.com/blogs.

bmarrison@dispatch.com