Print, in general, is struggling in every corner of the United States

Not just the US. Rupert Murdoch has been making comments about charging for content. For example:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2009/oct/23/charging-for-content-rupert-murdoch
He has also been making noises against the BBC which publishes lots of content for free.

And yet, Rupert has not embraced the adsurf model. I guess he doesn’t “get” it either.

The model as practiced in the so-called autosurf advertising “industry” is plainly illegal.

Yep. But some of the pro-ponzi crowd have claimed that they have a contract to do business, even if that business is illegal. The evil government is breaking the US constitution by stopping such business. Or some such nonsense.

I’ve often said that the ponzi operator/supporters/promoters etc all recycle the same excuses over and over again. It seems that even this excuse has been used before. Not by Bryan Marsden, or Blake Prater. A bit before that:
Oscar Hartzell, from the 1920’s and 1930’s.
http://www.fool.co.uk/news/investing/2009/10/26/famous-scams-oscar-hartzell.aspx

in the US his legions of victims, who seemed to have an unshakeable trust in him, complained bitterly that they could donate their money to whomever they wanted for any legal purpose.

The similarities between this and modern ponzi scams is interesting. A fortune being held by the wrong people – aka – evil government, or opportunities only available to the very rich. Spinning bad news into good. Taking the name of someone else to support the fraud.