It may not merit top ranking on the woes-of-the-world list, but--as many other writers have noted--the continued implosion of the newspaper business is particularly threatening to traditional arts journalism. Papers have been laying off book and movie critics for several years. (I noticed today that a site documenting the waning ranks of film reviewers hasn't yet caught up with the recent dismissal of the longtime movie critic for the Richmond Times-Dispatch, the daily in the Virginia city where I live.) Reviewers and arts reporters who haven't been given the old heave-ho may be asked to writer shorter pieces, and to be pickier when choosing works to discuss.Of course, reviewing, at least, is flourishing on the Web. But the Web tends to be niche-ified: It's the more conventional journalistic establishment, arts critics included, that can better generate a cultural discourse the whole society can share.Investigative reporting, too, often falls by the wayside when the media is pinching its pennies. Various nonprofit organizations, such as ProPublica and the Center for Investigative Reporting, have sprung up to preserve that valuable journalistic genre. Perhaps there's a need for a national nonprofit specializing in arts journalism--an outfit that could dispatch writers to document and critique that museum exhibit, or small-town adventurous play, or noteworthy dance production that might otherwise fall through the cracks. The nonprofit could publish the pieces on the Web, of course, but perhaps before ink-and-paper outlets die out completely, it could also become a sort of Associated Press for arts journalism, allowing papers and magazines across the country to run the coverage for a modest sum.Any energetic visionaries willing to step up to the plate?