Of course, there are rare cases of great artists/etc who can't make a living because they haven't been "discovered" yet, or because their work runs against the current trends (despite being brilliant). I would argue these are the minority, and for the most part the system is functioning properly.
Professional writers aren’t ad-financed.
Look at Panama Papers.
Not a single of the involved newspapers and broadcasters is ad financed: All are either tax or subscription financed.
Btw, for just 19.99€ you can get full access to all articles about Panama Papers in the Süddeutsche if you don’t want to enter a 12-month subscription for the whole newspaper.
Wrong.
While some outlets enjoy full state support or sufficient subscription revenue to not need advertisements, the VAST majority of publications get a significant portion of their revenue (which is the used to pay their staff writers and freelance contributors) from ads. Better known examples of such publications include: The New York Times, Wired, The Atlantic.
In Norway, where I live, Aftenposten was given access to the Panama Papers for analysis and publication. Aftenposten is partially subsidized by the Norwegian government, but also dependent on ad revenue to survive.
Nothing has value. Value is assigned to something by people who are willing to pay. I wouldn't say that people should work for free; I would say that people shouldn't do something if they don't want to.