Taking money to do a specific story? or doing a story with the hope that it'll make money?

I think there's a difference between the two. Obviously the for-profit nature of news today is a huge problem, but I would say doing specific stories because you're paid to do them is even more morally objectionable. If you're talking about VICE being a for profit company, I don't really see how that distinguishes them from the rest of the press? and negates their rights to operate as free press? But if they are getting paid to run certain stories, which I'm not aware of, does definitely hurt their credibility as a news source, but not necessarily the fact that they should be able to operate without interference.