Nonprofit news models are important. We need others too

With new grantees announced earlier this year, I’m thrilled by the success of nonprofit local newsrooms, well represented by the American Journalism Project, rolling across the country. It seems clear that each U.S. state, and many regions around the country, will, and should, have some version of this model, sustained by local philanthropy and individual donors. This is a necessary, and exciting, layer to the future of local news ecosyinstems — it is also incomplete. As the founder of decade-plus-old, bootstrapped, niche multi-local newsroom, let me share why.

Back in 2009, I used two plastic containers as a couch and supplemented my meager freelance income by doing odd jobs in landscaping and plumbing. It was clear a true global economic crisis was hastening the decline of my trade. I was living in a crumbling, mouse-infested apartment in the Frankford section of Philadelphia. I scared, lonely and very sad.

Two friends I knew from my college newspaper days were also feeling quite stuck, falling through the cracks of a yawning fissure in how our economy worked and information gathering needs were met

From the start, we agreed that every local news organization still structured as an advertising model was on an irreversible path of decline. The web’s power was scale, anything that unnecessarily drew geographic boundaries was unnatural. None of us came from families with any business background but we were curious and frustrated. We felt very abandoned by those who should have been our mentors and advisors. If I’m being honest I still harbor a chip on my shoulder from those days, and likely will for the rest of my career.

Since then, I’ve become fixated on understanding how journalism creates value for communities. I’ve learned that journalism’s value—curating and verifying information to help people understand their world—remains immense. But too often, the ways we attempt to sustain journalism misalign with this value.

Nonprofit models are one such approach. They freeze the core principles of 20th-century accountability journalism and fund it with philanthropy and reader donations. This is a promising trend, and I believe these newsrooms will endure as a key part of the ecosystem. But they aren’t enough.

For one, nonprofit newsrooms must compete with other critical community needs—food banks, job training, and the arts. During times of crisis, it’s unclear whether journalism can consistently win that competition. More importantly, there are simply too many communities for nonprofit models to serve alone.

Instead, we need a broader range of experiments. Journalism shouldn’t limit itself to replicating legacy models under new funding structures. We should explore new business models that align journalism’s value with sustainable revenue. That means embracing entrepreneurship, commercializing ideas, and rethinking how we engage with audiences.

For-profit newsrooms have the potential to play a critical role here. Charging a lot of people a little—or a few people a lot—remains the foundation of any sustainable business. Yet, too often, journalists are uncomfortable or even dismissive of revenue generation. That mindset is dangerous if we want journalism to endure.

I don’t mean to suggest that my own company, Technical.ly, has cracked the code. If anything, my experience has taught me there is no “code.” There are only the slow, messy steps of experimentation. But I remain convinced that local news needs more than one model to survive.

What if journalism wasn’t only produced by news organizations?

Opera is a tightly defined form of musical theater, but it doesn’t encompass all celebrated music. Journalism risks a similar narrowing of scope—a class divide that leaves it lacking the range and diversity its principles deserve.

As a community of practitioners, we often misunderstand journalism as the exclusive product of a single industry: news organizations. Journalism is not just a product; it’s a set of principles and approaches developed over centuries to foster trust and build relationships.

In the 20th century, journalism’s societal value—fact-based, contextual information to help communities navigate a complex world—was primarily produced by news organizations. This dominance stemmed from a successful business model that paired advertising revenue with independent newsrooms. That model, however, has collapsed under systemic creative destruction. Instead of rethinking how to produce the outputs (journalism) more effectively, we remain overly focused on restructuring the inputs (news organizations).

Meanwhile, other actors—some unaware of or uninterested in journalistic norms—have invaded the space. They mimic the appearance of journalism but produce outcomes ranging from banal content marketing to partisan propaganda, further eroding trust in traditional news organizations.

As someone who co-founded a digital-first local news organization after the Great Recession, I’ve spent the last decade operating in this shifting landscape. In 2011 I wrote: “Sustaining the craft of journalism matters more right now than the craft itself.”

Our work looks little like the 20th-century newspaper model that dominated local journalism, which leaves us seen as anomalies rather than as viable examples of what’s possible. Through this experience, I’ve become convinced that journalism practitioners are still thinking too small. We need to codify the tenets of journalism into a worldview that any professional or organization can adopt—making journalism less of an exclusive craft and more like a cloud-based SaaS tool: adaptable, scalable, and widely accessible.

Local journalism, in particular, suffers under two unsustainable extremes: large-scale media brands thriving through web-enabled reach, and small, local brands struggling with audiences that appear minuscule in comparison. Nonprofit newsroom models have emerged as a promising response, preserving the core principles of 20th-century accountability journalism while leveraging philanthropy and reader support. These models are important and long-lasting—but also limited.

Nonprofit journalism cannot meet the needs of every community. Competing against other vital services like food banks and job training, especially in times of crisis, is an uphill battle. Moreover, the editorial firewall of the 20th century has left many journalists deeply uncomfortable with—or even hostile to—revenue generation. That mindset is dangerous if we want this work to last.

What we need is a broader exploration of commercial opportunities and new ways to align journalism’s value with sustainable business models. My own company, Technical.ly, hasn’t cracked the code—because there is no code. But we’ve worked through the painful, slow steps of building something sustainable, and I believe those lessons are replicable.

I’m motivated by the conviction that every community needs a voice. Journalism doesn’t belong to news organizations alone—it belongs to anyone committed to creating and sharing fact-based, contextual information. If we embrace that, we can ensure journalism thrives, not just as a profession, but as a societal good.

Newsrooms should have and defend their ‘basic beliefs,’ not the tactics to get there

News organizations, at least here in the United States, operate with all sorts of assumptions underpinning their foundations. But it gets uncomfortable once you review them. I believe more news orgs should identify these.

Out of a reporting project, I found myself considering what those core beliefs are for Technical.ly. To identify these assumptions, we’re forced to address: what is the line between a newsroom becoming partisan and a newsroom defending justice? My divide is between the *tactics* to reach a given goal, and the goal itself, which might be understood as that organization’s *”basic beliefs.”*

From my perspective, a news organization today should hold firmly those *beliefs* about the world and the communities it serves. These can and likely should range by the organization. As an exercise, I wrote a few that I believe are basic beliefs of my own news org:

  • Representative democracy is our preferred form of government;
  • A free press that challenges its community in pursuit of the most true view of that community is at times inconvenient but beneficial;
  • Race is an immoral predictor for health and economic outcomes, and should be removed;
  • Invention is a means for solving collective problems and should be rewarded;
  • Economic mobility makes us all better off, and entrepreneurship and career opportunities help;
  • Group-based income inequality correlates to conflict and so should therefore be reduced;
  • Violence is rarely a justified act and so should therefore be reduced, etc.

News organizations should defend fiercely their core beliefs — and individual employees, including newsroom staff, should be allowed to do the same. This is why when we had a newsroom conversation, it felt easy to encourage Technical.ly’s D.C. reporter to protest personally and loudly at a Black Lives Matter protest.

In contrast, the *tactics* to reach those goals are where I view newsrooms must tread most cautiously. In tactics, we find politics and partisanship; it is easy to fall in love with one set of tactics and then therefore become a political actor. Debating and lobbying for tactics is not inherently bad — activists and advocates are crucial, but I believe that’s where journalistic approach ought not venture. I believe there are exceptions but news organizations should use those exceptions rarely.

A good example? Minimum wage research is mixed. Whether a federal $15 minimum wage will reduce income inequality is contested. In contrast, there’s more consensus around growing local minimum wages to fit prevailing wages, and we at Technical.ly have guardedly written in a more favorable light to a local increase than a federal one.

“Ability to deliver for clients” can’t be anathema for news organizations

Leading a small news organization puts me at an unusual crossroads: I’m as close to our sources as I am to our customers. In my experience, most of those interested in financially supporting Technical.ly know their stuff. Of course, there are exceptions, but on the whole, they’re better informed than average.

Yet I often encounter a default assumption among journalists: To demonstrate independence, many instinctively treat those who financially support their news organization worse than those who don’t. This creates perverse dynamics. I’ve had potential advertisers tell me they avoided sponsoring us because they feared their independent coverage would be perceived as bought-and-paid-for.

This is a dangerous place for news organizations. It’s a cultural tic that likely developed during an era when newsrooms operated as monopolies, flush with resources, and could afford to brush off financial supporters.

But that’s not where we are today, and it’s not where we should want to be.

I push my newsroom on this point: You don’t have to treat financial supporters better, but you certainly shouldn’t treat them worse. As a publisher with an entrepreneurial mindset, I see it as part of my role to find ways to acknowledge and thank those who support us. But I won’t force it.

What I will insist on is this: the “ability to deliver for clients” cannot be anathema for news organizations. If society equates a news organization leveraging its “halo effect” with content marketing, we’re missing the point.

Technical.ly’s reporting is guided by truth, not business objectives. That’s journalism. But attracting advertisers, sponsors, and investors whose goals align with ours isn’t a problem—it’s smart. The danger lies not in seeking aligned partners but in twisting journalistic goals to fit theirs.

Independence doesn’t require antagonism. It requires clarity of purpose.

Journalism Thinking: a lightning talk at Ignite Philly

Geographically-focused acts of journalism are powerful. Professionals are increasingly rare because the business model that supported most of them has been supplanted. No one is doing the hard work of combating that. Let’s change it.

Following my journalism thinking essay, I’ve been looking to develop a more general-interest way to deliver the message. On Oct. 16, I gave my first try, at Ignite Philly, a local, volunteer-run outpost of a global confederation of big-idea events. (I spoke there in 2011 and 2013)

Find my notes and slides below, and I’ll add the video here when it’s eventually posted.

Continue reading Journalism Thinking: a lightning talk at Ignite Philly

‘Journalism Thinking’ doesn’t need a business model. It needs a call to arms

I originally posted this on Medium here. It received considerable endorsement, including here, here and here.

Early professional news networks in the 14th and 15th centuries were couriers on horseback, informing warlords and merchants. Even competitors saw the value in shared professional news gathering, when there wasn’t a state-owned alternative. Subscriptions, then, subsidized the first foreign affairs and business reporters.

Over the next 500 years, innovations in distribution and in printing and paper technology shaped professional news-gathering into the 20th century model we most recognize today: advertising revenue subsidized relatively low unit costs to ensure widely available mass media (albeit almost exclusively from a white male perspective, but that needs its own post entirely).

Today we’re well into the first generation of the digital transformation of news-gathering and distribution. Yet we as journalism practitioners are still managing to underestimate how dramatically things have changed.

Continue reading ‘Journalism Thinking’ doesn’t need a business model. It needs a call to arms

Journalism is a strategy, not an industry

Journalism is a strategy, not an industry.

Newsrooms should rethink their competition. Journalism organizations are in dozens of different businesses. What we share in common (journalism DNA) makes us more partners than adversaries. The many businesses that are competing for the revenue and not providing other community value, like service journalism, are the real competition.

This was the focus of a lightning pitch I gave this weekend at the national Online News Association annual conference in Denver. Below find my slides, audio and some tweet reactions I received.

Continue reading Journalism is a strategy, not an industry

We need to deploy ‘Acts of Journalism’

The idea of ‘citizen journalism’ was always going to be short-lived.

It did its job to articulate that after generations of highly professionalized news-gathering we needed help. Now both professional and amateur journalists need a new understanding of the work we do.

I’ve been using a somewhat clunky and certainly pretentious-sounding phrase for some time now: producing “acts of journalism” to refer to the many outcomes that lead to honest dialogue about an idea and concept.

This could be data visualization and panel discussions and, yes, article writing, with a feature lead and a nut graf. So I was quite tickled to see Josh Stearns use this phase as the title of an important report he published for the Free Press Institute this fall [PDF].

As the Harvard Nieman Lab went on to point out: the report raises the crucial question of how Shied Laws should protect such acts.

This is a healthy reframing of journalism practitioners, and others who take on the work when relevant to their passions and interests.