Thanks, Dick. If I may, I would add one suggestion to this way of approaching failures: philanthropy, and perhaps the field itself, could do some meaningful (and honest) post-mortems so that there really is learning across the field (not just for the small group involved with any given organization), and also so that, maybe, the failings when seen more holistically, inspire new ways of thinking about business models, staffing models, etc.
An end-of-the-day post-script: another way that philanthropy (institutional) sometimes fails is in tying funding to growth and expansion. Why is growth and expansion and “scale” so important? Why is it not okay for a local or even a national digital news organization to build upon its foundation but not necessarily open multiple bureaus, or move into new locations if it does not have the ability to sustain that scale? Orchestras aren’t told to “scale.”
Excellent points. There is a hidden problem in non-profit news, which is that if you run the data on funding, if one took away the philanthropy grants, I suspect most non-profits would fail.
The thesis is that "perpetual" repeat funding by philanthropy (foundations, not people) can't occur forever. The conclusion is that a pathway to sustainability still needs to be developed for non-profit news as the "future expected failure rate - when philanthropy stops for a given news organization" is likely well over 50% or even higher.
Thanks, Jeff. I plan to take up sustainability in a forthcoming column, but I see no reason why philanthropic support overall cannot be sustainable. Particular donors may come and go, but most of the nation’s leading cultural institutions have long depended every year on philanthropic support, and there’s no reason, at least in my view, that can’t also be true of many newsrooms.
I look forward to the column ! It is a good point that philanthropy keeps many institutions open and can be a repeatable source of total revenue in the "revenue" ecosystem. I would still think there is a challenge to it being a dependable source of revenue for many individual news organizations as grants are often "one and done" for specific journalism stories, back office infrastructure, or specific projects (like election work, for example).
Actually, at least in my experience, few grants are for stories, and almost all “project” grants come from institutional foundations, which are not where the bulk of philanthropy comes from anymore. But the point overall is to diversify funding such that even as particular funders cycle in and out, budgets overall can stay stable or better.
Would you mind outlining more of what you mean by failure? If you're measuring it in terms of audience, that makes sense to me. At the same time, I see news as being as much of a public good as something like K-12 education in that it deserves support, profit or no profit.
What I mean is most often the situation when revenues simply can’t keep up with expenses. I completely agree that most news these days, especially locally, but in many cases nationally as well, is becoming a public good. But sustainable revenues, including from philanthropy, are still necessary.
Thanks, Dick. If I may, I would add one suggestion to this way of approaching failures: philanthropy, and perhaps the field itself, could do some meaningful (and honest) post-mortems so that there really is learning across the field (not just for the small group involved with any given organization), and also so that, maybe, the failings when seen more holistically, inspire new ways of thinking about business models, staffing models, etc.
Couldn't agree more. Would be important to do this transparently, including as an incentive to get it right.
An end-of-the-day post-script: another way that philanthropy (institutional) sometimes fails is in tying funding to growth and expansion. Why is growth and expansion and “scale” so important? Why is it not okay for a local or even a national digital news organization to build upon its foundation but not necessarily open multiple bureaus, or move into new locations if it does not have the ability to sustain that scale? Orchestras aren’t told to “scale.”
Excellent piece!
And Barbara is right.
Excellent points. There is a hidden problem in non-profit news, which is that if you run the data on funding, if one took away the philanthropy grants, I suspect most non-profits would fail.
The thesis is that "perpetual" repeat funding by philanthropy (foundations, not people) can't occur forever. The conclusion is that a pathway to sustainability still needs to be developed for non-profit news as the "future expected failure rate - when philanthropy stops for a given news organization" is likely well over 50% or even higher.
Thanks, Jeff. I plan to take up sustainability in a forthcoming column, but I see no reason why philanthropic support overall cannot be sustainable. Particular donors may come and go, but most of the nation’s leading cultural institutions have long depended every year on philanthropic support, and there’s no reason, at least in my view, that can’t also be true of many newsrooms.
I look forward to the column ! It is a good point that philanthropy keeps many institutions open and can be a repeatable source of total revenue in the "revenue" ecosystem. I would still think there is a challenge to it being a dependable source of revenue for many individual news organizations as grants are often "one and done" for specific journalism stories, back office infrastructure, or specific projects (like election work, for example).
Actually, at least in my experience, few grants are for stories, and almost all “project” grants come from institutional foundations, which are not where the bulk of philanthropy comes from anymore. But the point overall is to diversify funding such that even as particular funders cycle in and out, budgets overall can stay stable or better.
Would you mind outlining more of what you mean by failure? If you're measuring it in terms of audience, that makes sense to me. At the same time, I see news as being as much of a public good as something like K-12 education in that it deserves support, profit or no profit.
What I mean is most often the situation when revenues simply can’t keep up with expenses. I completely agree that most news these days, especially locally, but in many cases nationally as well, is becoming a public good. But sustainable revenues, including from philanthropy, are still necessary.