Wise words. This is why The Lenfest Institute owns, but does not control The Philadelphia Inquirer, either its news or its business operations. Gerry Lenfest believed that no donor, including himself, should be able to buy influence over the free and independent journalism he sought to preserve.
Yes agree. I didn’t see him do that- but I followed this only loosely. It’s wrong to blackmail a nonprofit with your donation- although I suppose in anny criticism it is implicit that if you don’t get your way- you might not donate again.
Great column and great points. The challenge is sometimes the people who care the most - and believe the most in the mission- are large donors for that very reason. Should they not donate just so they can have public opinions? Equally - do they have to sit silently because they give? Where did Bill Ackman cross the line for you?
Here’s a thought: what if every nonprofit newsroom were to have a statement in its “Support Us” page that clearly states the terms of editorial and all other aspects of independence? And what if each newsroom were to explicitly point out this statement to all prospective donors? Then the only challenge would be for the newsrooms to stand by their principles, even if it means losing donations.
I have floated the same idea in front of the fundraising and development folks where I work, at a university-affiliated publication. It always draws a chuckle. Maybe I should count my publication fortunate.
Wise words. This is why The Lenfest Institute owns, but does not control The Philadelphia Inquirer, either its news or its business operations. Gerry Lenfest believed that no donor, including himself, should be able to buy influence over the free and independent journalism he sought to preserve.
Yes! Hands off!
Bravo! Good column, crucial insights.
Yes agree. I didn’t see him do that- but I followed this only loosely. It’s wrong to blackmail a nonprofit with your donation- although I suppose in anny criticism it is implicit that if you don’t get your way- you might not donate again.
Great column and great points. The challenge is sometimes the people who care the most - and believe the most in the mission- are large donors for that very reason. Should they not donate just so they can have public opinions? Equally - do they have to sit silently because they give? Where did Bill Ackman cross the line for you?
Here’s a thought: what if every nonprofit newsroom were to have a statement in its “Support Us” page that clearly states the terms of editorial and all other aspects of independence? And what if each newsroom were to explicitly point out this statement to all prospective donors? Then the only challenge would be for the newsrooms to stand by their principles, even if it means losing donations.
I have floated the same idea in front of the fundraising and development folks where I work, at a university-affiliated publication. It always draws a chuckle. Maybe I should count my publication fortunate.