This article makes a lot of interesting points. A bunch of us hyperlocal nonprofits who have benefited hugely from NewsMatch have been talking about this article, and I feel like on the second read, it read differently. Is it me, or was there some editing done from the original post? Thanks!
Appreciate this candid discussion. It would be especially helpful and totally appropriate to include larger nonprofits as well as titles like the Seattle Times and The Philadelphia Inquirer in Newsmatch.
I think one thing lost in this post is that NewsMatch has helped newsrooms build the infrastructure needed to run fundraising campaigns themselves. Then they "graduate" to doing the campaigns without NewsMatch, and it's hard to argue that ProPublica needs the $18K more than a smaller newsroom. The smaller ones get MUCH more out of the program. In New Mexico and Colorado, we've been including for-profits in our own matching campaigns, with the proviso that they use it on reporting projects. If we are going to "super-size" NewsMatch we need to include public service for-profits and public benefit corps as well.
Thanks for the analysis, and for raising these questions, which I hope Newsmatch/INN or others will take on to answer. Another concern--from a former public media executive--is the fatigue factor for matching efforts like Newsmatch which last more than a month and consume staff efforts during that time. Would some of these funds be better invested in major donor cultivation?
This article makes a lot of interesting points. A bunch of us hyperlocal nonprofits who have benefited hugely from NewsMatch have been talking about this article, and I feel like on the second read, it read differently. Is it me, or was there some editing done from the original post? Thanks!
Appreciate this candid discussion. It would be especially helpful and totally appropriate to include larger nonprofits as well as titles like the Seattle Times and The Philadelphia Inquirer in Newsmatch.
I think one thing lost in this post is that NewsMatch has helped newsrooms build the infrastructure needed to run fundraising campaigns themselves. Then they "graduate" to doing the campaigns without NewsMatch, and it's hard to argue that ProPublica needs the $18K more than a smaller newsroom. The smaller ones get MUCH more out of the program. In New Mexico and Colorado, we've been including for-profits in our own matching campaigns, with the proviso that they use it on reporting projects. If we are going to "super-size" NewsMatch we need to include public service for-profits and public benefit corps as well.
Thanks for the analysis, and for raising these questions, which I hope Newsmatch/INN or others will take on to answer. Another concern--from a former public media executive--is the fatigue factor for matching efforts like Newsmatch which last more than a month and consume staff efforts during that time. Would some of these funds be better invested in major donor cultivation?