& a blog

the non-profit newspaper idea appears to be getting some traction. from early op-eds in the new york times kicking the idea around, to senator Benjamin Cardin (D-MD) introducing a bill to establish a non-profit status for newspapers, it appears that some people have begun to actually try to solve the problem, not just analyze it.

the cynic in me has to ask a big question: should the newspaper survive at all? note that i am not referring to the news media, which i view as invaluable, but the newspaper, which prints news and advertisements on cheap paper, and distributes it. frankly, the newspaper model is not too efficient on almost any front: economically, it spends the bulk (over 75% of its operating budget) on actually printing and distributing the paper. environmentally, it produces a product that consumes an enormous amount of inks (chemicals), paper products (trees) and must be distributed by automobiles that are surely not carbon-friendly. and whenever a newspaper is not ‘properly’ recycled, it becomes litter or landfill. in short, what is it about paper news that is really so indispensable? i can’t really think of anything, save its convenience of material existence when you encounter a newspaper somewhere other news media can’t go, or somewhere you weren’t expecting to require news media (see lunch). i can also not support the ‘paper fetishists’ among us, who believe in some sort of divine spirit attached to the physical texture of news print. given the economic and environmental cost of newspapers, its frankly silly that anyone would still want to print them (i suppose the people who want physical advertisements are really the driving force behind their continued existence). 

so could a non-profit model work for news media? yes. i think so. particularly if newspapers are willing to stop being news papers and just become news media. the new york times has been the most risk-taking in this effect, striving to become a interactive (flash animation, video, podcasting) news outlet as it perceives the mortality of physical print journalism. while working as an editorial assistant at the newport mercury, i discovered that the actual news production of a paper is its smallest cost; distribution and production being the bulk of the budget. in a non-profit, even a small endowment could allow a skeleton crew of journalists to produce investigative reporting and editorial content of note. the best part is, funded by ads, donations, and endowments, small ‘journalism-cells’ could still allow their produced content to be freely accessed. viva the arrival of the ultimate form of citizen journalism: the micro news media!

of course, non-profit status for newspapers threatens one of its most treasured commodities: its political endorsement. cardin’s bill flatly denies the ability of non-profit journalism to endorse political candidates. one has to wonder if that will be all that non-profit status can deny a news organization. would reviews of movies, consumer products, music, and other cultural products also be castrated by non-profit status? it seems fair, after all, if warner brothers were to donate a hefty component to the institution, might that not seem to be paying for a positive review? the answer, of course, is not necessarily; the dark knights gets advertised in newspaper’s whether or not they think the movie is a gift from cinematic gods. so i feel that donations to an endowment, while suggestive of bias, don’t need to correlate to a devolution in news media production. 

this, after all, seems like a good step forward. instead of running around like chicken little, screaming that the newspaper in the sky is falling, now we have some people saying “let’s remodel it.”

two updates: 

1. sf chronicle profiles ‘mother jones’ model for non-profit news
2. clay shirkey and the newspaper’s paradox