In the battered news industry, are nonprofits best equipped to survive?

Digital Content Next | Kasia Kovacs

Over the past decade, the nonprofit news model has offered some hope while traditional news outlets struggled to keep afloat. Without the need to rely on advertisers and instead making money through fundraising and memberships, nonprofit news outlets have proliferated.

But recently, that hope has flickered. The worldwide Covid-19 pandemic, or coronavirus, triggered a tsunami to batter an already troubled industry. With advertisers losing money and pulling ads from news outlets, media companies are furloughing and laying off workers. And, in some cases, publications are being shut down temporarily or entirely.

How will nonprofit news outlets fare in the face of this pandemic and the economic downturn that follows? Perhaps better than traditional news outlets. New York Times columnist Ben Smith went so far as to advocate letting the for-profit model fail while supporting nonprofits instead. However, even with booming readership and engagement, nonprofits are concerned about how an economic recession will affect donations and fundraising, and ultimately, their future.

The promise of nonprofit news

Traditional news outlets began wrestling with declining revenues long before coronavirus spread throughout the world this winter. Although digital traffic has either increased or leveled off, advertising revenue continues to fall. Pew Research Center’s most recent State of the News Media Report found that ad revenue dropped by 13% from 2017 to 2018, continuing a trend that began in the early 2000s.

Further, the number of newsroom employees in the newspaper sector was essentially cut in half from 2006 to 2018. The number of newsroom jobs dropped by 36,510, according to the Pew report.

But nonprofit news organizations sketched a different picture of the future, offering the news industry a sense of hope. “It may be one way to start to repair the loss of trust in and public engagement with journalism in North America,” wrote University of British Columbia associate professors Alfred Hermida and Mary Lynn Young in Nieman’s predictions for journalism in 2020.

Journalism philanthropy quadrupled over the past decade, according to a 2019 Media Impact Founders report. Today, more than 230 nonprofit media organizations are members of Institute for Nonprofit News (INN), an organization that began with 27 members in 2009. Over two-thirds of INN’s members have launched in the past 12 years. INN’s members also employ about 3,000 staff, including 2,000 journalists, according to the organization’s 2019 Index.

Nonprofit strategies

These nonprofit outlets have provided necessary and often resource-heavy journalism that newspapers with dwindling funds might struggle to take on, especially watchdog and investigative reporting. Many nonprofit organizations cater to local audiences or report on niche topics, such as gun control, the environment, or education.

Certainly, many nonprofit news outlets earn some revenue from advertising and corporate sponsorships. However, these organizations rely most heavily on memberships and donations from individuals, families, and foundations. In the past, foundations provided the majority of the funding for nonprofits. However, the 2019 INN Index found that individuals and families contribute now about 40% of nonprofit funding. That same year, foundation funding dropped below 50% for the first time.

Even some for-profit news organizations have integrated strategies from the nonprofit model. The Guardian made an operating profit in 2019 for the first time in two decades after pulling off a financial turnaround strategy. This was, in large part, thanks to donations from more than one million readers.

And, faced with furloughs and possible layoffs, Vox Media is trying its hand at soliciting support from its audience. Emphasizing its wish to eschew the subscription model and keep its journalism freely accessible, particularly at this time, the company is turning to readers for support.

Of course, nonprofit outlets have not been the deus ex machina to single-handedly save the news industry. Journalism scholars have pointed out the shortcomings of a nonprofit business model. These include the risk of catering to elite donors rather than publishing stories for a wider audience. Larger nonprofits also tend to fare better than smaller organizations, which may struggle to raise enough funding.

Enter the pandemic

When coronavirus spread — first to Asia, then Europe, and then the U.S. — it dealt a serious shock to the news industry. Digital traffic to news websites increased significantly, with anxious visitors reading about the growing number of coronavirus cases, troubles with virus testing, and best practices for health and safety.

Despite this boost in page views, advertisers faced with their own losses have hit the brakes on many ad campaigns. They’ve also intentionally reduced the number of ads on digital news websites due to concerns about appearing next to coronavirus news. Buzzfeed News found that advertisers stopped over two million ads from showing up on news sites in the first three weeks of March.

As a result, Gannett is furloughing journalists at local newspapers across the country. Euclid Media Group announced layoffs at its seven publications. Some alt weeklies have shuttered entirely. And with economists predicting a global recession, the long-lasting repercussions of the pandemic look dire.

Traffic climbs

Nonprofits have faced consequences too, although they haven’t been so catastrophic.

High Country News — an independent magazine based in Colorado has maintained its nonprofit status for decades. Like many other news sites, it has seen a considerable increase in online readership of late.

Although the magazine normally publishes articles on issues relating to the western U.S., HCN assigned a team of about 10 journalists to focus on COVID-19. Stories shared details about the dangers of self-isolating on public lands, how to ethically get outdoors, and how rural doctors face the virus.

“Every story that we’re putting out on COVID-19 has just blown up. There just seems to be a huge appetite for those stories,” said Paige Blank, associate editor at HCN who is now leading the coronavirus coverage at the organization.

The number of users in March rose about 48% compared to the same time last year, and the number of new users also increased by nearly 53%. Plus, visitors are not just reading stories, but also becoming more engaged.

“The tip form has been getting a ton of responses from our readers,” Blank said. “We’re actually able to gauge what people are worried about right now. And we’re using those tips to tailor our coverage for our readers.”

But will revenue follow?

But whether that traffic and engagement can translate to sustainable revenue is unclear. So far, HCN hasn’t seen an uptick in donations in March. The magazine hopes to harness the traffic by launching an online fundraising campaign in late April, said Laurie Milford, development director at HCN.

Still, the magazine delayed a 50th anniversary campaign which it expected to raise $10 million this year. (The campaign gala is now scheduled for June 2021.) Overall, HCN expects to see a 25% reduction in general fund receipts in 2020.

HCN’s predicament is pretty representative of what most nonprofit organizations will be grappling with in the coming months, according to Sue Cross, INN executive director and CEO.

“It’s a mixed picture, she says. However, the situation “appears quite a bit better than the situation for for-profits,” Cross said. “(I’m) hearing of really significant increases in individual donor support. But some others that had a lot of events/sponsorship revenue or advertising income are hurting… For most, their community position and funding are up now, but uncertainty remains about future grant funding.”

Not all bad news

When it comes to for-profit news outlets like the Guardian, which also largely rely on reader donations, reader contributions could potentially act as a sort of cushion, softening the pandemic’s severe financial blow. However, thus far, it’s unclear how much of a difference reader donations will make.

In March, the Guardian received about  2.17 billion page views, far bypassing its previous record of 750 million pageviews last October. And the increased traffic appears to be increasing financial support from its online readers, according to editor-in-chief Katharine Viner. However, mid-March the Guardian announced a projected a loss of £20 million over the next six months from declining advertising and newspaper sales, which has led to furloughs and pay cuts.

Indeed, many news organizations hope that readers will see the value of their coverage during the coronavirus crisis and, despite the economic uncertainty, donate. Case in point: Chalkbeat, a nonprofit that focuses on education news in cities like Chicago and Detroit, gained $1,700 in just one week after an appeal for financial contributions.

Chalkbeat has focused its reporting over the past month on how schools are dealing with the pandemic. Traffic tripled in March, according to figures from editor-in-chief Bene Cipolla. Like at HCN, Chalkbeat readers have been involved in spurring content; by the end of March, Chalkbeat had published 20 stories based on the responses to callouts asking for reader questions.

Instead of running its annual spring campaign, the organization is treating the COVID-19 crisis as a campaign unto itself. This means sending out weekly appeals, which resulted in significant donations and 21 new members after one week, according to Kary Perez, senior marketing manager.

Community engagement

In addition, “we have also been approached by lots of people asking us to come to their communities,” said CRO Maria Archangelo. “When they see the kinds of information that we are able to deliver to Detroit and Memphis, they realize what their communities are lacking.”

The future is less certain when it comes to Chalkbeat’s philanthropy partners and major donors, who are dealing with the pandemic consequences on their own terms. Archangelo hopes that donors and funders will realize the importance of Chalkbeat’s coverage once the pandemic has passed, and will continue to provide funding.

For Chalkbeat, HCN, and all other nonprofit news organizations, it’s difficult to calibrate the full impact of COVID-19. But for now, compared to the rest of the news industry, nonprofits seemed to have maintained a level of resilience in the wake of coronavirus’ brutal blow.

In the wake of several big name failures, the industry seeks a solid Spanish language news model

Digital Content Next | 30 January 2020

2019 will be remembered as a turbulent year for Spanish-language news in the U.S. The New York TimesBuzzFeed News, the Huffington Post, and the Chicago Tribune all shut down their Spanish-language websites in a large blow to parts of the 59 million Spanish language speakers in the U.S.

However, as the old decade folded into the new year, national news outlets confirmed that they weren’t giving up on Spanish-language news. In the past two months, The Washington Post launched its first Spanish-language news podcast, El Washington Post, and USA Today started Hecho en USA, its series on Latino communities. As the new decade begins, the future of Spanish-language news in the U.S. remains a puzzle, difficult to piece together.

Revenue review

The reason for the failures of 2019 largely boil down to money. The Times, for instance, initially launched NYT en Español in early 2016 as a way to grow its international audience. This was part of an optimistic goal to generate $800 million in digital revenue by 2020. At the time, Donald Trump’s racist rhetoric was in full force. So, putting the Times’ journalism stamp on important issues south of the border was meant to be a significant step towards the outlet’s lofty aims.

The plan was to support NYT en Español with advertising revenue, along with the hope of turning readers into subscribers. But a little more than three years later, NYT en Español closed its Mexico City bureau. Despite a potential audience of 80 million people, the advertising dollars weren’t coming in, a Times spokesperson said when the website shut down in September. Nor were these readers subscribing. But according to NYT en Español’s founding editorial director Eli Lopez, the Times lacked a credible plan to monetize his team’s content.

In the wake of these ill-fated efforts, Spanish-speaking communities pay the price. More than 8,000 English-speaking news organizations currently serve approximately 250 million English speakers in the U.S. However, for the almost 59 million Spanish speakers – 10 million of whom don’t speak English well – only approximately 624 news outlets serve them.

When Tribune Publishing shut down Hoy Media, their Spanish-language newspaper in Chicago, in November, reporter Laura Rodríguez lamented the news that would no longer be reported for Chicago’s Latino and Hispanic communities.

Markets in need

“I’m seriously so angry and frustrated at the fact that the company decided to get rid of such an important platform for the Spanish-speaking community in Chicago,” Rodríguez tweeted. “I wrote so many stories no one else did — we had our space! Our Latino, Spanish-speaking community counted on us to tell their stories. Those that are often not told.”

While some of the nation’s largest outlets can afford to experiment, the same can’t be said for smaller organizations across the country. Statewide and citywide newsrooms have already faced crushing layoffs and decimated revenues in one of the hardest decades ever for journalism. And Spanish-speaking communities are among those that will suffer the most.

In New Mexico, where slightly more than one million Spanish speakers represent 49% of the state’s population, the Hispanic population is the most underserved. Despite having a long history with the Spanish language that dates back to before the Constitution, the state only has three Spanish-speaking news outlets. And they are all TV stations and all based in Albuquerque. Compare that to neighboring Arizona, home to a Hispanic population around double the size of New Mexico at more than two million. It is home to 17 Spanish-language outlets, more than five times the amount in New Mexico.

Size matters

At a time when local news has already suffered greatly and positive signs are few and far between (it’s estimated that more than 13,000 communities in the U.S. don’t have any local news coverage) is it too much to expect smaller and medium-sized outlets to launch Spanish-language offerings? Given that national outlets such as the New York Times can’t turn a profit from such investments, the answer for many local newsrooms with fewer resources may just be yes. Right now, it is too much.

Scott Brodbeck is just one local news editor who is familiar with the obstacles of running a local news website. Brodbeck is the founder and CEO of Local News Now, a network of hyperlocal news websites he launched in 2010 that serve markets in northern Virginia and Washington, D.C. With the shrinking advertising market for most media companies due to Google and Facebook’s dominance, financial uncertainty is just one reason why local news companies such as Brodbeck’s aren’t able to implement new products specifically for non-English speaking audiences.

“The biggest challenges are recruiting, training and retaining talented people; producing consistently excellent local journalism that attracts a large local audience; and growing sales to keep growing our organization,” Brodbeck said. “Given the challenges of just putting out our current news product, it would be unrealistic to try to do what we’re doing in a second language.”

Demanding demographics

America is undergoing a rapid change in demographic identity. According to Census projections, the Hispanic and Latino population represented just more than 17% of the U.S. population. By 2060, that population is predicted to be roughly 120 million people, or 28 percent. That’s why Brodbeck said that the best solution for local newsrooms in the future could be for them to focus on hiring reporters from diverse backgrounds. That would allow them to serve as many communities as possible.

“Having separate Spanish language brands may make sense for some of the largest news publishers. Smaller newsrooms would be better off putting their energies into developing robust hiring, training, and employee support practices, to cultivate a diverse workforce that can better serve all readers

News outlets continue to wrestle with how to serve diverse audiences. Thus, it might be down to schools and universities to take a proactive approach by preparing the next generation of journalists for the ever-changing media landscape.

One journalism school that’s already doing so is the Craig Newmark Graduate School of Journalism at CUNY. The school’s Spanish-language journalism program aims to train bilingual journalists to better cover issues important to Latino communities. This program could be a footprint for other journalism schools across the country to follow. It could also provide news outlets with a new generation of journalists to serve an increasingly diverse population.

Like many other aspects of an industry grappling with profitability and even survival, the future of Spanish-language news remains uncertain. And just as the industry experiments with reader engagement and revenue models, news organizations and universities are now exploring different methods of delivering Spanish-speaking news, such as podcasts and special series. With so many moving pieces, only one projection is relatively certain: the growing population of Spanish speakers in the U.S.

This Writer Plans To Stop The White House By Publishing Lies

paul-horner-cnn

International Business Times | 22 January 2017

Paul Horner, the man known for his sham articles that spread across the internet, has published his latest story: “Twitter Deletes Donald Trump’s Twitter Account: ‘We Will Not Tolerate Racism and Hate.’”

The site cnn.com.de also features articles about President Barack Obama banning the national anthem and declaring September National Muslim Appreciation Month. These reports, like all of the stories written and published by Horner, a 38-year-old writer of satire and fake news, are bogus. Twitter is not deleting President Donald Trump’s account. Obama has not banned the national anthem. There isn’t a federally mandated month dedicated to Muslims. And the website that hosts these stories, cnn.com.de, is not affiliated with CNN.

Amid a national conversation about fake news and how such stories influence public opinion, Horner became famous online after Election Day for claiming his fabricated reports helped turn voters against Democrat Hillary Clinton. With the former business mogul now in power, Horner wants to use fake news — or “shenanigans,” the term he prefers — to take down the president. He’s convinced that his writing has a purpose: to use false information to give people the truth.

Interest in fake news rose dramatically around the time of the U.S. presidential election, when the campaign between Trump and his equally unpopular rival, Hillary Clinton, saw fabricated stories mushroom on social media. Google searches spiked from the last week of October to the second week of November. Since then, the term “fake news” has been regurgitated and debated by lawmakers, academics, journalists and other Americans.

Horner told the Washington Post in November he was afraid his stories helped put Trump into the White House, and his notoriety was exacerbated when he said Trump supporters were naïve.

Horner began receiving hate messages calling him scum after the interview. He stepped back from publishing his fake news stories, keeping a low-key profile on his hoax news sites for the next month. In January, he began writing once more, this time with a new approach.

His story about Twitter deleting Trump’s account is filled with fabricated quotes. The journalist who supposedly wrote the story — Jimmy Rustling, who has Pulitzers, a mail-order bride and an adopted Syrian daughter, according to his online biography — does not exist. It’s the pseudonym Horner uses for his fake CNN site.

Horner’s story leans heavily on hyperpartisan anti-Trump rhetoric. Trump, according to the story, appointed a climate change denier as head of the Environmental Protection Agency (perhaps skeptic is a more accurate term, as Scott Pruitt has admitted that the climate is changing, although he said the extent to which human activity causes that change is debatable) and a person who “doesn’t believe in public education” in charge of the Education Department (Betsy DeVos has criticized the way public education operates, but she hasn’t said she wants to do away with the system entirely).

Yet throughout the piece, Horner also references and links to several stories from reputable media outlets such as The New York Times, Time Magazine and Vanity Fair. This tactic is markedly different from many of his previous political hoax news pieces, which were mainly crafted from his imagination.

The goal is to lure people in with a false, clickbait title — “Twitter Deletes Trump’s Twitter Account” has gotten over a million views, Horner said — and then offer them persuasive facts in the story.

“It gets that person that’s a follower of TMZ — people that don’t follow anything political or know anything really that’s going on, they just know Donald Trump is our next president… it gets the person who will read that story (to) pretty much (be) forced to learn about everything that’s negative about Trump,” Horner said.

If the comments on the story are any indication, however, not everyone is getting the message.

“Cnn and the rest of the liberal media are just scared Trump can communicate directly with the American peole and does not need the media or that they cant control the narrative. They are trying to silence his 1st amendment the most un-american thing they can do,” one visitor to the site wrote.

Horner, who lives in Phoenix, is used to juggling multiple tasks at once. He spoke with IBT over the phone while heading to a Safeway grocery store in an Uber. After the driver seemed to become confused with directions and took a few wrong turns, Horner canceled the ride and left the car.

“Oh my god, what was wrong with that f*cking guy?” he said. And then: “Sorry about that … I’m walking back to my apartment right now. Let’s do this again.”

Writing hoax stories may be lucrative — $10,000 a month through Google’s AdSense program, he said — but it’s not all he does. He also deals in online day trading. He tries his hand at stand-up comedy. He writes for his online journal. And he runs the charity Sock It Forward, which he plugs in many of his fake news stories.

Horner takes pride in his work, differentiating himself from “crap” fake news sites, he said.

“I could write a story right now about Paul McCartney from The Beatles dying, and it would go viral, and it would make $10,000 in ad revenue,” Horner said. “But there’s no purpose, it’s morally wrong. That’s why I don’t do it.”

It’s that same moral code that guided Horner when he published a story called “The Amish In America Commit Their Vote To Donald Trump; Mathematically Guaranteeing Him A Presidential Victory” in October.

“The purpose of the story was to try to get Trump supporters not to go out and vote, thinking that they didn’t have to vote now because the Amish had locked up the vote,” Horner said. After the election, he “started thinking maybe that story helped him get elected.”

But some of his articles seem to have no purpose at all. Another one of his recent stories carried this headline: “Police Officer On LSD Attempts To Save Anti-Masturbation Dolphin Mascot From Imaginary Fire.”

The fact is, fake news has been around for at least hundreds of years. In the 15th century, a priest in Italy spread rumors that Jews murdered a Christian toddler, drained his blood and drank it to celebrate Passover. And then there’s the Spanish-American War. Just over 100 years ago, the U.S. found itself in a military conflict thanks to two news empires driven by sensationalism.

Media critics today debate about what falls under the umbrella of fake news. Is it total fabrication to get clicks and money? Conspiracy theories on message boards? What about reports with questionable information (see BuzzFeed’s Golden Showers scoop), or selecting certain facts in news stories while intentionally ignoring others? Some critics now cry “fake news!” over facts they simply disagree with.

All of that is further complicated by the online infrastructure that directs how falsities are spread, which is often through Facebook and Twitter. Since the “fake news” news exploded in November, Facebook and Google both announced measures to try and curb stories that peddle false information. Google, for instance, has pledged to ban fake news sites from AdSense, its advertising service.

“The most critical way to counter fake news now is (for the press) to be extremely skeptical when confronting Trump,” said Angelo Carusone, president of Media Matters, a non-profit, progressive watchdog group based in Washington, D.C.

Louis Jacobson, senior correspondent for fack-checking site PolitiFact, went even further, arguing that no real progress will come unless other systems are changed.

“We and other fact checkers are working with Facebook to check and label questionable, widely shared posts,” Jacobson said. “I hope this proves valuable, but we’re just starting, so it’s too soon to know. The other solutions to this problem, such as better education of students about critical thinking, are only going to occur over the longer term.”

Horner, for his part, said he supports efforts to curb false information.

“I can tell you that I’m a big fan of Facebook and Google’s attempt at getting rid of the actual fake news that’s out there,” he said.

His stories haven’t been targeted by Facebook or Google, he said, and he isn’t worried about being shut down himself.

Is Horner concerned that his new stories will backfire and build support for the Trump?

“There’s no chance of getting him elected twice,” he said.