Nonprofit Journalism: Far from perfect

Nonprofit journalism has become a growing industry. The idea behind it is that journalists will be able to publish content they feel is important and act independently of consumer (or employer) interest. On the surface this may seem to be the solution to producing journalism without outside influence however, as Jack Shafer discusses in his article, “Nonprofit Journalism Comesat a Cost,” the mainstream press and nonprofit news outlets may be more alike than one would think.

The mainstream press has been criticized for producing content to appeal to owners or investors and the nonprofit news outlets may have these similar problems. As Shafer points out, nonprofit journalists may feel pressured to appeal to the interest of their donors. For example, the news outlet ProPublica is largely funded by the Sandler foundation. The mission of the Sandler foundation seems to line up with the goals of ProPublica. Both seek to benefit the public. Although ProPublica may be organized in a way that reflects the donors interest, the work they are doing appears to be helpful. However, if the ProPublica staff was interested in doing a story that the Sandler foundation does not want to be published, it would be difficult to argue with the people who are donating $10 million dollars annually to the publication. 

Another aspect of Shafer’s article was the reason behind why readers choose to donate to nonprofit news outlets. Shafer believes that those donating to nonprofit news outlets because they will receive “psychic income.” He believes donors want to feel they had some influence on political change or that they helped have some sort of impact on society. I’m not sure if it was his intent, but Shafer seems to shape this donation outlook in a negative way. Personally, I feel that whether the donors are seeking “psychic income” or not, the bottom line is they are donating because they feel passionate about the subject matter of the outlet. These donors believe that it is important for the public to receive the content produced by these nonprofit news outlets. While these small donors may have some influence on what is published, I don’t think they can really say what can or cannot be published. The larger issue definitely stems from pressure from major donors.

The most important part of Shafer’s article may have been when he calls attention to the salary of Paul Steiger, the first editor-in-chief of ProPublica. He was getting paid more at the nonprofit news outlet than he was as an editor at the Wall Street Journal. Steiger is quoted in an article from the New York Times, stating that no one who joins his staff will have to take a pay cut. This brings attention to the true motivation of why journalists may be working there. Are they truly dedicated to goals of ProPublica or were they more interested in the monetary benefits?