Does Non-Profit Media Have a Competitive Edge?

(MoneyWatch)  Last night, here in New York City, the National Magazine Awards were announced. Among the usual suspects (The New Yorker, National Geographic, Vanity Fair, Atlantic, Rolling Stone) were several winners with an alternative business model.

The non-profit Mother Jones won the award for general excellence in its category (100,000-250,000 circulation); and the essentially non-profit weekly, The Nation, won in the public Interest category for a powerful investigative report on the plight of vets.

Meanwhile, the non-profit National Public Radio (NPR) yesterday aired an investigative story today partnered with the non-profit Center for Investigative Reporting (CIR) to produce an expose of a dubious "robocall" service tied to the Clinton campaign.

Long-time editor and emeritus publisher Victor Navasky used to like to joke that The Nation, which is the country's oldest (1865), continuously published newsweekly, was also "the oldest for-profit publisher to never actually turn a profit."

That may have changed slightly in recent years, but the magazine is also sustained by the non-profit Nation Institute, a membership organization that also receives foundation grants. Meanwhile, the magazine's online component is one of the most dynamic websites I've yet seen in the magazine industry.

Mother Jones is operated by the Foundation for National Progress, which raises money from individuals and foundations to support the magazine.

CIR is an independent non-profit that attracts funds from individuals and foundations to supplement the fees it earns for its investigative stories. NPR exists on a mix of "underwriting" income from corporations, grants from foundations, individual contributions, and a small amount of government funding.

All of these groups, as well as several others, continue to practice excellent journalism without being tied to the quarterly profit cycle that bedevils mainstream news divisions. Could they provide an alternative model to the businesses whose decline we've grown accustomed to documenting here in this space?

This much is clear. Those running Mother Jones, CIR, NPR and The Nation will need to fully grasp the magnitude of the transformation sweeping all media in order to continue their great traditions. Accordingly, they, too, are exploring the online options for ways to adapt and survive.

In other words, no media company, of any size or business model, can escape the twin forces of globalization and technological change. Fortunately, these four groups have relatively strong brands that already have some visibility in overseas markets. The question I have is will they grow into global (online) brands, or remain U.S.-centric?

It's the same question every newsroom must grapple with: How to adapt to the new environment... Stay tuned.

***

Notes: I not only have deep ties to the four organizations profiled above, I support all of them enthusiastically. As a co-founder, during CIR's first 12 years, 1977-89, I served as executive director. I remain on its Board of Directors. For a couple years in the early nineties, I was managing editor and/or investigative editor for Mother Jones. Within the NPR system, I was the interim executive producer news and public affairs director for KQED in 1994, and executive vice-president of KQED, Inc., in 1995. I'm currently on the editorial board for The Nation. None of these organizations provide me any compensation.