Get SF Weekly Newsletters

Friday, January 22, 2010

Should Sugar Daddies Save Journalism? Bay Area News Project Editor Weighs In -- Again

Posted By on Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 5:48 PM

click to enlarge sugar_daddy.jpg
As journalist Jim Barnett pointed out earlier today, Bay Area News Project's

new editor-in-chief, Jonathan Weber, wasn't always a fan of nonprofit

news-gathering. In fact, just last year, Weber said that the idea that

nonprofits were the future of journalism was a "cop-out."


Weber, then helming the for-profit site New West, wrote an essay  last January in which he raised troubling questions about non-profit journalism.

"What

happens when saving journalism is no longer a cause of the moment?" he

wrote. "How can a news organization properly go about its business when

it's constantly on bended knee looking for funders?" And then

there's the kicker: "New business approaches will, ultimately, be a

better guarantor of quality journalism -- and democracy -- than sugar

daddies," Weber concluded. Now, of course, he's heading an organization

funded by "hillbilly millionaire" Warren Hellman.

When we called Weber to ask how his perspective has evolved since last year, he told SF Weekly that, in a lot of ways, it hasn't.

"If

you took out some of the rhetorical lines, you could read that piece

as, 'What are some of the challenges of doing non-profit journalism?'"

he said. "I haven't exactly changed my mind about some of those things."

The

one major shift in his outlook is that he has seen how few investors

are willing to put their money into developing journalistic content.

That makes the non-profit model look a lot more attractive.

In last year's essay, "The Trouble with Non-Profit Journalism,"

Weber argued that it's healthy for news organizations to be held to the

"brutal discipline of the market," and wondered about the real

readership for a news publication dedicated to "sober, non-partisan"

coverage.

"How many copies of the Warren Buffet Times"--or, in

his case, the Warren Hellman Times -- "would need to be sold to make that

$200 million-a-year newsroom worth the investment?" Weber asked. If the

non-profits couldn't really get readership numbers, he wondered, would

they, too, turn to covering Britney?

When we asked Weber to respond to his own question, he had a short answer: No Britney.

"I do think there are ways you can engage a broad-based audience

without chasing clicks for your own sake and without getting into a lot

of redundant coverage of, you know, Tiger Woods or whatever would be

the click-friendly story of the week. We're definitely not going to go

down that road," he said.  

At

the same time, Weber told us, "We expect to have a broad-based

readership. This is not a narrow public policy wonk publication."

So,

where will the Bay Area News Project fall in the spectrum between that

old-school catechism, "the reporter is objective," and straight-up

opinion journalism?  

"There are sort of subtle questions of

style and voice, and I think that one of the things I'll be working

very hard on is developing that style and voice," Weber said.

"It

will not necessarily adhere to the very traditional AP style, he

said/she said kind of reporting, but at the same time, I think it will

very much adhere to the classical standards of fairness and accuracy

and real reportage."

The New York Times is only one of the project's partners, and Times tone won't define the News Project's voice, Weber said. Contrary to what some people may still be assuming,  he said, "The New York Times is not going to be the sole or even the primary outlet for our journalism."

  • Pin It

Tags: , , , ,

About The Author

Lois Beckett

Comments

Subscribe to this thread:

Add a comment

Popular Stories

  1. Most Popular Stories
  2. Stories You Missed

Like us on Facebook

Slideshows