Here's a link to a recent Christian Science Monitor story about the rise of nonprofit journalism. While I think it's a hopeful trend, it's not exactly like these small and highly targeted publications are going to be able to replace the function and reach of today's (or should I say yesterday's) newspapers. It is also terribly difficult to sustain any venture on "soft" philanthropic dollars.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0212/p03s01-usgn.html?page=1

--Betsy 2/14

Indeed, it is difficult to sustain a foundation-funded publication.

It comes down to providing value with highly specialized content for a concerned readership that cannot get reliable information from any other source. One legendary example is The Chicago Reporter chicagoreporter.com (It is an official nonprofit, despite its web address.) Launched in the 1970s to combat social injustice and poverty in Chicago, it has remained in print and hugely popular among Chicagoans who care about schools, housing, criminal justice, election integrity and immigration.  Its sister Chicago Catalyst will be 20 years old in 2010. As reported in a recent article in The American Journalism review http://www.ajr.org/Article.asp?id=4458, increasingly philanthropists are recognizing the value of non-profit publications with a highly specialized focus on issues such as health care and are willing to put substantial start-up dollars behind them in the form of two- and three-year grants. What happens when the money goes, depends largely on what impact such publications have produced.  This is where it gets tricky because measuring the impact of news and information is a very inexact science, and sometimes, it’s hard for philanthropist to understand that.

Meanwhile, we non-profit journalists are face increasing pressures to bring in revenue via advertising, events, fundraising, etc.  

Charlise  2/14, 2008