The last decade has proven more challenging to the news industry than any since the end of the early 20th centurys yellow journalism era. The reasons for this reality could fill volumes. But stated briefly, they include: 1) the destruction of revenues from print and from web advertising; 2) the predation by vulture capital firms and the expensive legal hostility from litigious billionaires; 3) the control of content visibility by impersonal social media companies more interested in engagement than in the public good or the sustainability of news organizations; 4) the explosion of free media sources, both of high and dubious quality; and 5) the fragmentation and partisanization of news consumers, naturally limiting any one organizations potential audience.

The radicalization of the conservative movement and the Republican Party also play a key role. If news and opinion organizations decide to call out their descent into nihilism for what it is, they get dismissed as partisan rags of the left. If they bend over backwards to be balanced, they invite justified outrage by failing to adequately inform readers of the reality of the situation. The New York Times, for instance, has consistently chosen to softpedal their coverage of the Trump Administration, especially in the headline department. Many customers have chosen to speak with their wallets by unsubscribing.

Still, the big newspapers like New York Times and Washington Post are not seriously in danger. Its the local papers and smaller online publications that are.

Facebook continues to prioritize garbage conservative content over more honest smaller publications, and the well is drying up for outfits that provide an alternative to what the big behemoths are offering in both reporting and opinion. Those that responded by pivoting to video turned out to be victims of Facebooks data fakery. Those that sensationalized content and headlines for clicks slowly destroyed their own reputations. Turns out, theres enough good content out there that paywalls tend to be a self-destructive proposition.

Our magazine doesntdo any of thatand we feel we serve an important purpose in the media ecosystem. We offer innovative policy dives from a variety of ideological viewpoints that are rarely found elsewhere, and in thePolitical Animal section of our website, were one of the few left-of-center places remaining where you can find old-fashioned blogging. We pull no punches and avoid the equivocating tropes of leading opinion pages, while, at the same time, maintaining high standards of accuracy and freshness of perspective. At least, I like to think so!

The banner head of the Washington Post rightly claims that Democracy Dies in Darkness. Here at the WashingtonMonthly, were a smaller light, but one that serves an important role in keeping our democracy alive.

Ultimately, the only tried and true way of sustaining that light is through the generous contributions of our readers. So please,make a donationduring our holiday fundraising drive.

Give whatever you can$10, $20, $100, $1,000and for a limited time only your contribution will be matched, dollar for dollar, thanks to a generous challenge grant from NewsMatch. If you give $50 or more, youll receive a complimentary one-year subscription to the print edition of the Washington Monthly.Your contributions are vital, tax-deductible, and much appreciated.

We cant keep this light on without you.

If you enjoyed this article, consider making a donation to help us produce more like it. The Washington Monthly was founded in 1969 to tell the stories of how government really worksand how to make it work better. Fifty years later, the need for incisive analysis and new, progressive policy ideas is clearer than ever. As a nonprofit, we rely on support from readers like you.

Yes, Ill make a donation

View post:

The Smaller Lights of Democracy Need to Stay Bright, Too - Washington Monthly