Non-profit Journalism

This week presented yet another fascinating development in the journalism business model. Many people believe that as news organizations have to trim their staffs and budgets to meet Wall Street expectations, the first things to go will be international bureaus and investigative journalism.
This week brought the announcement of a new investigative organization with a big fat annual budget that means it won't have to sell advertising or have circulation. It's bank-rolled by billionaires who think contribution to the public interest is the only return-on-investment that matters.
It's called propublica and it's led by a widely respected journalist, Paul Steiger, who used to edit the Wall Street Journal.
I have two questions for you. Will it work? Will it matter in the public conversation?

Ad controversy

The battle over body image in fashion opened another front in Europe. A controversial ad featuring an emaciated woman (caution: disturbing image in that link) is supposed to provoke conversation, but others have accused the company of trying to profit off the controversy.
What do you think? Do fashion advertising affect body image? Are most models too thin? Are advertisers responsible for the social impact of their messages? If so, does that apply to single messages or advertising as a whole? Go back to the first week of this blog and check out the post on a church's view of advertising and its "10 commandments." How does this square with that?

Breast Cancer and Advertising

A Wall Street Journal story today looked at controversy surrounding the marketing of a new test for a rare genetic factor in breast and ovarian cancer. (The New York Times had a similar piece.) Some people are concerned ads promoting the test will prompt too many women to spend money and worry needlessly because the problem is rare and the test imperfect.
What is the company's responsibility here? They're trying to turn a profit. Should they heavily market the product, regardless of the concerns? Who are all the stakeholders (people with a specific interest)? Who is responsible for relaying information about the rareness of the gene or potential problems with the test? People who are selling it? Patients who use it? The government? The media?