Who should own newspapers?

Lots of talk percolating that news organizations have an *ethical* duty to keep newspapers alive. It's an urgent question as revenues decline and bankruptcy looms (Chicago Tribune and Minneapolis Star-Trib are already there).
Some people say foundation endowments are one way to go.
Others look to a new model of non-profit journalism.
Some disagree.
What do you think? Do newspapers matter? Should we be talking about the medium (paper) or the function (gathering and disseminating news)? If this medium dies, what are the implications for citizens? For advertisers? For consumers?

Non-profit Journalism and Investigative

We spoke earlier about non-profit journalism and how to make a difference with investigative work. Here's a new piece by one of my young grads, who left a newspaper job for a post with the Center for Responsive Politics, a non-partisan group that tracks the effects of money on politics. The piece took exhaustive reporting and data analysis to show how investments by members of Congress are tied to holdings in Sudan, even despite the politicians' concerns about genocide there. The piece received an immediate response, with members divesting within hours of the reporter's calls.
My old student reports: "I've been working on it for the last five months and it might be the piece that I'm most proud of at CRP--it took months of data-assisted reporting based on our work and the Sudan Divestment Task Force's work, it's about an issue that I'm passionate about and, maybe for the first time ever, I got to see a direct impact. It's a pretty cool feeling! :)"
Makes me proud by extension. A little inspiration for your New Year. Have a good one (and a safe celebration).

Non-profit Journalism

Here's a nice wrap-up on my earlier post on non-profit journalism from the Poynter Institute.

Here's how this shakes out. The age-old business model of newspapers is scaring the pants off everyone right now. Print circulation and ad revenue are down markedly. Newspapers all over the country are tightening budgets and laying off workers, trying to keep a Wall Street-friendly profit margin in the face of these revenue problems.
People like me suspect that two kinds of coverage are most threatened by this trend: international reporting and investigative reporting. They're both essential to the very meaning of journalism but also colossally expensive to do.
Enter "non-profit journalism." The idea now goes that philanthropists will fund investigative journalism to keep the press as watchdogs of government, business, other institutions.

Do you think this will work? Can entities like this effectively serve as watchdogs? Were newspapers even doing that in the first place? What are the conflicts of interest?

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?