Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Philanthropy is helping eliminate news deserts

Opinion

News desert
Hitoshi Nishimura/Getty Images

Boren is executive director of the Institute for Media and Public Trust at California State University, Fresno.

When I watch TV coverage of a news conference at the White House, I’m reminded of how reporting resources are disproportionately allocated in today’s news environment. The journalists at the White House are essentially all giving us the same story, while city council and school board meetings across America are not being covered because of cutbacks in local newsrooms.

How much better for our democracy would it be if we could say we had “too many” reporters covering local news? Instead, we have communities dubbed “news deserts,” meaning they don’t have news sites covering public agencies and other essential information that citizens need to make decisions about their local democratic institutions.

Fortunately, there are news leaders working on this issue, and right now philanthropy has become a major funding source for hiring local reporters. Let’s be clear: Philanthropy isn’t going to replace the thousands of journalists who lost their jobs because of the broken news business model. But it will help local newsrooms cover their communities.


I recently returned from Raleigh, N.C., where I attended a crucial board meeting of Journalism Funding Partners, a nonprofit group that is trying to help save local journalism by raising money to pay the salaries of reporters. JFP is one of several such organizations working on the challenge. If we don’t, misinformation and disinformation are only going to increase, with an unchallenged social media pushing these untruths along.

These organizations have made excellent progress, but they must do much more to keep journalists writing about their local communities. I’m thrilled to volunteer on the JFP board, and I believe the many other similar nonprofits trying to fund local journalism are making a difference.

It was about three years ago when a few of us came together to see if we could help in a small way reverse the fortunes of the news industry by capitalizing on the idea of using philanthropy to fund local journalists. JFP’s founding board members were veteran journalists, who intimately knew the impact that exceptional journalism can have in communities.

The idea quickly took fire, and JFP began matching donors with local newsrooms across the nation. JFP became so successful that, since 2020, we have helped secure more than $3 million in grants to support local journalism. This includes funding 15 climate reporters. The stories these reporters are covering would not have been told without this funding.

We deeply believe that local journalism is crucial to our democracy because well-informed citizens make smart decisions about their communities. Conversely, when city councils, school boards and planning commissions hold meetings without reporters telling the public what happened, bad decisions often are made. Studies have shown that politicians spend money more recklessly and government is less efficient in communities where there aren't journalistic watchdogs.

Look at JFP's work so far. We are helping fund reporters just about everywhere you look – in Fresno, Sacramento, Modesto, Miami, Fort Worth, as well as in communities in Idaho, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia and Florida, just to offer a partial list. These are new reporters who would not be there without JFP.

At our July meeting in Raleigh, our 11-member board began planning our vision for the next five years of JFP. These are some of the best strategic thinkers in the industry. One goal is to put $10 million annually into local journalism. To be clear, this money goes directly to hire reporters, and not for newspaper operations.

I'm confident that JFP will continue to make a major impact in local journalism, and local communities will be better informed because of our work to secure newsroom funding. We raise funds from foundations, major donors and individuals. We also act as the "fiscal sponsor" to allow nonprofits to direct funding to newsrooms using JFP as the intermediary. This allows donors to make tax-deductible contributions. We operate under strict IRS guidelines.

The money goes to JFP and then to newsrooms, and funders do not have any say on what gets covered, other than the grants are to be used for climate reporters, in that particular example. Newsroom editors make coverage decisions exclusively.

Our board has extensive experience in journalism, education, law, nonprofits and philanthropy. Over the past year, we have hired a full-time executive director, veteran journalist Rusty Coats, and that has allowed us to make great strides as an organization. We are now prepared for the next phase of our work.

Philanthropy isn’t the only answer, but it will help fund local journalism until newsrooms come up with a better model to hire and support local journalists.


Read More

The U.S. Pentagon.

Buried in the 2027 NDAA, Section 224 could fundamentally reshape U.S.-Israel defense ties. Is Congress creating an irreversible military partnership?

Getty Images, Westend61

America Should Stay Single

As we wait to see what comes of ceasefire negotiations between the United States and Iran, the House just released its 2027 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). Buried within it lies Section 224, titled the “United States-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative,” a provision representing what would be a radical departure from how we work with even our strongest allies, turning America’s relationship with a close collaborator into a permanent military-industrial integration. The U.S. has worked with NATO partners on co-production and shared supply chains in the past, but never like this. Many are calling it a merger. We should all be calling it off.

Section 224 could inextricably link the fate of our country’s defense to another’s. The Secretary of Defense would be directed to designate an executive agent to fuse ventures with Israel so significantly that it would touch almost every area of defense tech: AI, autonomous systems, energy, cyber, biotech, and beyond. It also proposes “network” and “data fusion,” which means, as the director of the Democratizing Foreign Policy program at the Quincy Institute warned, “the U.S. military’s data could soon be the Israeli military’s data.America First may soon sound more like a sarcastic punchline than a platform.

Keep ReadingShow less
AI Could Save Thousands—So Why Is Healthcare Still Hitting the Brakes?

Discover how generative AI in healthcare could reduce misdiagnoses, improve chronic disease management, and save hundreds of thousands of lives—if policymakers accelerate adoption instead of waiting for risk-free perfection.

Getty Images / Pakorn Supajitsoontorn

AI Could Save Thousands—So Why Is Healthcare Still Hitting the Brakes?

Imagine that the only way Americans traveled was on foot or on horseback. And assume that 100,000 people died each year because they couldn’t reach a hospital in time or firefighters arrived too late.

Suddenly, they learned that thanks to a technological breakthrough, cars and trucks will become widely available within three years.

Keep ReadingShow less
This 3D rendered image shows a central AI processing chip sitting atop a glowing blue printed circuit board.

Can AI profit-sharing help workers? Examining public wealth funds, AI taxes, economic transition policies, and the future of work.

Jason marz / Getty Images

There’s No Easy Path Through the AI Transition

“Trending” policy ideas tend to garner attention for all the wrong reasons: they seem like silver bullet solutions that will save us from taking on much harder reforms. Proposals to share profits from leading AI companies with the public are the latest example. It’s the rare policy scheme that seems to have united President Donald Trump, Senator Bernie Sanders, and CEOs at the leading AI labs. While the proposals for AI profit sharing vary in their precise details, a quick review of their likely outcomes should quickly deflate the popular excitement that has formed in response to calls for new taxes, public wealth funds, and the like. It’s important to reveal such limitations so that the AI policy discourse can move on to mechanisms more likely to address the real concerns of the American people.

In our first hypothetical world, the two leading AI labs—Anthropic and OpenAI—give away 3% of their equity. That’s not nothing! Based on current figures, such a contribution could kickstart a public wealth fund of about $55 billion. Let’s then imagine that fund earns 10% a year (a big “if” but let’s run with it). Per The Economist, this AI would reach a staggering $140 billion within ten years. How much would that benefit Americans? If annual payouts were 4% — what the publication reports is a proper amount to keep the fund going and growing — Americans would have an extra $20 in their pocket.

Keep ReadingShow less
For Imre Huss, Fixing Democracy Starts With Talking to a Stranger
a couple of people sitting at a table with cups of coffee

For Imre Huss, Fixing Democracy Starts With Talking to a Stranger

The Democracy Architects Council, presented by The Bridge Alliance Education Fund and Civics Unplugged, offers a paid, one-year fellowship for eight fellows ages 18 to 28, each selected for their work across a distinct sector of democratic life.

The youngest member of the Democracy Architects Council is building AI-powered civic tech, but he says the real work of democracy still happens face to face.

Keep ReadingShow less