It has been surreal to follow the debate
that has unfolded in recent weeks on the subject of endowing news organizations
-- as if this is a new idea.
NPR employs more than 400 journalists in 36
bureaus - 17 of them overseas. We produce and distribute more than a dozen hours
of original news programming every day. Our audience is healthy, stable and
growing. We have won just about every journalism prize in the book.
And, we are non-commercial and
not-for-profit. NPR is supported by philanthropists, grants, corporate
sponsorship, and by our member stations. (They are funded similarly, and well as
by millions of listeners nationwide). Our endowment was formed in 1993 and
stands at $205 million. We are the living, breathing prototype of the kind of
operation David Swenson, Steve Coll, Jack Shafer and others are imagining – and
imagining to be revolutionary.
So let me inject some reality into the
debate:
First, the notion that non-commercial
status and an endowment is protection from a bad economy is nonsense. Our
endowment has shrunk like all endowments, making it difficult - though not
impossible - to draw from. Our donors are also feeling the economic pressure;
corporate sponsors, even more so. We cut 7% of our staff in December. And we
will likely need to find other ways to cut our budget before this is over. If
you’re looking for a magic bullet – you won’t find it.
Second, I take exception to Shafer’s
contention that philanthropy-supported journalism inevitably leads to
compromise. NPR has been around for more than 38 years with no such degradation.
There has been no case in our history of undue influence from a donor. Our
structure and governance protects us from that. Neither the NPR Board of
Directors, nor the NPR Foundation Trustees have any authority to direct our news
coverage. The News Division reports to the CEO, who serves as a firewall.
Listeners and philanthropists give to NPR precisely because they want to protect
our independence and integrity. That is our inviolable pact with our
audience.
Third, Shafer worries that an organization
with an endowment and board means there’s no one to yell at. Fear not – we get
yelled at just as much as every other news organization. Our governance has not
dissuaded our listeners from letting us know when they hear or read something
they don’t like; and they do so with the zeal of the owners that they are. Where
is that yelling directed? You name it – to me, to our Ombudsman, to individual
reporters, to the head of news, to our stations. We are all accountable and we
take that seriously. Our non-commercial status does not insulate us from
criticism – nor should it.
Lastly, Shafer concludes that
non-commercial status inevitably leads to over-earnest (read: boring!) coverage.
Our supporters don’t want to hear dull coverage and our reporters have no
interest in force-feeding broccoli to our listeners and online readers. It is
possible to be not-for-profit, comprehensive and journalistically excellent,
without losing the ability to tell a good story that will interest the audience.
And our 26 million weekly listeners seem to agree.
Vivian
Schiller
President and CEO,
NPR
February 4,
2009
