In the past five years, independent newsletters have exploded, as journalists and other writers look for new ways to monetize their work in the face of layoffs and shrinking outlets for reporting and critical or personal essays. Some of these newsletters are 100 percent reader supported, while others monetize through ads and sponsorships, and still others recoup revenue through consulting or speaking work. But outside the framework of established institutions and expectations for how writers interact with the people funding their work, these writers are usually left on their own to sort out any ethical conundrums that might arise.
What do you do when the newsletter platform you use also supports people whose positions you fundamentally disagree with? What if the person you fundamentally disagree with now owns that newsletter platform? How do you handle the perception — and arguably, the reality — that these platforms in general are power plays less interested in fostering journalistic, critical, and creative work than advancing their own financial and ideological agendas and circumscribing the public sphere? It’s all the issues we’ve faced with social media, crowdfunding platforms, and big publishers and their corporate owners, but somehow (like the new journalism models it fosters), more concentrated and more direct.
What do you do when your readers — now your direct patrons — are also part of a community that you have to moderate? What do you do when they demand a particular style of writing or a particular slant to your coverage (usually more positive, more critical, or maybe more relevant to their own interests)? Now, suppose that patron is an advertiser or sponsor — one whose products or services might be covered in your newsletter or who competes with those who are. What lines do you draw and how do you stick with them? Suppose an independent newsletter owner employs another journalist to act as an editor, fact-checker, community moderator, podcast producer, etc. How do they relate to that employee (typically also an independent contractor) without exploiting them as much or more than a larger organization would?
This doesn’t even touch on some of the murkiest ethical issues affecting independent journalists. Here’s a lightly redacted anecdote. For four years, I’ve written a newsletter about Amazon and the media, tech, and commerce industries. I consider myself a fair critic of Amazon, but definitely more of a critic and user than a booster or a take-no-sides reporter.
Last year, I was approached by a firm representing an unnamed client who was offering a large sum of money to support my newsletter, under the understanding that I continue to write stories critical of Amazon. Nothing proposed was anything other than factual, and not significantly different from the writing I was doing, but they had specific requests for areas I could focus on. They’d found an ideologically aligned writer with a reputation as an independent voice, and wanted to underwrite that work. But I could not disclose the sponsorship or even be told the identity of who the ultimate client was. I did not take this assignment, but I had to wonder who else was being made an offer like this, and who would ultimately accept.
This is not a scenario that a reporter in a traditional newsroom is permitted to consider, at least without violating many standards of professional ethics. But for a single newsletter writer, this can be an offer too good to refuse. I would also say it bleeds uncomfortably into the already accepted domains of patronage and disclosed sponsorship that already fund many independent newsletters. I would say in fact that independent newsletters are ripe ground for this kind of astroturfed activism, and there are many actors in many industries who know it.
For these reasons and more, I think a discussion about ethical guidelines for independent newsletters is far overdue. We have to talk about standards of who we work for, who we work with, and how we get our work done. It is not nearly so simple as saying that a direct financial relationship with your readers solves all your problems. It just poses new ones. In 2023 and beyond, we have to do better at recognizing and grappling with these problems before we’re overrun by them.
Tim Carmody writes about media, technology, art, and culture.
In the past five years, independent newsletters have exploded, as journalists and other writers look for new ways to monetize their work in the face of layoffs and shrinking outlets for reporting and critical or personal essays. Some of these newsletters are 100 percent reader supported, while others monetize through ads and sponsorships, and still others recoup revenue through consulting or speaking work. But outside the framework of established institutions and expectations for how writers interact with the people funding their work, these writers are usually left on their own to sort out any ethical conundrums that might arise.
What do you do when the newsletter platform you use also supports people whose positions you fundamentally disagree with? What if the person you fundamentally disagree with now owns that newsletter platform? How do you handle the perception — and arguably, the reality — that these platforms in general are power plays less interested in fostering journalistic, critical, and creative work than advancing their own financial and ideological agendas and circumscribing the public sphere? It’s all the issues we’ve faced with social media, crowdfunding platforms, and big publishers and their corporate owners, but somehow (like the new journalism models it fosters), more concentrated and more direct.
What do you do when your readers — now your direct patrons — are also part of a community that you have to moderate? What do you do when they demand a particular style of writing or a particular slant to your coverage (usually more positive, more critical, or maybe more relevant to their own interests)? Now, suppose that patron is an advertiser or sponsor — one whose products or services might be covered in your newsletter or who competes with those who are. What lines do you draw and how do you stick with them? Suppose an independent newsletter owner employs another journalist to act as an editor, fact-checker, community moderator, podcast producer, etc. How do they relate to that employee (typically also an independent contractor) without exploiting them as much or more than a larger organization would?
This doesn’t even touch on some of the murkiest ethical issues affecting independent journalists. Here’s a lightly redacted anecdote. For four years, I’ve written a newsletter about Amazon and the media, tech, and commerce industries. I consider myself a fair critic of Amazon, but definitely more of a critic and user than a booster or a take-no-sides reporter.
Last year, I was approached by a firm representing an unnamed client who was offering a large sum of money to support my newsletter, under the understanding that I continue to write stories critical of Amazon. Nothing proposed was anything other than factual, and not significantly different from the writing I was doing, but they had specific requests for areas I could focus on. They’d found an ideologically aligned writer with a reputation as an independent voice, and wanted to underwrite that work. But I could not disclose the sponsorship or even be told the identity of who the ultimate client was. I did not take this assignment, but I had to wonder who else was being made an offer like this, and who would ultimately accept.
This is not a scenario that a reporter in a traditional newsroom is permitted to consider, at least without violating many standards of professional ethics. But for a single newsletter writer, this can be an offer too good to refuse. I would also say it bleeds uncomfortably into the already accepted domains of patronage and disclosed sponsorship that already fund many independent newsletters. I would say in fact that independent newsletters are ripe ground for this kind of astroturfed activism, and there are many actors in many industries who know it.
For these reasons and more, I think a discussion about ethical guidelines for independent newsletters is far overdue. We have to talk about standards of who we work for, who we work with, and how we get our work done. It is not nearly so simple as saying that a direct financial relationship with your readers solves all your problems. It just poses new ones. In 2023 and beyond, we have to do better at recognizing and grappling with these problems before we’re overrun by them.
Tim Carmody writes about media, technology, art, and culture.
Dominic-Madori Davis Everyone finally realizes the need for diverse voices in tech reporting
Jennifer Brandel AI couldn’t care less. Journalists will care more.
Shanté Cosme The answer to “quiet quitting” is radical empathy
Mariana Moura Santos A woman who speaks is a woman who changes the world
Al Lucca Digital news design gets interesting again
Matt Rasnic More newsroom workers turn to organized labor
Cindy Royal Yes, journalists should learn to code, but…
Eric Ulken Generative AI brings wrongness at scale
Rodney Gibbs Recalibrating how we work apart
David Skok Renewed interest in human-powered reporting
Jody Brannon We’ll embrace policy remedies
Tamar Charney Flux is the new stability
Larry Ryckman We’ll work together with our competitors
Anthony Nadler Confronting media gerrymandering
Ståle Grut Your newsroom experiences a Midjourney-gate, too
Richard Tofel The press might get better at vetting presidential candidates
Stefanie Murray The year U.S. media stops screwing around and becomes pro-democracy
Alexandra Svokos Working harder to reach audiences where they are
Hillary Frey Death to the labor-intensive memo for prospective hires
Christina Shih Shared values move from nice-to-haves to essentials
Barbara Raab More journalism funders will take more risks
Raney Aronson-Rath Journalists will band together to fight intimidation
Walter Frick Journalists wake up to the power of prediction markets
Kerri Hoffman Podcasting goes local
Doris Truong Workers demand to be paid what the job is worth
Sue Schardt Toward a new poetics of journalism
Julia Angwin Democracies will get serious about saving journalism
Megan Lucero and Shirish Kulkarni The future of journalism is not you
Peter Bale Rising costs force more digital innovation
A.J. Bauer Covering the right wrong
Laura E. Davis The year we embrace the robots — and ourselves
Nicholas Thompson The year AI actually changes the media business
Janelle Salanga Journalists work from a place of harm reduction
Taylor Lorenz The “creator economy” will be astroturfed
S. Mitra Kalita “Everything sucks. Good luck to you.”
Tim Carmody Newsletter writers need a new ethics
Michael Schudson Journalism gets more and more difficult
Sam Guzik AI will start fact-checking. We may not like the results.
Gabe Schneider Well-funded journalism leaders stop making disparate pay
Jessica Clark Open discourse retrenches
Brian Moritz Rebuilding the news bundle
Jacob L. Nelson Despite it all, people will still want to be journalists
Janet Haven ChatGPT and the future of trust
Parker Molloy We’ll reach new heights of moral panic
Anita Varma Journalism prioritizes the basic need for survival
Emma Carew Grovum The year to resist forgetting about diversity
Elizabeth Bramson-Boudreau More of the same
Wilson Liévano Diaspora journalism takes the next step
Priyanjana Bengani Partisan local news networks will collaborate
Francesco Zaffarano There is no end of “social media”
Kavya Sukumar Belling the cat: The rise of independent fact-checking at scale
Snigdha Sur Newsrooms get nimble in a recession
Juleyka Lantigua Newsrooms recognize women of color as the canaries in the coal mine
An Xiao Mina Journalism in a time of permacrisis
Burt Herman The year AI truly arrives — and with it the reckoning
Gina Chua The traditional story structure gets deconstructed
Alexandra Borchardt The year of the climate journalism strategy
Amy Schmitz Weiss Journalism education faces a crossroads
Jakob Moll Journalism startups will think beyond English
Sue Cross Thinking and acting collectively to save the news
Valérie Bélair-Gagnon Well-being will become a core tenet of journalism
Christoph Mergerson The rot at the core of the news business
John Davidow A year of intergenerational learning
Don Day The news about the news is bad. I’m optimistic.
Moreno Cruz Osório Brazilian journalism turns wounds into action
Kirstin McCudden We’ll codify protection of journalism and newsgathering
Errin Haines Journalists on the campaign trail mend trust with the public
Alex Sujong Laughlin Credit where it’s due
Dana Lacey Tech will screw publishers over
Upasna Gautam Technology that performs at the speed of news
Eric Holthaus As social media fragments, marginalized voices gain more power
Esther Kezia Thorpe Subscription pressures force product innovation
Ryan Kellett Airline-like loyalty programs try to tie down news readers
Cassandra Etienne Local news fellowships will help fight newsroom inequities
Khushbu Shah Global reporting will suffer
Zizi Papacharissi Platforms are over
Ryan Nave Citizen journalism, but make it equitable
Johannes Klingebiel The innovation team, R.I.P.
Sumi Aggarwal Smart newsrooms will prioritize board development
Jaden Amos TikTok personality journalists continue to rise
Joe Amditis AI throws a lifeline to local publishers
Martina Efeyini Talk to Gen Z. They’re the experts of Gen Z.
Molly de Aguiar and Mandy Van Deven Narrative change trend brings new money to journalism
Nikki Usher This is the year of the RSS reader. (Really!)
Jarrad Henderson Video editing will help people understand the media they consume
Alan Henry A reckoning with why trust in news is so low
Andrew Donohue We’ll find out whether journalism can, indeed, save democracy
Julia Beizer News fatigue shows us a clear path forward
Dannagal G. Young Stop rewarding elite performances of identity threat
Masuma Ahuja Journalism starts working for and with its communities
Anna Nirmala News organizations get new structures
Jim VandeHei There is no “peak newsletter”
Victor Pickard The year journalism and capitalism finally divorce
Andrew Losowsky Journalism realizes the replacement for Twitter is not a new Twitter
Mary Walter-Brown and Tristan Loper Mission-driven metrics become our North Star
Danielle K. Brown and Kathleen Searles DEI efforts must consider mental health and online abuse
Basile Simon Towards supporting criminal accountability
Laxmi Parthasarathy Unlocking the silent demand for international journalism
Ben Werdmuller The internet is up for grabs again
Bill Adair The year of the fact-check (no, really!)
Joanne McNeil Facebook and the media kiss and make up
Eric Nuzum A focus on people instead of power
Joshua P. Darr Local to live, wire to wither
Felicitas Carrique and Becca Aaronson News product goes from trend to standard
Jessica Maddox Journalists keep getting manipulated by internet culture
Bill Grueskin Local news will come to rely on AI
Cory Bergman The AI content flood
Surya Mattu Data journalists learn from photojournalists
Leezel Tanglao Community partnerships drive better reporting
Sarah Alvarez Dream bigger or lose out
Karina Montoya More reporters on the antitrust beat
Josh Schwartz The AI spammers are coming
Jonas Kaiser Rejecting the “free speech” frame
Alex Perry New paths to transparency without Twitter
Ayala Panievsky It’s time for PR for journalism
Peter Sterne AI enters the newsroom
Jenna Weiss-Berman The economic downturn benefits the podcasting industry. (No, really!)
Ariel Zirulnick Journalism doubles down on user needs
Rachel Glickhouse Humanizing newsrooms will be a badge of honor
Kaitlyn Wells We’ll prioritize media literacy for children
Nicholas Jackson There will be launches — and we’ll keep doing the work
Emily Nonko Incarcerated reporters get more bylines
Nicholas Diakopoulos Journalists productively harness generative AI tools
Jesse Holcomb Buffeted, whipped, bullied, pulled
Tre'vell Anderson Continued culpability in anti-trans campaigns
Jim Friedlich Local journalism steps up to the challenge of civic coverage
Kaitlin C. Miller Harassment in journalism won’t get better, but we’ll talk about it more openly
Jennifer Choi and Jonathan Jackson Funders finally bet on next-generation news entrepreneurs
Sarah Marshall A web channel strategy won’t be enough
Sarabeth Berman Nonprofit local news shows that it can scale
Daniel Trielli Trust in news will continue to fall. Just look at Brazil.
David Cohn AI made this prediction
Elite Truong In platform collapse, an opportunity for community
Eric Thurm Journalists think of themselves as workers
J. Siguru Wahutu American journalism reckons with its colonialist tendencies
Lisa Heyamoto The independent news industry gets a roadmap to sustainability
Pia Frey Publishers start polling their users at scale
Michael W. Wagner The backlash against pro-democracy reporting is coming
Gordon Crovitz The year advertisers stop funding misinformation
Mauricio Cabrera It’s no longer about audiences, it’s about communities
Mael Vallejo More threats to press freedom across the Americas
Mario García More newsrooms go mobile-first
Amethyst J. Davis The slight of the great contraction
Brian Stelter Finding new ways to reach news avoiders
Susan Chira Equipping local journalism
Mar Cabra The inevitable mental health revolution
Sarah Stonbely Growth in public funding for news and information at the state and local levels
Anika Anand Independent news businesses lead the way on healthy work cultures
Cari Nazeer and Emily Goligoski News organizations step up their support for caregivers
Simon Galperin Philanthropy stops investing in corporate media
Joni Deutsch Podcast collaboration — not competition — breeds excellence
Delano Massey The industry shakes its imposter syndrome
Sue Robinson Engagement journalism will have to confront a tougher reality
Paul Cheung More news organizations will realize they are in the business of impact, not eyeballs
Kathy Lu We need emotionally agile newsroom leaders
Ryan Gantz “I’m sorry, but I’m a large language model”
Sam Gregory Synthetic media forces us to understand how media gets made