 Our next conversation is launch a world-class newspaper in every state. I'm going to do what I've done along the way and just introduce first Perry and let him introduce the rest of the panel. Perry is one of our fellows at New America. The fellows are our constantly renewing source of big ideas and energy and sort of intellectual inspiration. He's the political editor at griot.com and a regular on-air political analyst for MSNBC. So this is a great conversation. It fits right in the sweet spot of New America between ideas and policy and media. And I don't think you'd find this conversation at too many other think tanks, but we're really pleased to have it here. Thanks so much. Thanks, Rachel. I have actually worked at a newspaper before. I used to work at one called the Washington Post until recently. And so we'll start from there. The panel here, we've got on the far end here, David Suzuki, and he works at the Gates Foundation. He's in charge of their investments in media and how they're going in terms of investing in media companies and media technology. Evan Smith is editor-in-chief of the Texas Tribune, which is a great innovation in media and in local media that we'll talk about some. And then Michelle Perrier is the associate dean for innovation, research, and creative activity at Ohio University. And she does a project called the Media Deserts, and we'll talk about what that means and what a media desert is in a bit. So the idea here we talked about initially is we're having a great moment in terms of media innovation at a national level. You've probably read about Vox or 538, and there's a lot of websites and then other media like that that covers national news. If you want to know about Jill Abramson, or Hillary Clinton's strategy for winning in 2016, or if she's running, who knows if she's running or not. But you know, Hillary Clinton's strategy, or if you want to know something about what happened with Beyoncé and her sister. We are in a great environment. You will never have more information about that than you have today. On the other hand, I've been doing a project looking at the health care law, Obamacare. And that's a law that is set up state by state essentially. So you have 50 different state health insurance markets, and each one of them is a little bit different. And if you're trying to track a law like that, you run this problem of a lot of states because of what we've seen the last 10 years in terms of newspapers. A lot of states just don't have a lot of great information for you to figure out what's happening with a law like Obamacare that's really complicated to cover and cannot be done in a blog post. In fact, if you think about it, Pewda studied about hiring and journalism, and they released it this year, and they found that the largest 500 digital outlets, which includes the Huffington Post, which includes Buzzfeed, includes things that you've heard of, they all employ about 5,000 people. So 500 of these entities employ about 5,000 people. What we've seen in local media is over the last 10 years, there's been a decline of 16,000 local newspaper jobs. So it tells you that we're in a moment of innovation. We still have many fewer full-time journalists than we had before. And the journalists we do have are increasingly covering national news. Buzzfeed has a bureau in London. They probably are not going to open up one in Charlotte anytime soon. So that's kind of where we're going to start from in terms of this discussion, but these guys are the experts in media, so I wanted to talk to them. First of all, I want to ask all of you all, talk about the state of local media right now. What do you think is good and what do you think is not good that's happening? I'll start with David. So thinking about the framing of this panel launch a world-class newspaper in every state, we discussed this a little bit and I think we all agree with the general ambition, which is that we want more informed local communities and there's certainly a scarcity of some relevant information to local communities in order to be engaged citizens. Newspaper is probably not the word we would use to describe how they get that information these days. And I don't know that state, with the exception of the Texas Tribune, which we'll hear more about, I don't know that state is the right geographic framing for how to deliver news to those communities. But the Knight Foundation a couple of years ago commissioned this report on the information needs of local communities. And it found that there is a lack of access to information that is necessary to be an informed engaged citizen. And why is that important? I think it's important for three different reasons, especially at the local level. One, it holds governments to account and I think more attention is probably focused to the federal government and what's not working at federal government than the state government. When actually we have or local city governments, when we have a lot of interesting innovations there that could probably be adopted by the federal government. Second, it informs citizens so that they can be engaged in their communities and citizens are looking for information that's relevant to them. Local information is usually more relevant than federal information. And third, it just creates a shared sense of identity that transcends some of the things that kind of are obstacles to bring us together, class, race, all of these things that we often focus on in terms of how we're different rather than those bonding identities of what we share as residents of a city or state. Perry, I can tell you that the state of the local media in Texas is better than it was three years ago, but significantly worse than it was 10 years ago and much worse than that compared to 20 or so years ago. I moved to Texas in 1991 to work at a magazine called Texas Monthly, which I eventually came to edit. And over the years that I was there, both as a member of the staff and as the editor, I watched the number of newspapers in Texas decline. I watched what you alluded to, the number of reporters on the staff of those papers decline. There were still two daily newspapers as recently as 1991 in Houston, Dallas, San Antonio and El Paso. There are no markets in Texas with two daily papers. Most markets can barely sustain one daily paper. And what's left after all the cuts, cuts of staff and cuts of budget is not an enormous amount of coverage of serious issues, public policy, politics and government. That has been the void created by this decline in the media business. Now in the last couple of years, economies come back in Texas as it has elsewhere and the media business has picked up some. But we are at about half, we estimate about half of where we were 20 years ago in terms of the number of reporters who are at the Capitol covering public policy and politics. Any news organization at crisis time staffs up. And in Texas where our legislature meets 140 days every two years, it's a little bit like the department stores at Christmas. They hire seasonal help. And then when Christmas is over, they lay all the elves off. Well, that's what it's been like in the media business in Texas. Let's say a session comes along, they staff up for the season and then when the session is over, they tend to let them go. So really for most of that two year period, except for those 140 days, it's lean times and coverage of that stuff. We started to effectively combat or attempt to combat that lack of coverage and the problem that David alluded to which is a low level of engagement among people in Texas. Texas citizens generally speaking are not terribly engaged in the political process. We had the lowest voter turnout in 2010 of the 50 states. In fact, we were 51st of the 50 states behind the 49 states of Washington, D.C. And that's the most visible measure of disengagement voter turnout. But if you ask people around the state of Texas who represents you at the Capitol in Austin? Who represents you at the Capitol in Washington? What are the three or four big issues that are being fought over during the Let's Life session? And what stakes do you have in the outcomes of those fights? Most people can't tell you. Jerry Mandarin is responsible to some degree. The decline in the newspaper business is responsible to some degree. And therefore we have a supply and a demand problem that has made it very difficult for Texans to stay informed. But I will tell you, we are optimistic about the model that we're now four and a half years in putting forward. And we think that all over the country there can be some version of this that helps raise a level of engagement. Well, at Night Foundation Report and the work of many communities to begin to look at and understand what's been happening in the media system really speaks to some of the challenges that have happened since 2007. Nearly 120-plus newspapers have gone out of business in this country since that time. And untold number of people that have lost their jobs as a result of that disruption. And what we have found is that that lack of information at the local level, politics of course is a part of that, state government of course is a part of that as well, but the basic information needs of people in our communities such as jobs, health, local services, where they can get access to information about what's happening right next door has diminished tremendously as a result of this loss in the ecosystem. And so what we see as a result of this disruption is a real void in local information and the ability of people to be able to engage because they don't have the information they need to be able to access this information. What we've seen in that same time as well are innovations in media that have grown into those spaces left behind by legacy media such as hyper-local online news sites, patch being a recent distributed and network that's undergone some changes as well, but online entities sold pure plays online that have actually grown and developed into the cracks left in that legacy media. And I think those are becoming a source of very localized information at the neighborhood, at the block level, at the city level to be able to get more personalized information. And I think those types of entities are giving people that sense of place. They're also giving people the faces of their local neighbors and understanding who are the people that can help them in their communities. So I do believe that we've got some real challenges though, however, in being able to fill the voids left by legacy media and also to really fill in the places that never really had good media to begin with. One of those places that you were talking about. So the Media Deserts Project that you referenced earlier is really an attempt using big data and geographic information systems to map the media ecosystem across the United States. Looking at newspapers, both daily, community, alternative weeklies, looking at hyper-local online news sources and other online news sources to be able to see and audit at the zip code level what's happening in our communities. I think the story we've lost in the transition and the story that journalists will tell is about the shutdown of newspapers and about the layoff of journalists. But the story we really have not told is a story about what's happening in the communities themselves. The disenfranchisement of residents from their local government, from their local politicians, and from their neighbors. I am, I think, David as well as our big fans of the Texas Tribune, which I'm sure some of you all have not read, but the Texas Tribune really is a lot of journalists involved in covering public policy, probably more than any local institution I can think of. And then can you talk about how you started, I mean you had this great career, Texas Monthly, you all were beating out the New Yorker and the New York Magazine for awards when you were at Texas Monthly. What made you decide to change in 2009 to start the Texas Tribune? And what are you going to explain to the audience about what you all do and how you cover things? Very quickly the idea was that in view of the decline that I described earlier, a number of us who were working in and around the Capitol decided that it was a good time given the tumult. There's never a better time to start something than in the midst of chaos. This was a great opportunity to jump off an attempt to recreate or to redefine the model for covering the stuff. We made it nonpartisan. We said that there are plenty of places to go to have the choir preach to, places on the left, places on the right. What people need is good reliable down the middle information that they can use in David's phrase to be more thoughtful and productive citizens, to be more engaged. And we decided to go at this as a non-profit on the argument that this kind of accountability journalism, public interest journalism is a public good, that the free market would not provide this inadequate supply because the economic model was not there and the newspapers in Texas and elsewhere had proven that. And so we said we're going to incorporate it as a 501c3 and then we're going to go out and raise money from individuals, foundations and corporations. We started with 17 employees on day one which was November the 3rd of 2009. 11 of those were reporters. We're now up to around 50 full-time employees, 26 reporters. And really you could define that number as larger because I believe that the technology staff, the programmers who do the work behind the work that we do that you see, they're as much part of the editorial team as anybody on that staff. So by traditional definitions, 26 reporters, we've raised about $24 million in four and a half years. We have $3 million in the bank as we speak. We've never come close to missing a rent payment or payroll. We've actually been able to make this work. It costs money to do this, to do it right but it's also the kind of thing that donors of all sorts, again individuals, foundations and corporations have shown year after year now that they believe in, they think brings value to Texas and that they'll support. And I'll say one thing about the specific work we're doing. There are eight key areas that we think have really suffered from lack of coverage and the citizens of Texas have suffered from not having adequate coverage in those areas. Public education, higher education, immigration, health care, transportation, criminal justice, energy and the environment. Those are the key reporting, core reporting areas that we deploy our resources to cover. And we have found that there is an audience out there. It's not all 26 and a half million Texans. What is your audience? I didn't ask you that. So we're reaching on a monthly basis. If you look at total audience, which would be the site traffic that we reach on our site, the traffic we reach in other news organizations because we give our content away to newspapers, TV and radio stations around the state that can't afford to pay for this kind of coverage themselves. It's kind of like a free AP wire. We provide our coverage every day to those folks. We publish in The New York Times on Fridays and Sundays two pages on Friday and two on Sunday for three and a half years now. We estimate the total audience to be somewhere around a million people a month. We're not going to get all 18 million adult Texans. Eventually we might get to 3 million. The point here is to try to get into places where they're not getting this kind of coverage. The five big cities in Texas are pretty well covered. We need to reach places like the Rio Grande Valley, El Paso, Lubbock and Amarillo in the Panhandle, East Texas, places where there's just not a conversation taking place on these issues. David, we haven't discovered this issue at the New America Foundation. People have been talking about this for a long time. Can you talk about the foundation work that's already being done in media and in local information for that matter? Yeah, well, I think these days anyone who invests in journalism is a philanthropist because no one's making money off of hard news right now. The kind of core issues that the Texas Tribune covers, those just aren't profit making. In terms of foundation, so I'm currently at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Previously I worked at O-Media Network and Open Society Foundations. There's a lot of variation foundation by foundation about what types of media they invest in and why. For Open Society Foundations, for instance, it's an organization that really promotes rights and a rights-based kind of perspective of life. So media is a way to both create more awareness about people's rights and then also spotlight abuses of rights. Gates Foundation were very much focused on development and so it's about highlighting the importance of development and the need to allocate more resources more effectively to save more lives around the world. A couple of thoughts about philanthropy and media. One is that it's been difficult for many media organizations that have gone from for-profit to not much of a profit or non-profit to understand the distinction from the foundation perspective which is that we're not as interested in attention as we are in impact. So providing utility to your readers is much more important than competing with others for I want as much of the attention pie as possible. And to do that is really a culture of collaboration rather than competition. And so one example that comes to mind is the Center for Public Integrity teamed up with Global Integrity and a bunch of statewide media organizations to launch the State Integrity Index, I think that's what it's called, kind of looking at accountability at the state level. And that's a great example of collaborating across media organizations with other non-profits and trying to get readers really engaged in the content through different types of innovations or events that works really well. I'll say a word about that. I think one of the, it's a fantastic point, one of the things about being a non-profit news organization is that you are not by virtue of not being a for-profit organization concerned about reselling eyeballs to advertisers. You don't have to worry about the size of your audience, you do worry however about the impact of the work you do on the audience you have and so it allows you to make the right decisions for the right reasons to focus on stuff that might not get a mass audience but will have the greatest impact. I think the conversion of the conversation away from audience and to impact is a very healthy thing for journalism and I suspect that funders much prefer to hear that as well because you want to know that those dollars are being deployed for maximum effect. And I think when you look at the foundation world, that impact in measuring the impact of newspapers and news and information in a community has been a real challenge. We've seen that in the public's perception of the value of newspapers declining over time through decline in circulation and subscriptions and access to news and information and in the value of the role of journalists in society. So we've seen that decline over time but at the foundation world I think as well impact has always been an issue. And so we've got to be able to marry those things whether you're a commercial entity or a nonprofit entity or some other kind of form yet to be discovered. We need to really be able to measure who's being able to get access to the information that we're providing. How can we deploy it on a variety of different platforms to make it accessible to people and again our foundation's giving money to the people in places that have never had access to fresh good local news and information. Let me ask two related questions. I want to start with David on this. Are we identifying the right problem? If you really live somewhere and you want to know what the best school is in your city, do you really need to have like some fancy Texas Tribune or the Kentucky Tribune there or do you just need to talk to your neighbors and so on? Are people being informed sufficiently without necessarily, without us creating a bunch of new entities? And the second related question that is if they're not being informed, we're all assuming on some level that we need to have non-profit local media. If the local media was better and connected and really address people's needs, would they pay for it? I've always thought that the primary function of local media in the 20th century is to give people something to talk about. So you're able to go to work the next day and you can say, hey, did you read the front page and let's talk about something? And social media has replaced that function. Where I think that there's a real challenge, and this is a major challenge for us in philanthropic foundations, is not so much information scarcity as information nutrition. I think most of us feel like we're information obese, that we have too much information vying for our attention, but are we well enough informed to be good citizens? And technology, I think there's some promise there. So Great Schools is a platform that takes in a lot of data. Most of it is automated. Teachers and parents can leave comments and it's a fantastic resource. And most of it's automated. You don't need that many journalists working on that site. But I do think you need, yes, I think there needs to be, I would say that this country would be much better off if there were a Texas Tribune in every state and if there were a voice of San Diego in every city. And I think that there are enough people in those cities that would be willing to pay for it to sustain it and enough sort of corporate entities that would be willing to underwrite a good portion of the content as well. You know, the fact is I love my neighbors. I'm happy to talk to my neighbors, but you can't run your business anecdotally and you can't run your life anecdotally. Data matters. Real information. Information that you can use to make smart decisions matters. You've asked about the public schools. I have a specific example of this. We sought and received a grant from the Michael and Susan Dell Foundation a couple of years ago to build a public education explorer for the state of Texas. Where we gathered together data on the performance of all 8,500 elementary, middle and high schools, public schools in Texas. Performance as in statewide test scores, the diversity of the student population, enrollments, graduation rates, college readiness, teacher salaries, the breakdown by race and ethnicity of the teacher and administrative ranks in those schools. Basically, every conceivable metric of performance and financial efficiency and to accountability that you could ask for, we built this database over the course of a year with funding from the Dell Foundation so that the average person can go not take their neighbor's word for it, but actually go dial up their school, the school in their district or a school they might be thinking of moving to and see how does this school do on the basis of all the metrics for success? How does this school compare to other schools in the district? How does this school compare to the socioeconomic cohort schools elsewhere in the state? Anecdotal is great, but at the end of the day, real information, real data drives smart decision-making, and I do think that not just our organization, but a lot of organizations have gotten onto this idea, which is why you see so much data journalism thriving these days. I think you see the difference between news and information here because I think you're talking about data that can be crunched and given to an audience in a very basic fashion. News being the work of journalists that takes that information and analyzes it in a way and puts it into context for an audience. Those are two different things, one which may be automated to a certain extent, some which probably should not be automated in any way. And so I think there's a real difference there in terms of what we're talking about here and the needs of communities. The report was about community news and information needs, and I think when we're looking at what a community needs, it's not just content. We need to think about access to that material. If all of our newspapers become entities behind a paywall and we have low-income communities that can't access that information because they're not paying for it, we may have information what looks like a news and information glut in an area and yet find that there are people that can't access it because of paywalls, because of rural areas that may not have access to mobile signal to be able to get your mobile site. All these other barriers to news and information that we really need to be cognizant of as we begin to look at ways to rebuild the media system. For me, the most important conclusion from that night commission report was that just supplying more content, if it's relevant, good quality journalism is not enough. Media literacy is a really big part, and so there's this chicken and egg problem where a lot of local media organizations say, well, no one wants to read hard news. We're going to write about technology and sports and celebrities, but if you don't make that information available in a compelling way and really try to engage readers, then, of course, they're not interested in it. So we're funding the Seattle Times right now. It's a launch project called Education Lab. It's been going on for about six months, which does exactly that. It digs into the data first to say which schools are overperforming or are outperforming neighboring schools and what are they doing differently. And then it tries to involve parents in those conversations so that those parents see the utility of this type of journalism. What you're saying about the choices that are being made by some media organizations today, we're going to choose to do these things and not those things because these things have a natural audience is exactly what we heard when we started the Tribune Parry. We had the editors of the five big newspapers in Texas in a conference room and we said, here's what we plan to do. You've heard a lot about us, but let us tell you from us. This is what we intend to do. We're going to cover these things and not those things. And we believe that there's value in this. And the message from them to us effectively was, we've stopped covering that stuff because nobody cares. And our response back to them was, you have it exactly right, but you have it exactly backwards. Nobody cares because you've stopped covering this stuff. In some ways, this is a time when it's good for the media to be arrogant and to assert a need that may not be provable right here. But we have to give people this stuff because if we don't give it to them then they simply will not pay attention to it. And I don't mind sort of stabbing in the dark a couple of times until you hit because at the end of the day, this kind of success at reaching people has impact and has consequences across the board. But I think that's a key point and a distinction between commercial media and nonprofit media as well because you can make those different kinds of choices to not go after the consumer and the eyeballs in order to be able to get advertising revenue but be able to do your work a little bit differently to be able to go after the substance in the news's food model if we're looking at feeding and sustaining a community. You have to have that diet that does allow for the more media subjects to be able to put into context and to be able to be given to people in a way that they can understand what they can do to maybe make those choices in their lives. I'll ask one more question just briefly and then we'll go to the audience and hopefully you'll know this shortly. When I pitched this idea, I very much framed it as the New York Times in every state and not an AP and not a Bloomberg and not a Politico and I'm probably getting in trouble now. But can you talk about it and you were saying and maybe a New America, New Mexico even but not necessarily the other models I was talking about but you talked about, David made the point earlier that thinking about it in terms of a news entity may be the wrong way to think about it. Talk about New York Times is to you like the wrong way to think about it, right? I think New York Times is great in that it does still play that primary function of giving us something to talk about. We all read the New York Times. There's a common culture. I feel like I'm an American when I read the New York Times. We in Texas feel like we're communists. I live in Seattle. Yes, you do. I would not want the national American public to be informed by one media organization. I wouldn't want any one state to be informed by any one media organization. I think it's great that there is a large variety of media sources and we should encourage that. But it's important to have media organizations that do fact checking. I think authority within media is important. You made the point we were talking yesterday that you don't necessarily learn news from the New York Times source that has a lot of times in New York Times reporting news that you kind of already knew about but they have a credentialing function of sources. I'm saying it poorly. The latest Pew State of the Media Report found this, that we all consume information on social media networks. We all share information, but it tends to be from those authoritative sources. I actually think at the state level what you need is not credentialing but you need information that you don't get otherwise. You know, if the Texas legislature cuts $4 billion in public education funding as it did in 2011 or if it passes legislation requiring that abortion clinics raise their standards to those of surgical centers and the result is that 37 of 42 abortion clinics in a state of 26 and a half million people are forced to close. That is material information that but for state level news coverage is probably not going to get out to most people. Michelle is exactly right that there are many inherent challenges to getting into communities where the need is the greatest. But we all have to be swinging at the ball. I'm glad to have made that point. One last thing I wanted to say was we're having a great growth of journalists in Washington at the exact time Washington is not doing anything. Congress is not passing any bills versus if you look at the 50 states, all this legislation is being covered, being done, making it even more important to have great coverage there as opposed to more people tracking what John Boehner says each day. Do we have questions though? Sure, in the front. I'm Neiman Donsa from New America Board. I love what you're doing in Texas, Evan. I have a question for you. Yes, sir. Is there something unique about Texas given the answer that's yes. So many things. How much time do you have? From a business standpoint, is there something unique about Texas or is the model replicable elsewhere? Well, I do. I mean, I think first of all, Texas has always viewed itself as different from the other states. I joked to somebody earlier that the state model ought to be Texas. We know better. You know, Texas has always viewed itself through a different lens than a lot of other states do. And honestly, Texas is more like a city where Austin, Dallas, San Antonio, Fort Worth, Houston are the neighborhoods than it is like a state. Texanness is a connective tissue of sorts. It's why Texas monthly has been such a successful magazine for 40-plus years when no other statewide magazines have been successful. And it's why we were able to do the Tribune because I think no matter where you live in Texas, you care. And so defining the state as a market is possible there in a way that it may not be elsewhere. But I'll say something else. We have 36 billionaires on the Forbes 400 this year, and I'm told about another 30 to 35 who simply aren't on the list. We have more millionaires and billionaires than any other state. I'm told reliably we have more Fortune 1000 companies than Texas than any other state, and we're in the top three in Fortune 500 companies. You asked about business. We have a base of wealth from which to draw. If you're running a nonprofit news organization that intends to be funded in part by generous, wealthy individuals and corporate support, corporate underwriting, it helps to have wealthy individuals and corporations with money. And I'm not sure that you can run this play in exactly the same way in a state that has a smaller base of wealth from which to draw. Another question? The tool is in the front there. Do you want to wait for it? I think they want the... A question for you about the difference between working in a patron-driven organization where your customer really starts to become the patron rather than the people whose eyeballs you're trying to get to. And is there a model that can try to diversify? Can you have part of your way that you're generating revenue come from subscriptions and getting the eyeballs? Is there a mixed model so that, you know, we've seen all the ways in which not-for-profits can become really driven by their patrons and get their own blinders as well? Yeah. It is asserted often without being proven, although I'm certainly not criticizing the question at all. I've heard it many times that just because we take money from wealthy individuals who support our mission, that we must somehow be beholden to them editorially. And my response back is that I ran a magazine, a for-profit magazine for many years, where advertisers spent significantly more money with the magazine than donors are spending with us, and yet we didn't compromise the editorial standards then and wouldn't compromise the editorial standards now. What the donors to the Tribune, and I know many other nonprofit news organizations get, is a handshake and a tax letter. That's all they get. And they're told expressly at the beginning, I know I tell them expressly at the beginning, that you're not going to affect the editorial coverage that we provide. You can't cause something to happen or cause something not to happen, and if you attempt to, I'm more than happy to give you the full amount of your contribution back. We are beholden to no one but the state of Texas in the sense that we cover the state where they're as a sort of trust almost for the state of Texas. And we do have subscribers. We call them members. A little bit like NPR stations or PBS stations. At a 5 million or more in revenue that we generated last year, that in 50,000 was membership. These are gifts of 10 and 35 and 60. It's not all rich people. It's some average folks. It's college students. And so we certainly believe that you have to diversify revenue sources and we've tried very hard to do that. Can I ask you a question? We're approached every week by media organizations that say, give us 10 million dollars. And I always tell them, you don't want us to do that because it's not good for your editorial independence. No media organization wants more than 25% of their funding to come from any philanthropic, any source at all, really. At least nonprofit media. And so something I've done in the past I think has been pretty effective is doing matching funds with nonprofit media organizations that do crowdfunding for some journalistic endeavor. So there was a Brazilian media organization that wanted to do these 10 investigative pieces. They didn't have the resources for it. So they got their community together and they said, this foundation is going to match three to one every dollar that we raised from this community if we're able to get, I think it was like $75,000 of funding to do these investigations. The people, their readers that ended up donating for that campaign became much more invested in the stories. And it was something that they felt, invested in and that they contributed to. So I think that's an interesting model. And a major part of this honestly is also transparency about funding sources. I don't think the for-profit media are terribly transparent about who pays the bills, but I can tell you that we disclose every single contribution, individual, foundation, and corporate on our website in real time. So anybody can see at any given time any dollar contributed through any door at the Tribune. Hopefully that kind of sunlight is an adequate disinfectant. That our last question? We have time for one more question? Yes. Okay. Buzz? So if you start... Microphone. I think they have this. Sorry. Start with the market of lobbyists for corporations who need intel from state capitals, right? And you aggregate that intel from state capitals by connecting all these small organizations together in one big magazine or a website, right? Could you... Could that be a viable business model to actually get more reporting on the legislatures in the states? The big people who build schools? You mean it's a national news organization? Bam. Well, I can tell you that when Newsweek was up for sale, I called Alberto Abargo in the head of the Knight Foundation and I said it's apparently $40 million in liability that Don Graham is looking for, but he'll sell you Newsweek for a dollar. That was the rumor. I said, why don't you put in $10 million and go to three other foundations, get them to put in $10 million and do exactly what you just said. Aggregate up the best work of nonprofit news organizations in cities and states and effectively build a nonprofit... Reincorporate Newsweek as a nonprofit and rebuild that magazine into the nonprofit provider of news of the sort you're talking about. Obvious need intel. So like the Politico Pro model is what you're talking about? Yes, something like that. Rather than rely on nonprofit model, you want to get an engine that's self-sustaining, right? Go ahead. You've got plenty of talent. It's just a question of deploying it properly. I think we're talking a little bit of inside the Beltway here because there's whole swaths of population whose stories don't get told in our rural communities and our underserved and underrepresented populations, our ethnic communities who may not be able to read the materials that we're even producing or the news and information. And so as we begin to rebuild this media system, we should not look to the media system of the past and the diversity that continues to decline even in that legacy media. I think we need to be very cognizant and very focused on making sure we develop models that work for everyone in the country, not just the elite, not just the top 10%, but all the people that are part of America. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Good. Thank you.