Revenue Mix, Mission Drift
What I learned trying to build a sustainable nonprofit newsroom (without losing the plot)
When I started building the business model for LehighValleyNews.com, I did it backward—like a lot of people. I started with the expense side: I knew what we needed to accomplish our mission, and how many journalists, editors, videographers, and producers it would take. I also knew the tech infrastructure our audience would expect from a modern, responsive news organization. The number wasn’t small.
And our board? Let’s just say they weren’t in the mood for an investment that wouldn’t break even for a long time. So I built a revenue model around both of those realities.
I’m thinking about all of this again because of a smart piece from Katherine Fink in The Conversation, which points out a core challenge in nonprofit journalism:
“The more complicated their revenue mix becomes, the more complicated their approach to fundraising has to be.”
That’s not just true. That’s lived experience.
Our original model had seven revenue streams: grants, membership, digital advertising, sponsorship, philanthropy, events, and earned revenue. I specifically de-emphasized grants—capping them at just 5%—because, as I often said at the time: I didn’t want us to have to beg for our supper every 1–3 years.
But I also knew our limitations. We were a public television station without a digital sales team. That meant we had to build one—more expense, more complexity. And the more we diversified, the more moving pieces we had to manage. Each stream had different staffing, data, finance, and marketing requirements.
Widening our revenue base didn’t just increase potential—it increased friction.
Like many other media and nonprofit leaders, I’ve seen organizations hesitate to explore new funding models because the act of experimenting itself can feel like a threat. It may appear to staff, board members, or even supporters that you’re “moving away” from your mission. Sometimes that’s a fair criticism. But often it’s just the discomfort of change.
My advice? Plan wide, move narrow. Don’t try to scale seven revenue streams simultaneously. Pilot small, test smart, and don’t bite off more than you can chew.
And when it’s not working—pivot fast.
We didn’t do that quickly enough with our membership program. We had planned to offer members exclusive content and event access. However, we quickly discovered we didn’t have the bandwidth to produce content for both the daily product and a member vertical. So we switched to a straight-up donation model. I only wish we’d made the decision sooner.
Of course, my board pushed back—first on the seven-year plan (which they trimmed to five), and then on the breadth of the revenue goals. They weren’t wrong to worry. But complexity is the cost of sustainability, and if you’re not designing your revenue to match your ambitions, you’re just playing pretend.
And here’s the kicker: this isn’t just a media problem.
Mission-driven organizations across sectors struggle with the same issue. The moment you diversify revenue, you increase complexity. But if you don’t, you risk dependency, stagnation, and missed opportunity.
So what’s the lesson?
📌 Be honest about your limitations.
📌 Match your model to your mission.
📌 And experiment with intention—not inertia.
📥 Want more real-world strategy lessons like this?
Subscribe to Backstory & Strategy — weekly reflections on leadership, media, and mission-driven work. It's free, thoughtful, and rooted in experience.