Matter: kickstartered project to sustain serious, long-form online journalism


8 Responses to “Matter: kickstartered project to sustain serious, long-form online journalism”

  1. shahar2k says:

    an important goal and fantastic project, but I found it funny that they used the israeli anthem as part of their video (and yes I’m aware the anthem took the music from somewhere as well) 

  2. Draco_Auric says:

    They aim to charge 99¢ a story, but if you sign up for the kickstarter you only get three for $10?

  3. Draco: It’s a fair point, but we didn’t go to Kickstarter simply because we wanted to line up pre-sales.

    Sure, you could get the articles cheaper if you turn up later. But the reality is that you don’t get the articles *at all* if we can’t start publishing them. If things go really well (and they are going really well so far: we’re halfway to our funding target in less than 24 hours) then we’ll be reconsidering how we can better reward those who have shown belief in what we’re doing: however, it’s always a case of balancing promises of what sounds good to what is actually achievable.

    But yeah, if you want to buy the stories when they come out and save yourself a few bucks, you can do that too.

  4. DJ Awesome says:

    Great idea I guess, but I don’t really feel that long form journalism is in danger – it’s regular journalism that’s in trouble. There are always going to be jerks like me that buy the New Yorker, and all the millions of people who read the huffington post aren’t going to give a fig about it.  They don’t have the attention span and/or don’t care.

    Fine idea, but don’t act like you’re saving the world.

    • We’re not acting like we’re saving the world! We’re just trying to make investigative journalism work on the web, no more, no less. And we’re not expecting it to be something everybody reads.

      Still, we think there are ways to produce this material in a sustainable way — rather than require non-profit status, or rely on owners with deep pockets who can entertain significant losses on magazines for jerks like you and me (like the New Yorker).

  5. Q says:

    I’ll give you money if you release your work under a creative-commons license that allows people to make derivative works:
    * CC-BY
    * CC-BY-SA
    * CC-BY-NC (worse)
    * CC-BY-SA-NC (the worst)
    Why? Because you can enrich the commons with your content by allowing the commons to clearly use your work with attribution. Furthermore you are petitioning the commons for help, why not enrich it as well.

  6. dagfooyo says:

    I was all “hell yes!” until I saw that it was specifically “science and technology” articles.  Don’t get me wrong I’m all for science and technology reporting.  I just don’t think that’s where we need better journalism.  Why aren’t they focusing on world events, politics, exposing corruption etc.?  THAT’S where serious, long-form journalism is supremely lacking in our world today.

    I was all ready to dump a couple hundred into their project in the hopes that it would create our generation’s Woodward and Bernstein.  This is great, I just think they could’ve had a lot more impact on the world by focusing on mainstream news.

  7. digi_owl says:

     Was that Engadget under their “dumb” headline? I think i can agree with that.

Leave a Reply