Editors’ Blog
Back when a good portion of TPM’s current staff was first getting into journalism in the mid-2000s, there was this idea that the New York Times and the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal were all the things of the past; that world was dying, and whatever was to come next, we were told, was in the process of being born. What would it be? You probably remember some of that era. There was a rush toward digital media startups, with investors pouring money into new outlets.
Now, many of them are gone.
TPM predated this frenzy by a little, and has outlasted it. And our community support is a big part of why we’re still around.
The hope for some in those years was that something new would win the attention of the news-reading audience that the newspapers once enjoyed, and this new thing would be staffed by journalists. That something new, however, did not turn out to be a news outlet, and did not turn out to be staffed by journalists. It was, unfortunately, social media apps.
The reason why many of the digital-native outlets of the aughts and 2010s are now gone or seriously diminished is because people didn’t develop a loyalty to any particular one of these startups, they developed a loyalty to the platforms that delivered those stories and the communities on those platforms: once Facebook, then Twitter, now a wide array of different Twitter-like successors and streaming platforms such as YouTube and Twitch. The news first reported by professional journalists ends up sliced and diced and resurfaced and echoed in some form across billions of feeds on innumerable platforms, some of which you and I have likely never heard of. With the time of easy money gone, we see some news outlets continuing to try and squeeze out the dregs from investors, promising novel newsroom uses of AI or a supposedly savvy editorial position that tells the money-havers exactly what they want to hear, regardless of its grounding in reality.
TPM, fortunately, is different, and it is why we’ve been able to survive as long as we have. We know we’re not going to change the news industry, and we don’t need to. We rely on you, our community of readers. We’re not making some grab for the attention of the social media-scrolling masses. Sure, we’ll take it, but we don’t need it. We have something fairly unique here: a loyal readership and a gradually growing group of members with whom we are deeply connected.
This is why we come to you periodically and ask you to support us. It’s that time now, so please, if you have the resources to do so, we hope you will contribute.
What you get in return is not a tote bag, and not (or not just) a warm fuzzy feeling for having supported us and made us happy. We’re a news outlet doing something unique: community based, community sponsored national political journalism. We are not funded by Wall Street or Silicon Valley, and we do not need to come up with contrivances to keep those masters of the universe sending us their cash. We are funded by you, the people who read us and find us valuable. It’s great! We are proud to be part of this experiment, one that continues year after year.
Harris’ Campaign Is Working—Get Used to It 
I’m reading through a Puck newsletter, sent out under the heading “The Vibes Election.” Some of this is similar to what I discussed in yesterday’s Backchannel — Happy v. Mad, etc. But most of it zeroes in on the idea that Harris’ campaign is all vibes and no substance, a sugar high, something that can’t last. Will it be enough to carry her to Election Day? Here’s one snippet.
Read MorePut another way: Vibes, baby! Harris has not outlined any specific economic agenda, speaking only in generic terms about corporate greed, standing with labor unions, protecting Social Security and Obamacare, and fighting for the middle class. She is framing the election simply as “the choice about what direction this country will go in”—conveying an agreeable set of center-left values against Trump rather than a 10-point plan for this or a white paper for that.
Team Happy vs Team Mad
I’m not the first to note this. I saw a headline somewhere over the weekend that the campaign had reset to one between the Happy Tribe and the Angry Tribe. It’s always reductive to try to capture the vast complexity of two national campaigns in a simple catch phrase or binary opposition. But those broad descriptions can capture realities that transcend the details; they are often the takeaway for those watching only at a distance.
It doesn’t take much imagination to think of Trump and the MAGA movement as the Angry Tribe. I mean, they’ve always been Team Angry, or maybe Team Grievance or Team Vengeance. But what about the Harris campaign and the earlier Biden campaign? The Biden campaign, which I supported greatly, was not a happy tribe. I don’t mean that as a criticism. Happy isn’t the only or most important part of a political campaign. Especially when there’s quite a lot not to be happy about.
Read MoreI don’t normally promote Morning Memo in the Editor’s Blog (though you should definitely sign up to receive it in your inbox), but you can’t really understand the Trump campaign hack and Iran’s attempt to interfere in the U.S. election without seeing all the key elements laid out in a timeline from June through today.
The middle period of a drive is the most difficult part. You’re past the initial rush of contributions (thank you!). But it’s before you start approaching the finish line, at which point the pace starts picking up again. The middle period is where we are right now — but we’re now getting close to a big, big milestone, because over the last 53 hours, TPM readers have contributed just over $44,000. Which is friggin’ amazing! Now we’re coming up on the last big milestone ($400,000) before we hit our goal of $500,000. We think we can get there this weekend. We’re now just over $378,000. If you want to help nudge us toward the big four-zero-zero, just click right here.
The Times-Siena poll has been among the least friendly to Democrats through this political cycle and the previous one as well. It’s always important to remember: that doesn’t mean it’s “wrong” or “biased.” In every election you have a range of pollsters making slightly different assumptions about the electorate. You only know which assumptions are right, or most predictive, when you get the election results. Today Times-Siena released a new poll showing Harris up 50-46 over Donald Trump in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. Same result in each.
Read MoreI want to urge you not to let the week come to an end without making your contribution to the TPM Journalism Fund.
We come to you in a bit of a different posture this year. Compared to past years, TPM isn’t just stable financially but in a stronger position than perhaps we’ve ever been. It’s a product of a prudent business strategy applied consistently over time. No tricks, no magic, no secret sauce, except the longstanding relationship we have with you that has given us the luxury of time. Time to retool, rejigger, experiment, fail, and try again. The community you have helped us to build is the source of our hardiness in what remains an extremely difficult environment for many news publishers.
So why give to TPM now if things are going well? The answer comes down to the enormous difference between running a news business while constantly having to bail water out of the bottom of the boat versus being able to focus on navigating toward an ambitious destination while avoiding bad weather and treacherous shoals.
We don’t know what the next four months hold, let alone the next four years. But we do know that if your support lags now we’ll be left vulnerable in the rough weather and high seas we’ll inevitably encounter. But if you continue to give us the support you have in recent years, we can use that to build out a sturdier craft, which in turn lets us be more ambitious about where we sail it.
Whether it’s confronting the grim reality of a Trump II presidency or working to shore up the foundational elements of democracy and protect them from future threats like Trump, there is a lot of work to be done. We want to do that work at a high enough level that the impacts in the world are real and tangible and extend beyond the confines of the TPM community.
Asking for your support is a humbling thing to do. We don’t take your support for granted. In fact, we marvel at it. We are constantly evaluating and reevaluating how to earn and sustain that support not just because there are no guarantees but because you deserve our best effort. That, too, is foundational to this community.
Please, give what you can. If you’re in a financial position to give a little extra and take some of the load off of others, we’re asking you to take that on as part of your contribution to the TPM community. For everyone who has given so far, our deepest thanks.
Kamala Dog Walked Trump Right Back Into the Debate
One thing that gets a bit lost in all the helter-skelter of the last few days: Trump caved big time. Harris said he needed to show up on September 10th. And after three weeks of threats and whining he agreed.
Read MoreA new episode of The Josh Marshall Podcast is live! This week, Kate and Josh discuss VP Kamala Harris’ veep pick and the first few weeks of her campaign.
You can listen to the new episode of The Josh Marshall Podcast here.
Earlier today we hit the $350,000 milestone in the TPM Journalism Fund drive.
You may wonder how we think about this sort of thing internally. How do we talk about the fact that so many people are willing to contribute (generally speaking) over and above their membership fees to a small journalism outfit doing what it can to not just survive, but thrive in uncertain and unprecedented times?
Well it’s very simple: That’s 350,000 votes of confidence in our work. That’s 350,000 votes of confidence in our reporting, our analysis, and our commentary. That is 350,000 votes of confidence in our business model, which has kept us going even while countless other publications have, in recent years, failed or made significant cuts. It’s 350,000 votes of confidence in our belief that journalism can’t be hierarchical, so publications should offer free memberships to those who need them. In short, it’s 350,000 votes of confidence in us.
Look, let me be clear: We know not everyone can contribute over and above the membership fees. We’re thankful and appreciative of each and every member we have regardless of whether you ever contribute to the Journalism Fund. Memberships are the engine that sustains TPM. We thank you. Period.
One of the guiding principles at TPM is preparedness in the face of unexpected change. Change in the news environment or change in the business climate. We don’t always know what the changes will be or how they’ll affect us, but we know they are coming. They always do. That’s why the theme of this year’s Journalism Fund drive is “to help us prepare for what comes next.”
If you have not yet contributed but are able to, please consider doing so. The revenue will help us grow and expand our journalism. It will help us distribute that journalism to more people. And, just as important, it’s a little confidence boost that all the work we put in day in and day out makes a difference in people’s lives. Because the difference between an organization like TPM and many other companies purporting to do journalism is that we care about more than our profit — we care about our impact on the world, and especially our impact on those who help us do what we love to do.
One last thing: Last year, more than 5,000 people contributed. I’m absolutely positive that if we hit that marker again, we’ll hit $500,000. Any amount you can contribute, no matter how small, makes a difference.