Nonprofit news outlet Houston Landing to shut down

Sports Journalists Forum – Media, Newsroom & Reporting Talk

Help Support Sports Journalists Forum:

2muchcoffeeman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2003
Messages
42,055
City & State/Province
Left. Right. In a box by the door.
And another one, another one down
Another one bites the dust

The Landing, a nonprofit digital outlet, started publishing in June 2023 following a two-year study of the Houston media landscape by the American Journalism Project. It launched with more than $20 million in funding and aimed to provide accountability reporting and storytelling that reflected Houston's diversity. Despite rapidly growing a staff of more than 40, however, the Landing has had a rocky two years, weathering unpopular firings and the loss of significant funders.

"We are proud of the Landing's coverage of Greater Houston and continue to believe deeply in the need for more free, independent journalism in our region," board chair Ann B. Stern said in a statement on the Landing's website. "This decision was difficult but necessary. Houston Landing's reporting has made a meaningful impact in the community, but it struggled to find its long-term financial footing."

The Landing's announcement comes just months after one of its initial funders, Arnold Ventures, decided to stop donating money to the nonprofit. The Houston-based philanthropy founded by billionaires Laura and John Arnold had committed $4 million to the Landing over three years in 2022. But when the Landing asked them to renew their commitment — at one point believing they were set to receive an additional $850,000 grant — the philanthropy declined, Columbia Journalism Review reported.

The past few years have been difficult for news organizations across the country. Inflation and pullback from advertisers have led to mass layoffs and closures at dozens of outlets, including nonprofits. The Center for Public Integrity, for example, announced earlier this month it would shut down after difficulties fundraising led to a budget shortfall. Meanwhile, the National Trust for Local News, which brought groups of struggling papers in Maine, Colorado and Georgia under nonprofit control, is undergoing its own cutbacks.

The Landing, like many nonprofit startups, has struggled to develop a sustainable business model. It grew rapidly, deciding to invest from the start in its newsroom — a deviation from many other nonprofits that start small. But it failed to grow its revenue in a similar manner. Expenses exceeded revenue by $2 million last year, according to the Columbia Journalism Review.

the Landing's issues have extended beyond its financial struggles. From the start, it faced criticism for launching in an area that already had a legacy paper — The Houston Chronicle — as well as several other local outlets. The Landing and its funders have justified the startup's existence by stating that many residents do not feel adequately served by their local outlets.

Seven months after launching, the Landing fired founding editor-in-chief Mizanur Rahman and Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative journalist Alex Stuckey. The controversial decision immediately turned the Landing's staff against Bhatia, who argued that the firings were part of a necessary restructuring to make the Landing a "truly digital" outlet. The staff, however, openly denounced the decision and questioned Bhatia's reasoning.

Six weeks later, the staff unionized, citing "recent leadership decisions" that had caused concern about the company's "lack of transparency." The Landing voluntarily recognized the union, which is now bargaining a first contract.


https://www.poynter.org/business-work/2025/houston-landing-shuts-down-nonprofit-news-finances/
 
Hold on … it launched less than two years ago with $20 million in start up money, and now it’s kaput?!?!?

I’m no bean counter, but how do you **** away that much money that fast at a mostly online startup?

Next you’ll try to tell me that a dozen eggs cost $6.99 … [/oldguyrantover]
 
Hold on … it launched less than two years ago with $20 million in start up money, and now it's kaput?!?!?

I'm no bean counter, but how do you **** away that much money that fast at a mostly online startup?

Next you'll try to tell me that a dozen eggs cost $6.99 … [/oldguyrantover]

That struck me as very odd as well.

Also way to commit to the service by firing the Pulitzer winner less than year in.
 
You **** it away by hiring 40 people.

At any rate, these "nonprofit, free, independent" operations chug along best when they are nakedly one-sided politically. (Usually nakedly progressive, but not always.)

Houston Landing played quite a few stories down the middle, and the stories were not particularly exciting. That's called a "local newspaper without a sports section."

And that rarely works. People don't really care about local government. They don't. They should but they don't.

Why Houston Landing launched without taking a few of those positions and hiring a Rockets reporter and Astros reporter and Cougs reporter, who knows. That's just good business. It's what gets people in the door.
 
Last edited:
You **** it away by hiring 40 people.

How much do you think they were paying those people to be out $20 million? You give them an average of six figures and that's not even half the money
 
You **** it away by hiring 40 people.

At any rate, these "nonprofit, free, independent" operations chug along best when they are nakedly one-sided politically. (Usually nakedly progressive, but not always.)

Houston Landing played quite a few stories down the middle, and the stories were not particularly exciting. That's called a "local newspaper without a sports section."

And that rarely works. People don't really care about local government. They don't. They should but they don't.

Why Houston Landing launched without taking a few of those positions and hiring a Rockets reporter and Astros reporter and Cougs reporter, who knows. That's just good business. It's what gets people in the door.
You bring up a good question: If you're starting an "alternative" newspaper/website/app these days, do you bother with full sports coverage? If there's anything people can get elsewhere, it's sports coverage -- especially major college and pro teams.

Most of the alternative newspapers that started in the 1970s to 1990s stressed entertainment instead of sports to "get people in the door" and read their local news/political stories.

In the extremely rare case someone might try to start a news operation these days, I still think entertainment/food/cultural coverage would draw people in more than sports.
 
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change.
You bring up a good question: If you're starting an "alternative" newspaper/website/app these days, do you bother with full sports coverage?
If you hire 40 people? I'd set aside a job or two.

Honestly, it shoulda been a 8-10 person operation. You can do a helluva lot with that if you're focused.
 
On food: If you find a great, well-known, prolific writer, I think that can be a fit, yes. The key is prolific.
 
Houston Landing was also seen as carrying water for the charter school movement in Texas, and offering support at times for Houston ISD superintendent Mike Miles, who's wildly unpopular.



 
I jumped on board as a reader right when they started, but quickly stopped because they didn't have anything compelling and, as Mr. Greenwell says, they supported some unpopular people and ideas. They basically burned up a stack of cash for nothing.
 
Houston Landing was also seen as carrying water for the charter school movement in Texas, and offering support at times for Houston ISD superintendent Mike Miles, who's wildly unpopular.




It was reasonably mild in that approach, but nonprofits tend to do better when they lean left to hard left. Rich progressives, of which there are a ton, like funding advocacy media, especially on climate/environment issues.
 
It was reasonably mild in that approach, but nonprofits tend to do better when they lean left to hard left. Rich progressives, of which there are a ton, like funding advocacy media, especially on climate/environment issues.

This seems to be the tack in DC for The 51st, started by former DCist journalists after WAMU killed that publication. But the early returns have been *extremely* sluggish, with a lot of listicles, half-hearted attempts to cover the Wizards and the Ovechkin chase, and local-news stories that can be found -- and done better -- elsewhere.

You don't have to pay to read their stuff, just give them an email address. But what I find somewhat hilarious is that the first tier of paid subscriptions ($9.99/month) gives readers the ability to comment on stories. DCist famously killed its comments section -- which is the main reason many people even bothered with DCist -- a few years before its demise, on the surface because it said policing the comments was a pain in the ass. Left unsaid was that the commenters spent a lot of time snarkily correcting the DCist journalists' mistakes and shoddy reporting.
 
The Arnold folks give a lot of money to PBS, which I know because I watch old-man nature shows that name-check them.
 
The mix of firing key people and playing it too safe didn't help. Starting a new outlet today needs a clear identity and something compelling to draw people in. Without that, it's tough to survive.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top