"Social or not, we contend that there is substantially more room for commercial practices and enterprises in the independent news space than has generally been recognized. A primary goal of this book is to show journalists and entrepreneurs how they may occupy that space through stakeholder-driven media. First, in Chapters One and Two we will set out key components of business models. From that base we will distinguish stakeholder-driven media (SDM) from mainstream media (MSM), in particular where their value propositions are concerned. We will then explore current variations on these principles in SDM. At the end of the book we will return to this theme, through outlining SDM enterprises that may soon emerge. Our predictive track record is not perfect, but it’s not bad; in 2010 we predicted that media focused on fact-checking would become a growth sector, and in 2016 there are well over 100 of them around the world. Replace: Fact-checking played a key role in the 2016 U.S. election, too. We also believe that stakeholder-driven media are changing the strategies by which “impact” is achieved in journalism; this is the subject of Chapter Three. The landmark research of David L. Protess and his colleagues showed that investigative journalism achieves reforms most often through a sustained effort involving a coalition of social and institutional forces, and rarely from a single “mobilizing” article or series in any media. Put another way, the broader story – how events play out over time – trumps the scoop; the last word beats the first word. That finding directly inspired our own research into how SDM achieve reform, and sensitized us to why MSM may not always be the ideal vehicle for journalism that seeks to change the world: In practice, MSM rarely stick around for the broader story. Likewise, non-profit investigative journalism centers – who, as we noted, typically rely on MSM to publish their stories – rarely follow their blockbuster stories across the years required to achieve reform or relief for victims. This is considered advocacy, not objective or even credible reporting. In contrast, stakeholder-driven media consider advocacy part of their mission. They exist, precisely, to defend the interests of a community of practice or interest, to help carry through its agenda. That may not make them credible to MSM, but it certainly makes them credible to their users. SDM do not go on to the next story and forget the preceding one. They pursue a story so long as it matters to their stakeholders – their community. They are thus capable of achieving results over time that MSM rarely attain. For that reason, serious journalists are well advised to see how they may collaborate with SDM as well as MSM. Because of stakeholder-driven media, the notion that the attention of MSM is required to set reform agendas is no longer as true as it was when sociologist Michael Lipsky famously described how activists use news media to dramatize their demonstrations and embarrass authorities into action.3 We have studied numerous cases in which SDM, not MSM, determined the outcome. We have seen that the MSM have lost a surprising share of their previous agenda-setting influence, and SDM have gained it. We will show you how, and we will show you how you can capture and wield that influence yourself. We hope you will do it for the benefit of your own community, as well as the rest of the world." (Page 9-10)