Here at openDemocracy we publish around 20-25 articles a week, and given our high standards of production and editorial, the cost of sustaining that level is well beyond what we make from the standard operations of the site. We had tried subscription models in the past, but now we have moved over to publishing the overwhelming majority of our articles under a CC licence, this is no longer appropriate. Luckily, however, we have a large, enthusiastic and loyal readership who understand that in order for us to continue publishing, they need to support our model, as well as a number of philanthropic individuals and foundations who have supported openDemocracy since it's inception.

We've shied away from a Kottke-esque micropayments model, mainly as we have yet to see any sustainable implementations of this in similar businesses to ours, as well as the the online proficiency of our readers being low enough for many online payment methods to be a usability barrier. Instead, we run regular readership campaigns, with a innovative unique donation point each time. Our most recent campaign, a 'matching funds' drive, raised over $40,000 from our readers, and we hope our summer campaign will raise even more.

But why do our readers give so much to access content that is 'free to the world'? They value our independence enormously and respect us for our transparency and honesty in requesting funds and the day to day operations of our organisation and they are realising enough real value from our free content that they want to ensure our business is sustainable.

Our workshop at the iCommons Summit will discuss building a 'giving' community online, remaining transparent, avoiding donor exhaustion and running a donation campaign. We'll also look at how we present our use of Creative Commons licences as a signal of our independence, editorial quality and openness, which is the model our readers and donors are investing in, both emotionally and financially.

tags: London United Kingdom business

extracted from: