PROFIT-NON-PROFIT

In my opinion bloggers should seriously discuss Andrew Keen's new book, "The cult of the amateur: how today's internet is killing our culture", because, from what I learn from here, it raises fundamental questions that go beyond the provocative statements it also contains.

For now, reading this, on his blog,

Enough of blogs and enough of bloggers! It's bad enough that there are 70 million of them out there, littering the Internet with fast breaking news about what their authors ate for breakfast. But blogs are just one piece in the digital media revolution. They are boring to write (yawn), boring to read (yawn) and boring to discuss (yawn).
What I really want to discuss is the impact of Web 2.0 on truth, education, memory and power. I want debate the increasingly Orwellian role of Google in our information economy. I want to talk about the way in which the Internet has unleashed a plague of pornography, gambling and intellectual dishonesty on our youth. I want to discuss the future of the book. I want to imagine the future of knowledge when, to quote David Weinberger, everything is miscellaneous.
Anyone want to join me in this discussion?

I remembered TS Eliot (I always remember TS Eliot, on a large number of things, but that's another story)

Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge?
Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?

From TS Eliot, The Eagle soars in the summit of Heaven, in Choruses from the Rock, 1934

I thank Lucy Bernholz for the link. I think it's important for the debate about philanthropy to have different (local, national and regional) perspectives.Despite their diversity – of mission, geographical focus, impact, or size - foundations and non-profit organizations worldwide share the same problems and face the same challenges. In the end it's all about how to address our missions in the most effective way.
I’ll try to bring to the table a “Portuguese” perspective.

Declaration of interest: I work for a Portuguese Foundation.

Susan Berresford, advocating for voluntary standards for transparency and accountability in philanthropy, here (The Guardian on-line), antecipating the European Foundation Centre's 18th Annual General Assembly (AGA) and Conference in Madrid.

Susan Beresford, President of the Ford Foundation, to the Seattle Times, on the on-going debate about the changing world of philanthropy, taken from here:


«The emergence of a new generation of entrepreneurs-turned-philanthropists offering their fortunes to tackle pressing problems has prompted reports of a philanthropic divide -- a generation gap between established foundations and their young counterparts. Such phrases as "venture philanthropy" and "social entrepreneurship" are in vogue. New foundations are said to be ambitious, strategic, entrepreneurial, innovative and focused on measurable results. Established foundations are said to lack those qualities.
As the president of an "old" foundation and a nearly 40-year veteran in the field, I am here to say this dichotomy does not fit reality. It does not capture the breadth of philanthropy's scope and history, and it has the potential to damage our field.»



I've been working for an "old-foundation" for the last seven years and I've have been learning all the buzz-words from the sector, mostly "imported" from the profit sector. So non of this is actually new. I can only agree with Susan Beresford, "new philanthropy" and "old philanthropy" are just to faces of the same coin, each one with its own specific role. One should not out-rule the other, but instead learn from each other.