Webathon

Support Reason So We Can Keep Bringing You the Future of Journalism!

From personalized magazine covers to 3D videos to cutting-edge podcasts, we've always been ahead of the curve, thanks to your help.

|

We're in the final few days of Reason's annual webathon, during which we ask our readers, viewers, and listeners to support our original, influential, and principled libertarian journalism with tax-deductible gifts (a perk of being published by a 501[c]3 nonprofit). Go here to donate and to learn about the great swag we're giving out this year. The webathon ends Tuesday, so don't delay!

For extra motivation, I'm excited to tell you that an anonymous donor is currently matching all donations, dollar-for-dollar, until we reach $50,000 in new gifts. Any amount you give today—$50, $100, $1,000, or even $5,000—will be instantly doubled until we reach $50,000! Make your donation go twice as far by giving right now.

One of the things for which we use your money is to develop new ways to bring our journalism—articles, videos, and podcasts—to different and bigger audiences. Since our founding in 1968, we've always been on the hunt not just for stories about what comes next in American politics and culture but for how to get our stories out into the world in new and interesting ways. The result is a pretty cool history of innovation, gambles, and publishing firsts.

Reason.com's logo, mid-1990s.

The first few issues of Reason were cranked out on an old mimeograph machine, the do-it-yourself (DIY) tech of the day. We launched our website in 1994, when most print publications were either ignoring online publishing completely or shrilly denouncing the web as the end of all that was good and decent when it came to media.

In 2004, we published the first-ever mass-produced personalized cover in magazine history. Employing cutting-edge printer technology and publicly available databases, we were able to send out about 45,000 unique covers illustrated with a high-quality aerial photograph of the recipient's house. Each subscriber was named on the cover too, and four pages of the issue were personalized by ZIP code and congressional district. Even some of the ads were personalized. The image to the right is for the newsstand edition, which wasn't personalized, though it was for me in a way: The house that's circled was my address at the time.

In 2007, we launched Reason TV, one of the first "pivots" to video by an existing journalism outfit. I recounted the origins of Reason TV in a previous webathon post (short version: Thanks, Drew Carey!) so I won't go into that here, other than to note that our pioneering efforts in online video proceed directly from our vision of a world in which creative destruction is not only tolerated but actively encouraged.

In 2010, we released a series of videos about the national debt that were filmed in amazingly crisp 3D! Our thinking was that conventional two-dimensional footage just couldn't capture the full horror of rapidly mounting debt. Below is the series, which includes a Dadaesque cameo by former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel, in old-fashioned 2D. (If you have 3D glasses, you can watch the videos in their original format by going here.) We also published a special 3D companion issue of the print magazine that came with Reason-branded glasses.

In 2016 we went long on podcasts, and just a few weeks ago we reorganized our efforts and launched three new streams: The Reason Roundtable, a weekly, rollicking, no-holds-barred discussion featuring Katherine Mangu-Ward, Peter Suderman, Matt Welch, and me; The Reason Interview with Nick Gillespie, weekly in-depth interviews with activists, artists, authors, entrepreneurs, newsmakers, and politicians; and The Soho Forum Debates, a debate series recorded monthly before a live audience in New York City in which Nobel laureates, radical thinkers, and other public intellectuals face off over bitcoin, electric vehicles, government debt, illegal drugs, robotics, sex work, and other controversial topics. Go here to learn more and to subscribe to our podcasts.

These sorts of fun, exciting, and ongoing efforts are just some of the ways Reason is using your tax-deductible donations to create a future that is more interesting, more innovative, and more engaging.

We can't do any of this without your support, both as consumers and as patrons. And remember, right now, your gift will be doubled by our $50,000 challenge grant. Please give what you can by going here.

NEXT: Today in Supreme Court History: December 8, 1902

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Hire writers who would rather report than play to their preferred base and I’ll donate.

  2. In 2016 reason decided that being cutting edge was too much work and decided to give their editors descriptions to various mainstream media accounts to help set narrative building. Now they could spend their time watching GoT and being lazy.

    1. As the editors talked about in the latest roundtable podcast, the writers spend most of their time writing long-form articles for Reason magazine. The blog is meant to be a casual and off-the-cuff.

      1. As the editors talked about in the latest roundtable podcast, the writers spend most of their time writing long-form articles for Reason magazine.

        And as anyone with even a basic grasp of mathematics could ascertain by comparing the amount of content in the magazine compared the amount of content on the website, that is an absolute crock of bullshit.

        1. It’s self-evident that you visit the website. Do you ever read the magazine?

        2. reason prides itself on lies and sends in swarms of sock trolls to muddy the discussion about it.

          1. “sends in swarms of sock trolls”

            It is truly sad that you actually believe this.

      2. I have rarely, if ever, been disappointed by their long form posts or articles for the magazine. I may intensely disagree with the conclusion or opinions, but damn if it isn’t some good journalism, typically.

        That’s what, to me at least, makes HnR disappointing at times. Too often, especially recently but as has happened in the past, it does not seem that they hold the same integrity for these posts. I don’t have a problem with differing opinions, but damn it, arrive at those conclusions through logic and reason! And more importantly, to me at least, I’d like to visit a libertarian website and get a libertarian perspective on different issues, not what amounts to a libertarian excuse for the status quo.

        I don’t know if that expresses how I feel right now adequately, but it’s the best I can come up with.

        1. I don’t get the feeling the editors at Reason actually pay much attention to the blog.

        2. I have rarely, if ever, been disappointed by their long form posts or articles for the magazine. I may intensely disagree with the conclusion or opinions, but damn if it isn’t some good journalism, typically.

          Journalists have no business drawing conclusions or giving opinions; on most subjects, they are no more expert than their readers.

          1. We get to draw conclusions and give opinions, right?

            Thus, if they are no more expert than us, they’re equally (un?) qualified.

            You don’t need to be an expert to do that, and I don’t want technocrats or credentialed-experts being the only people offering analysis and opinion..

            Experts are just as likely to be victims of groupthink as anyone else, if not moreso, depending on the “expertise” filter. That’s … bad.)

        3. “I don’t have a problem with differing opinions, but damn it, arrive at those conclusions through logic and reason!”

          Logic and reason are social constructs of the white supremacist cisheteropatriarchy used to oppress marginalized peoples.

        4. And more importantly, to me at least, I’d like to visit a libertarian website and get a libertarian perspective on different issues, not what amounts to a libertarian excuse for the status quo.

          I get it … but doesn’t that imply that libertarian perspectives must always be Against Whatever Exists?

          (Not “this could be better if it was more libertarian” – the term “excuse” is itself one that asserts meaning and judgment about the opinion offered.

          I mean, I think e.g. Dalmia’s immigration stance is … badly defended and explained, to be charitable, but I don’t think she’s “offering excuses for the [recent if not current] status-quo”.

          I think she’s sincere and wrong, not being a fake-libertarian water-bearer.)

  3. For reference…

    A local radio station in Pittsburgh named WDVE, granted it’s the one that broadcasts steelers games and classic rock, raised nearly $900,000 for our childrens hospitol, from mostly Pittsburghers, in 2 days this september.

    https://www.givetochildrens.org/dverocks

    Reason, a national magazine and website, has raised 230k from an entire nation of readers in what now, 6 days?

    I think reason needs a reality check. Most of us who comment don’t actually subscribe or support because we feel there’s too many ideologues writing here and not enough actual reasoning or investigating. We understand libertarians will have different viewpoints, but when you cover something like illegal immigration without ever describing the burdensome and costly negative affects in places like California and Texas. or the impeachment fiasco without ever acknowledging the coordinated efforts of democrats, from the Irs targeting all the way to fusion gps, or even acknowledge that what the bidens did looks shady. Then you lose credibility with us and do a disservice to libertarians everywhere because you’re making it harder for us to understand all sides of the issue, like a libertarian should want to.

    1. With about a third of that simply matched donations from a few big donors.

      1. Reason literally has a single donor. The money that Chuckie Koch doesn’t contribute directly he launders through a charitable organization used nearly exclusively by him to add quasi-anonymity to political donations If you actually look at Reason’s financial statements that is literally the only source of significant funding.

        1. Even if true, that’s not necessarily a bad thing.

          #BillionairesKnowBest

          1. Aren’t you concerned poor Mr Koch will go broke?

          2. Billionaires know best? Well, you should be hooray that one is currently president.

    2. LOL

      The webathon is so successful, they exceeded their initial $200,000 goal in mere days. This means many people are donating despite the terrible economy, which has been ruined by Orange Hitler’s tariffs and immigration restrictions.

      IOW, it was clearly the smart move for Reason to transform into basically another progressive anti-Drumpf website (while still retaining Charles Koch’s position on taxes and the minimum wage).

      1. Their staff better move out of California and NYC pretty soon…ain’t no cola increases coming anytime soon lol.

    3. we feel there’s too many ideologues writing here

      Well, it’s a libertarian publication, and libertarianism is an ideology…

      I do agree that IRS targeting or the IC shenanigans deserve a lot more attention. Regardless of your opinion on Trump, that’s all very dangerous and anti-liberty.

      1. reason is NOT a Libertarian publication nor does it support Libertarianism.

        1. Which “Libertarianism”?

          (Big L? What, whatever the LP wants?

          Look, I make fun of Reason, too – and they deserve it – but … “libertarianism” is a big tent from everything from Hayekian “stop trying to manage the economy” to Rothbardian “stop having a state, slaver!!!” types.

          “Not Libertarian” is such a radical claim that it demands … at least saying what you mean by the term.)

    4. “We understand libertarians will have different viewpoints”

      Which is why it’s weird that every Reason writer pretty much agrees on pretty much every opinion

  4. No thanks. It goes to promote bringing in more illegals, which directly results in tax increases and worse government services for us.

    Also, Trump Derangement isn’t reason.

    1. Also, Trump Persecution Complex isn’t reason.

      1. Except one exists, and the other does not. Pretending that people are not out to get Trump is just gaslighting.

    2. +1000

  5. Your pioneering work in the field of covering up Islamic terrorism is unparalleled. Keep up the good work Reason!

    1. Major atrocities like 9 / 11 should of course be covered. But national attention is not necessary for every crime whose perpetrator happens to be Muslim.

      #LibertariansAgainstIslamophobia

      1. Too many to cover.

    2. Is this about the Reason blog not writing anything yet about the Navy training center shooting that happened on Friday?

    3. Darn Reason, not like President Trump, who wanted to let us all know ASAP that the King of Saudi Arabia is real sorry!

    4. This.

      I didn’t expect the nytimes to cover this but I figured somewhere on reason it’d make a blurb at least. Especially given boehm lives in Pennsylvania.

      https://www.wpxi.com/news/top-stories/pittsburgh-terrorism-syrian-refugee-arrested-for-allegedly-planning-terror-attack-on-pittsburgh-church/959625279

      From this summer. A Syrian refugee plotted to blow up a majority African American church in Pittsburgh. The dumb syrian was trying to avenge his is is friends fighting in nigeria, so the dumb Syrian saw a bunch of African Americans at a church and assumed “African American = nigerian, I must avenge! Alalallalallaalalalalaaa”

      But nope not a peep here because if reason had to admit a recently admitted, young, syrian refugee wanted to not only blow up a church, but SPECIFICALLY TARGETED AN AFRICAN AMERICAN ONE, then shiKas entire narrative on immigration would explode in her face like truth diarhea.

  6. I know the comment section likes to gripe. But I spend a good deal of time on the site reading things I know I won’t necessarily agree with. At the very least I’m entertained. So I donated my BAT this month.

    1. That’s a healthy outlook. Now, if ever I become entertained by a Shecky Dullmia screed I’ll throw a few bucks your way.

  7. Support Reason So We Can Keep Bringing You the Future of Journalism!
    From personalized magazine covers to 3D videos to cutting-edge podcasts, we’ve always been ahead of the curve, thanks to your help.

    Notice reason does not support the future of Libertarianism or journalism.

  8. The “anonymous donor” is obviously the DNC. Good luck with that reason.

  9. The Reason comment section is basically Statler and Waldorf mocking the show from the balcony. But they stay in their seats.

    I myself might be more interested in their fundraising appeals if they had something on the Daleiden case which was later than 2017. There have been developments since then, you know.

    1. The Reason comment section is basically Statler and Waldorf mocking the show from the balcony. But they stay in their seats.

      Pipe down, sonny!

    2. I don’t know why you keep going on about he Daleiden case when there’s no question that they were impersonating journalists with their 60 Minutes-like undercover videos exposing criminal wrong-doing. You’re not a journalist just because you say you are, it’s not like you can just go find something to write about, write up a piece about it, then put it out on the internet and say you’re doing journalism. Journalism is a profession and you have to be properly credentialed to be a part of that profession, just like doctors and lawyers and priests and aromatherapists. This is why Joy Behar is a journalist and you’re not.

    3. Don’t kid yourself, most of the audience not surprisingly decided that the show sucks ass and got up out of their seats and left the theater years ago, probably for good.

  10. Really amazing topic. You put great efforts. Good work

  11. Mo money, mo Shikha Boehm Boehm.

    Donate accordingly.

  12. I am making over $9k a month working part time. I stored being attentive to different human beings inform me how much money they are able to make on line so I decided to look into it. well, it turned into all actual and has completely modified my life. that is what I do….HERE…… http://www.9Klife.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.