To make a better NRO, we need your help.
We are in the midst of a re-redesign that everyone here realizes we desperately need and is excited about.
One reason we have undertaken this project is that we have heard you. We have taken to heart your comments — what we’ve heard in person, via e-mails, on Twitter, in the suggestions we’ve solicited from you in reader surveys, in the notes you send along with donations.
We know that we have tried your patience with a website that has been slow and glitchy, and that we owe it you to make reading us easier and more enjoyable. That’s why we’ve embarked on this project, and we need your help.
Let me pause before I go any farther to say I believe we have the most loyal readers on the planet. You may not always agree with everything you read here, but you value the quality of the expression and thought and the independence of mind.
You have been coming in recent months in record numbers. You know you aren’t going to get a party line, rather honest analysis, entertaining writing, and — often — conflicting opinions.
Conservatism has many institutional expressions and different voices. Our particular mission is to protect and advance certain ideas in fair weather and foul, and hew to a few guiding principles even when there is pressure to treat them as disposable. You understand and appreciate that — and we are deeply grateful for it.
Now, I usually avoid name-checking my colleagues in these sort of appeals for fear of leaving someone out or seeming to play favorites. But I’ll make an exception this time to say you are really going to want to keep up with Andy McCarthy over the next several months (or years!) as the Russia controversy unfolds.
Our particular mission is to protect and advance certain ideas in fair weather and foul, and hew to a few guiding principles even when there is pressure to treat them as disposable.
Andy knows this stuff — the world of investigation and surveillance — cold. He’s not in the tank for anyone. And in recent months, he’s often offered shrewder, better-informed defenses of the Trump team than the Trump team has managed itself.
All that said, back to our redesign: It’s necessary, it is going to address the most common suggestions and complaints we’ve gotten from you — and it’s also expensive, when we usually have plenty of red ink from our normal operations.
This is not a case, to paraphrase Errol Flynn, of not being able to reconcile our gross habits with our net income. As a conservative magazine of opinion that doesn’t do clickbait or half-naked women, we have never in our long history been able to reconcile our journalistic habits with our net income. (We are not alone in this — no serious magazine of opinion, left, right, or center, has ever been a profitable venture.)
We have always relied on you to help fill the gap. And contributions to this particular project are especially important. Not to sound like a politician touting some public-works project, but think of it less as a donation than as an investment. We are building a better website that will be a cleaner, faster reading experience, as well as affording us new revenue opportunities.
You have already been incredibly generous. We have raised $184,000 out of a $264,000 goal. We have gotten a $25,000 donation (!) and lots of $50 donations and everything in between. Whatever the amount, we appreciate equally the support and the commitment to a common mission. It’s what sustains us, and in this instance, what will make NRO technologically robust in the years ahead.
Thank you so much for reading, and for giving.
— Rich Lowry is the editor of National Review. He can be reached via e-mail: email@example.com.