Let’s start with this: VTDigger has been doing yeoman’s work since the skies parted and the rains descended on July 10. They’ve ramped up their coverage to meet the need for information and insight, and that’s been absolutely critical in this age of ever-diminishing traditional media. And as a nonprofit organization, Digger has to meet its costs somehow or other.

So why does its joint fundraising campaign with the Vermont Community Foundation make me a little bit queasy inside?

Because, I think, it either crosses an ethical line or comes very close to it.

The details: Digger and VCF are raising money by selling a line of “Better Together” merch. The proceeds, minus the cost of the goods, is split 50/50 between the two entities. VCF devotes its half to flood relief, while Digger covers the cost of flood reportage with its share. The graphic design is, to my uneducated eye, kind of lame — of a piece with Digger’s recent website reboot. But that’s beside the point, and I’m sure the simple, direct design has its adherents. I don’t do TikTok either.

As a longtime denizen of public radio, I’ve spent more than my share of time dancing around this particular line between journalism and fundraising. During pledge drives, I’d be delivering the news one minute and begging for donations the next. Still, this Digger/VCF arrangement feels different, I think because it’s happening in the middle of a dire emergency — and looks like it’s capitalizing on the crisis. I’ve been part of public radio pledge drives, which take huge amounts of planning and organization, that were halted or postponed because of breaking news.

So I asked Digger CEO Sky Barsch about it, and she offered a strong rationale for the joint campaign. I wasn’t completely mollified, but I see her argument.

The nut graf, as it were: Digger went above and beyond after the flood: authorizing overtime pay for reporters, hiring freelancers, paying for drone footage and a heck of a lot of mileage. “It was an enormous amount of resources,” Barsch said.

Barsch, working from home because of a washed-out roadway, had a conversation with Creative Director Taylor Haynes, “thinking of ways to support our essential reporting.

“We were about to launch our merch store,” Barsch continued. “What if we did a special line for ongoing flood coverage and support a direct response through the Foundation?”

Combining the online shop opening with flood relief is a nice bit of synergy that doesn’t entirely sit well, but Barsch’s responsibility is to make sure the bills are paid. She didn’t ask the news team to stick to the budget, which is what a for-profit CEO would likely have done; she set out to cover the costs. She was hired to make Digger a sustainable nonprofit that produced quality journalism. The “sustainable” part is under additional strain due to the flood. She had to up her game.

Meanwhile, Vermont Public staged a weeklong fundraiser with all the proceeds going to the Community Foundation, $875,000 in all.

Which seems to make Digger look worse, right?

Well, it’s not that simple.

VP likely incurred some additional costs in covering the flood, but I can’t imagine it was anywhere near Digger’s additional outlay. The sheer volume of reporting on Digger outshines that of any other media outlet including VP.

Plus, don’t forget that Digger is a union shop. Work time is contractually set and overtime pay is part of the deal. That’s a good thing for reporters and editors, who are often exploited by employers who take advantage of their commitment to their craft.

In a non-union shop like VP there’s a lot more wiggle room. In my experience, comp time is offered but (a) it’s not really commensurate with the extra effort expended in a crisis and (b) it isn’t a line item in the budget. It simply means that you let folks have a day or three off when your schedule returns to normal and you can manage the stretch.

Also, VP is a relatively mature organization with a robust base of member and corporate support. Digger is still a youngish outfit blazing a new trail — making “print” journalism pay without a paywall.

Take those factors together, and Digger is in a more exposed position than VP.

Still, was the 50/50 split appropriate?

“We’re always trying to be mindful, but in the moment our mission is so critical,” Barsch said. “We thought [the 50/50] through, but we’re a nonprofit and I think we’re worth supporting. …We’re scrappy. We’d love to be able to give all proceeds [to the Foundation} but we have to fund our operations.”

I asked if Digger had gotten any negative feedback, and Barsch said “No. I think our members really understand. They could see the effort we put in.”

Maybe so. Maybe this is a bigger deal in the mind of someone who’s spent plenty of time at the intersection of journalistic ethics and fundraising than it is for anyone else. In any case, I won’t outright condemn what Digger did. I do hope that if they haven’t done so already, they will have some serious conversations about where the lines should be drawn.

Two points. First, the split should have favored flood relief. I think my line is 70/30 in favor of VCF, but 60/40 would have been better than 50/50. And second, don’t use a disaster as a launch pad for your new merch store.

That said, we’re entering a time when journalism can no longer count on advertising to pay the bills. One of two things will happen: The media ecosystem will continue to shrink dramatically, or new (and largely nonprofit) models will emerge.

Those changing circumstances will mean more pressure to fundraise, and may warrant a fresh look at where the lines are drawn. To be successful, journalism nonprofits might have to be a little pushier and find creative ways to turn the goodwill of readers into the cold, hard cash required to maintain a sustainable, top-quality journalistic operation. Just because it makes me a little uncomfortable doesn’t mean it’s not the right thing to do.

But it does make me a little uncomfortable.

Disclosure. I was employed by VTDigger for a few months in 2020. My tenure came to a sudden end a couple months into the pandemic, due to misbehavior on social media. In my view, expectations were not clear and insufficient warning was given. But that happened under former management, and I believe more strongly than ever that Digger’s success is vital for the health of journalism in Vermont — not to mention that it could serve as a model for a new type of enterprise. I’m rooting for Digger, in other words. I believe my criticism is motivated by principle.