Before the internet, many cause organizations represented the only trusted source of in-depth information available nationwide on issues that people cared passionately about.

If you really wanted to delve into money and politics, you joined Common Cause. Into human rights, you joined Amnesty. Civil liberties, the ACLU. Into the environment, a variety of choices.

These organizations provided inside, in-depth information to their trusting followers, and steered them into effective grassroots lobbying.

In retrospect, I’m not sure many of these groups fully appreciated the critical importance to their members and donors of their information-providing and interpretive role. The evidence of that is the separation in many — if not most — such groups between the “communications” and “fundraising” teams.

The internet smashed this information monopoly, and made citizens much less dependent upon cause groups as information providers. Perhaps this is part of the reason prospects now look for more “added value” from the groups they’re likely to support. Information is no longer sufficient … that’s ubiquitous. What counts far more now is performance and results … now — also thanks to the internet — more easily assessed and compared across organizations working in the same issue area.

Take the environment, for example. Why join the Sierra Club or EDF if you can get your “enviro fix” for free from Grist?

Grist today delivers nearly 1 million page views a month to 500,000 unique visitors and 290,000 email subscribers. Whether you’re into policy and lobbying on climate legislation or simply want to make prudent daily lifestyle choices, you can get the guidance you need from Grist.

And check out their demographics — 93% have college degrees, median incomes are $66K ( a third over $75K), and — hugely important for those enviro groups who would love to have Grist’s readers — their median age is only 41 years! And 89% have communicated with a politician in the past year. Talk about envy!

Of course, Grist itself doesn’t lobby … it doesn’t plant trees or take care of hiking trails … it doesn’t run conservation programs in developing countries or buy vulnerable land. It trades in information.

Do you have a “competitor” like Grist who trades in the information you once “owned” and held sacred in your area of focus or expertise? If so, how are you adding value for your members and donors?

Tom