Everyone else will. It isn't. But I know exactly where these projects break — and how to get through it anyway.
You want to build something outstanding. Something your audience will remember. Something that wins awards and proves journalism can still do things algorithms cannot.
I could tell you it's straightforward. A lot of people in this industry will.
It isn't. These projects are genuinely difficult — editorially, technically, financially, and politically. Business goals, editorial ambition, technology, and team capacity all have to move together. Most publishers who try this either don't start or don't finish.
I've finished. Multiple times. Wirtualna Polska. The Dallas Morning News. Gazeta.pl. I know exactly where these projects break — and I've learned how to navigate through it anyway.
That's what you're hiring.
Thirty minutes. You tell me what you want to build. I ask hard questions — about your editorial goals, your institutional appetite for risk, your budget, your timeline.
Not every story is a special project. Some of them are. I'll tell you which one you have.
A clear answer to whether we should proceed. If yes: the shape of what a project could look like.
I develop the project concept: editorial structure, format architecture, production scope, team requirements, timeline, and budget breakdown.
This document is honest. It will tell you what the project will require from your organisation — not just money, but editorial commitment, internal champions, and patience. I won't minimise that. The projects that fall apart are the ones where it was minimised at the start.
It is also the document you take to your board, your budget-holder, your grant committee.
A concrete, fundable project concept. The project's first real deliverable.
Reporting, narrative design, technology, and physical elements where the format calls for them. I coordinate the team and manage delivery.
I also support publishers in finding co-production partners and applying for grants that can fund part or all of the production cost. The best projects I've made were funded through a combination of editorial budget and external support.
A finished, launched project. On time. To brief.
Launch is not the end. We build the conversation around the project — INMA submissions, industry coverage, documentation, conference presentations, archival.
The recognition is not vanity. It validates the investment, raises the profile of the publisher, and makes the next project easier to fund.
A project with a public life, not just a publication date.
Not every story is a special project. A good candidate has a subject with genuine public importance or emotional resonance, an audience that deserves more than a conventional format, a publisher or institution willing to commit to process and not just output, and enough time to do it properly.
The projects in this portfolio were built over 3–8 months. The ones that became award-winning were the ones where the editorial team believed in the format as much as the subject.
Thirty minutes. The brief can be rough. The budget doesn't have to be confirmed. I just need to understand what you're trying to build.
BOOK A CALL →