“New Media” Requires a New Operating Model

VC firm Lightspeed did something that’s never been done before: It hired its latest partner from Instagram. 

It hired creator Claire Zau, who’s spent the last few years building an audience of over 300,000 followers across Instagram and TikTok, talking about venture deals. 

It used to be that venture firms treated investing, platform, and content like separate lanes. But, founders don't experience firms that way anymore. VC firms want to see that you have credibility, taste, and reach. That you understand the market and can help them gain visibility.

Distribution is the biggest edge for both investors and founders right now. And the only people who already have distribution are creators.

Lightspeed joins a long list of VC firms that have hopped on the “investor and new media hire” wagon: 

This is all part of the emerging "new media" trend that's taken over Silicon Valley. And most brands looking to implement it are asking the wrong question.

They're seeing the creator hires, the podcast networks, and the newsletter cadences and concluding that this is a talent-and-format story. Hire a creator, launch a show, build a presence. But that's the acquisition-and-distribution decision. What nobody is talking about is the operating decision underneath it.

"New media" is a term modeled and formalized by Andreessen Horowitz (a16z). At its core, it describes owned distribution as a competitive moat, built on creator talent and operated at publishing cadence.

New media sits at the intersection of three attributes: a small, sophisticated, professional audience of decision-makers; a format that's “alive” (usually something borrowed from consumers or creators, like a series, live stream, etc.); and a function that earns a position in the industry's conversation. When all three are present, you have new media. When one is missing, you have something that either skews towards the creator economy or B2B marketing. 

Most brands trying to build new media are still creating B2B marketing content: They have the audience right and maybe even the format. But the function—earning position, not demonstrating product—is where it breaks down. Because earning a position requires a completely different operating logic.

Yet the focus of the conversation about new media is entirely on formats and distribution—what to build, where to show up, how to go viral. Nobody is talking about what it takes to run and sustain a new media operation from the inside. 

Most brands aren't starting from zero. They have a content team, a comms function, maybe a social presence, and an agency relationship. They might have the structure, but what they don't have is a designed operating model for what new media actually requires.

Marketing departments run on campaigns, built with defined start and end points, approval chains, and deliverable-based accountability. Content support comes from fragmented functions across content marketing, comms, product marketing, sales enablement, and more, each with its own role in delivering that campaign. While that infrastructure is well-suited for a product launch, it’s not well-suited for a publishing commitment.

New media requires a whole new way of not only thinking, but also operating. 

New media runs on editorial logic, and editorial logic is built for continuity—a body of work that builds on itself, a voice that stays consistent across hundreds of pieces, and a point of view that sharpens over time. It's not about the product, but about the brand and the stance it's taking in the industry. The goal isn’t to explain why your product is the best on the market; it’s to become the authority in your category by leveraging what makes your brand unique.

This requires judgment, not just execution. A self-starting, self-cycling system, not a brief to activate it.

Most brands looking to build new media focus first on what to build—a newsletter, a podcast, a LinkedIn presence, a video series—rather than how they will run it. Not just tactically, but operationally: Who owns the editorial direction? How does the voice stay consistent when three people are writing? What is the decision-making process when a timely topic comes up, and four stakeholders have opinions? What happens six months in when the enthusiasm fades, and the content still has to ship?

These are operating model questions, and they don't get asked because nobody has framed them that way. It gets framed as a content problem, a talent problem, a distribution problem, a budget problem. The operating layer stays invisible until it's the reason everything else breaks down.

An operating model for new media is designed to answer five questions: 

When a brand can clearly answer these questions, content stops being a series of disconnected outputs and starts being a system with a point of view. That's what builds audience trust. That's what makes a new media investment pay off. That's what protects and compounds the position you're trying to earn.

a16z and the firms that follow are building operating models that put creators at the center, supported by an editorial cadence, production infrastructure, and a distribution logic. It’s not just another content strategy, but a new system designed to produce an authoritative, consistent, compounding narrative at scale. 

Brands looking at this trend are trying to acquire the outcome without building the system that produces it. The brands that win at new media in the long term won't be the ones with the best pilot episode. They'll be the ones who built something that knows how to keep going. 

Next week, I'll dive into what that operating model actually looks like in practice.

What’s trending across the interweb

Media news, launches, and insights

What I’m consuming this week