Archives: Ideas

Racial equity is the defining issue of this year, of this generation, and as a result, of the 2020 U.S. elections. Nationwide uprisings and protests sparked by the murder of George Floyd have demanded system changes to policing and incited a reckoning within newsrooms about their own systemic racism. As the journalists in these newsrooms increasingly turn their attention to election coverage, it’s important that they keep the focus on equity and seek ways to center historically marginalized communities. We need to hear directly from the people who are most affected by these issues.

It’s not a moment too soon. Racist conspiracy theories are now circulating to attack the credibility of vice presidential candidate Kamala Harris — the first Black female vice presidential candidate as well as the first Asian American.

And layered on top are the coronavirus pandemic and efforts to disenfranchise voters that disproportionately affect communities of color. Voter suppression has only increased since the pandemic, with deliberate attempts by Republicans and conservative commentators to limit mail-in voting, fear-monger, and sow uncertainty about voters’ ability to get to the polls and for their votes to count.

For all these intersecting reasons, it’s important to understand why traditional election coverage falls short on serving historically marginalized communities and what we can do to make a change in 2020.

Why Traditional Election Coverage Fails

The United States’ long tradition of election coverage relies heavily on pundits and polling: “horse race” coverage filled with stats and numbers that make audiences feel they have an insider read on who will come out ahead. But what about the issues people are facing in their everyday lives? To figure out what people care about, mainstream coverage relies heavily on polling, which rarely provides the full picture. Polling before an election often takes non-representative samples of “likely voters” (e.g., leaving out new voters), and can leave out significant portions of the population due to language barriers or differing communication methods. The same is true for exit polling: responses depend on who is asking the question, and how, to whom, and whether the person feels comfortable responding. Traditional coverage, particularly cable and broadcast news, also relies on the perspective of pundits as experts. These pundits historically do not represent the lived experiences of other Americans — particularly Americans who aren’t rich, white, male, and close to power.

There’s a Better Way

Media scholar Jay Rosen has been writing about alternatives to these traditional practices for quite a while. He proposes a straightforward approach: ask voters what they think candidates should be talking about in the election, whether national, state, or local.

Ask voters what they think candidates should be talking about in the election, whether national, state, or local.

Rosen calls this the “citizens agenda,” and in the fall of 2019, Hearken, Membership Puzzle Project, and Trusting News collaborated to publish and distribute The Citizens Agenda guide for reporters and newsrooms.

By February 2020, we saw the success and potential of this approach in real life, and Democracy Fund made a grant to this collaborative effort to launch what’s now called Election SOS: a non-partisan project that trains journalists to provide election coverage that serves community information needs using the citizens agenda approach and tried-and-true principles of engagement and trust-building.

Election SOS deepens and expands on The Citizens Agenda guide by providing essential training, guidance, and coaching to journalists on pressing topics like fighting misinformation, building trust, and protecting election integrity. They are partnering with a wide network of experts in journalism and within specific issue areas, including the American Press Institute (fiscal sponsor), First Draft News, ProPublica, PEN America, Troll Busters, the Center for Tech and Civic Life, Vote.org, and More in Common — just to name a few.

You don’t have to take my word for it. Read about over 20 newsrooms who have put the citizens agenda into action thanks to Election SOS training. Some highlights:

• Vox Media published a video explainer on horse race coverage and invited viewers to inform their future coverage.
• The Capital Times in Madison, WI is developing a People’s Agenda in both English and ​Spanish​ so that the community can set its own priorities.
• Washington City Paper developed a voter guide for the 2020 DC Democratic primary. A grant from the Solutions Journalism Network allowed them to reach out to readers and incorporate responses from 200 people to inform questions for candidates.
• WBEZ in Chicago created and published a citizens agenda titled “​12 Questions For The Candidates In Illinois’ 6th Congressional District​.”

These engagement practices are an important part of challenging the status quo of typical elections coverage. And newsrooms must continue to make an intentional effort to get input from historically marginalized people within the communities they serve, or engaged journalism will replicate the same inequities we see in traditional reporting.

What Funders Can Do

Projects like Election SOS are critical to ensuring that journalists and newsrooms are prepared to meet the information needs of their communities, now through Election Week and beyond. Funders can further support this work by:

• Investing in newsrooms directly to publish election coverage that centers the information needs of communities.
• Supporting news outlets led by and serving diverse and historically marginalized communities to support their elections and pandemic reporting. (You can use the DEI Tracker to identify outlets and organizations.)
• Funding collaborative efforts such as Your Voice Ohio, a network of over 40 news organizations publishing community-centered election coverage and holding community engagement events across the state (now virtual).

The decisions that voters make will impact a wide variety of critical issues facing our democracy, and funders must help ensure that our electorate reflects the diversity of our nation. One crucial part of this is ensuring every person, especially those from historically marginalized communities that have been excluded for far too long, has the information they need to vote.

 

Thanks to Jessica Clark.

In 2020, journalism went from rapid economic disruption to a full-blown existential meltdown.

Already wracked by #MeToo scandals, major outlets found themselves failing to meet the political moment sparked by the killing of George Floyd.

These failures of perspective and inclusion don’t just affect communities that have historically been left out of the national debate, but they also have ripple effects for democracy. As I have said before, we cannot have a functioning civil society without racial justice. And we cannot have racial justice without real reform in newsrooms. The old ways of doing journalism simply aren’t working: we need true innovation if we want equity in journalism. Equitable news coverage — fueled by innovative new processes and the culturally-competent and empowered staff needed to produce it — is a powerful lever which can move civil society toward justice.

The Ford Foundation, where I work, has been in alignment with the overall mission of the Engaged Journalism Lab. We have worked on the launch of the Racial Equity in Journalism Fund at Borealis Philanthropy, along with Democracy Fund, the American Journalism Project, Craig Newmark Philanthropies, the Google News Initiative, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, and the News Integrity Initiative. The REJ Fund is helping to bridge the gap in funding and institutional support by supporting organizations such as Buffalo’s Fire, which is fighting for independent media and freedom of information while serving Indigenous communities that have been especially hard hit by the pandemic; La Noticia, a Spanish-language newspaper serving the information needs of over 300,000 community members in North Carolina; and MLK50, an award-winning Black-led newsroom whose investigation of flawed hospital debt collection policies in partnership with ProPublica led to the forgiveness of more than $11 million of debt.

We’d like to issue a challenge to other funders — not just to fund equity in news, but specifically to fund innovation to achieve these ends.

Now, we’d like to issue a challenge to other funders — not just to fund equity in news, but specifically to fund innovation to achieve these ends. Innovation can take many forms, including taking more risks in funding; expanding the pool of who gets funded; rethinking how we assess impact and return on investment; and more. We invite funders to consider what equity looks like within our current funding systems — and what it might look like if we built something new altogether.

To support this exploration, the Ford Foundation has recently released three research papers:

• Reconstructing American news: Investing in the transformation of journalistic processes and power relations to strengthen civil society, written by Katie Donnelly and Jessica Clark of Dot Connector Studio, takes on the question of how the journalism industry and the funders who support it can innovate in service of media equity. Until recently, much of the focus for funders in the journalism funding space has been on supporting innovation in terms of products and platforms. It’s now time to resource new people, processes, and power relationships instead. This paper explores the challenges we’re facing with regard to how equity-centered news is currently funded — and how possible interventions might work in practice, with insights from 10 individuals in the field on how they are adapting given the upheavals in the space caused by the pandemic. This analysis doesn’t focus on journalism philanthropy exclusively, but rather approaches the entire ecosystem with a particular focus on investment, philanthropy, and sustainability.

• Gender equity in the news media: Analysis and recommendations for newsroom leaders is a companion report that found two major challenges that prevent gender equity from becoming a reality in newsrooms: gender gaps among content creators and those who make decisions about coverage, and slow progress in women’s representation in leadership roles. The report offers key solutions for organizational and newsroom leaders, including taking a public stance, appointing organizational catalysts, and creating incentives. Ford commissioned the report from two researchers at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government — Ariel Skeath, a Master of Public Policy candidate, and Lisa Macpherson, fellow in the Advanced Leadership Initiative.

• Investing in equitable news and media projects, a report from Andrea Armeni and Wilneida Negrón of Transform Finance, takes a deep dive into the investment space for equity-centered news and media projects, exploring three pivotal questions: Who is currently investing in equitable media (and why)? What are adjacent investing/investor spaces that could yield additional capital, and what would be needed to attract them? And what are the major pain points for current investors (and potential adjacent investors) and news and media entrepreneurs? There has been a dearth of research into the investment space outside of philanthropy for equity-centered news projects, and this paper fills in some very important gaps in understanding. Among other key recommendations, the report encourages foundations and private investors to “jointly explore the entire ecosystem of equitable media from a holistic perspective, rather than separating investment and grant funding.”

Taken together, these three reports point the path forward: current funders and investors must approach news equity in new ways, individually and together. They also highlight the need to educate and recruit a much broader array of funders and investors into this space. We hope you will use them to explore this work from multiple angles, and to continue to bring new funders and investors into the conversation. We’re excited to work with you to build a new, innovative and equitable journalism that strengthens civil society and finally truly serves communities in the U.S. and around the world.

“We stand in solidarity with Black communities. Black Lives Matter.”

Organizations, businesses, and groups across the United States sent this statement to millions of people via social media feeds and e-mail lists in early June 2020, in the wake of widespread protests for racial justice. Stating solidarity, however, doesn’t amount to much on its own.

Solidarity is a commitment to social justice that translates into collective action. This means statements need to be understood as distinct from statements attached to action. In the absence of action, declaring solidarity becomes a platitude for public relations. Talking the talk without walking the walk isn’t solidarity — it’s branding.

Funders can do more to support actions aligned with genuine solidarity in journalism.

What solidarity in journalism looks like

To assess news organizations using solidarity criteria, look at their coverage of marginalized communities. Are members of marginalized communities quoted? If so, are they quoted for their perspectives and thoughts, or solely for their feelings? Relegating marginalized people to speaking exclusively from the realm of emotion falls short of solidarity and may reinforce narratives of helpless victims who need saviors.

The Solidarity Journalism Initiative, which I lead at the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at Santa Clara University, offers free training and resources to help journalists, editors, and journalism educators serve communities better by using techniques such as:

1) Ensuring that reporters always include those affected and subjected by issues, aligned with the ethos of “nothing about us without us.”

2) Placing community perspectives in dialogue with official perspectives to press for accuracy and to debunk false narratives that officials may prefer to advance.

3) Treating journalistic reporting as an endeavor to represent people’s lived experiences, rather than relying on official statements from authorities. Claims that ignore or attempt to invalidate people’s lived experiences — even if they come from officials — can therefore no longer be lionized as true.

Let’s be clear. Enacting solidarity in journalism does not mean:

1) Ignoring or expelling people in positions of institutional power from coverage.

2) Acting as an uncritical mouthpiece for social movements or nonprofits.

3) Replacing news reporting with opinion pieces.

My research on the role of solidarity in US journalism traces journalists’ motives for covering marginalized communities, and consistently finds that journalists understand their work as an opportunity to help people who live within dehumanizing structural conditions. Far from trumpeting neutrality or objectivity, journalists who cover marginalized communities tend to describe their work in terms of a moral obligation that compels them to focus on enduring social issues.

Industry leaders, on the other hand, display greater hesitation when faced with the prospect of acknowledging journalism’s longstanding role of solidarity. Ironically, unlike corporations that may do little to nothing aligned with solidarity and yet are quick to capitalize on the opportunity to issue a statement du jour, some prefer to position journalism’s role as reporting on acts of solidarity rather than admitting to enacting it as well.

The point of journalism in this country — and the main reason to preserve and protect it — is to serve the public interest, aligned with the country’s ideal of dignity for all.

The problem with such positioning is that it overlooks a long history of journalism urging people to care about (socially) distant others’ suffering. The purpose of journalism has never simply been a matter of reporters reciting events in the manner of a scribe or synthesizing knowledge with the purported detachment of a scientist. Instead, the point of journalism in this country — and the main reason to preserve and protect it — is to serve the public interest, aligned with the country’s ideal of dignity for all.

How journalism funders can help

Journalism funders can help by supporting organizations who practice solidarity techniques. To use solidarity techniques, journalists need (1) time, (2) training, and (3) encouragement from editors to enter communities they may be unfamiliar with in order to build relationships and expand their sourcing networks.

This is where journalism funders can step up. With intensified public discourse around racial justice, funders can play a critical role through their investments in journalism using a solidarity framework.

A few examples of news organizations that are already enacting solidarity in journalism through sourcing and local representation include: The Oaklandside, Broke in Philly, Pittsburgh Media Partnership, and MLK50: Justice Through Journalism. In each case, the organization or partnership reports the perspectives of people whose lived experiences are at stake in the story — who are often otherwise overlooked or sidelined in corporately-controlled local and national media outlets.

Who do you serve?

Across the country and world, thousands of protestors have continued to march to demand change. When police officers approach, many protestors begin to chant:

“Who do you protect? Who do you serve?”

Journalists, journalism funders, and journalism educators all need to ask ourselves these questions as well. And if we find ourselves dismayed or pained to realize our roles in upholding unjust systems, then let this be the moment when we move forward — together — to enact solidarity with communities who have been marginalized for far too long.

Anita Varma, PhD is the assistant director of Journalism & Media Ethics at the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at Santa Clara University, where she leads the Solidarity Journalism initiative to help journalists implement solidarity in their reporting on marginalized communities. If you are a funder or journalist and would like to learn more about Solidarity Journalism, please contact avarma2@scu.edu. You can also follow her on Twitter.