First the good news: Philanthropy is starting to respond to the demise of local journalism with the urgency it deserves. In the past few years, major national efforts, such as the American Journalism Project, Report for America, and NewsMatch have generated well over $200 million in philanthropic giving to news organizations across the United States. NewsMatch’s annual gift-matching campaign, which kicked off November 1, raised a record $47 million in individual donations in 2020 alone.
Topic: Philanthropy
Blog
A call for funders on 9/11: invest in Black, African, Arab, Middle Eastern, Muslim, and South Asian communities
Democracy Fund is joining funders in a pledge to raise $50 million over the next five years to support Black, African, Arab, Middle Eastern, Muslim, and South Asian (BAMEMSA) communities deeply impacted by the United States’ response to 9/11. We are proud to join in this effort together with Open Society Foundations, Ford Foundation, and The RISE Together Fund (a donor collaborative of the Proteus Fund) and encourage other funders to do the same.
Over the past four years, we have seen a rise in dangerous rhetoric and policies targeting BAMEMSA communities, such as the Muslim, African, and asylum-seeker travel bans. There continues to be a relentless amount of money dedicated to funding Islamophobia and hate. At the same time, many leaders in BAMEMSA communities are on the frontlines fighting for an end to discriminatory policies and legislation.
Democracy Fund has dedicated a grantmaking portfolio to BAMEMSA-led organizations as they challenge infringements to their civil rights and combat polarizing and racist narratives. As part of this work, we have supported BAMEMSA-led funding collaboratives who help build the “critical social infrastructure”* of BAMESA communities, as well as a number of BAMEMSA led organizations. These grantees include:
- RISE Together Fund, the first donor collaborative dedicated to supporting BAMEMSA groups. Their support of grassroots organizations and collective advocacy efforts has contributed to decisions like the executive order rescinding the Muslim, asylum and African bans.
- Pillars Fund, a Muslim-led foundation, is building on a decade of funding community organizations. In 2021, they launched their Pillars Artist Fellowship to promote more complex and accurate representations of Muslims in media.
- The Institute for Social Policy & Understanding (ISPU), which educates and trains journalists across the country to accurately cover Muslims and issues impacting them. Their work reaches millions of people in diverse outlets such as the Chicago Tribune, NPR, and the Washington Post.
We invite you to read the letter we signed and consider joining us in supporting the BAMEMSA community. The attack on civil rights, violation of norms, and unfettered hate speech we have seen over the past 20 years harms our democracy and makes our society more vulnerable to fissures and violence. Supporting BAMEMSA communities is crucial to the fight for a more open, just, and inclusive society and democracy.
BAMEMSA-led grantees of Democracy Fund’s Just and Inclusive Society Project include:
- Arab American Institute
- Asian Americans Advancing Justice – Asian Law Caucus
- CLEAR CUNY
- El-Hibri Foundation
- Horizon Forum, a fiscally sponsored project of Proteus Fund
- Millions of Conversations
- Movement Law Lab
- MuslimARC
- Pillars Fund
- Proteus Fund — RISE Together Fund
- South Asian Americans Leading Together
- The Institute for Social Policy and Understanding
*Brie Loskota, Executive Director of the Martin Marty Center at the University of Chicago Divinity School, uses this term to describe the organizations, practices, norms, and relationships that make up a healthy society.
Blog
How journalism funders can move past the pipeline myth
- Table of Contents
- Intro
- Pipeline Myth
- Newsroom Culture
- Power Building
Journalists of color make up less than 17 percent of newsroom staff, and account for just 13 percent of newsroom leadership. Why are these numbers still so low? And what is our responsibility as funders?
As we’ve said before, there are serious inequities that need to be addressed to create a culture of journalism that helps people meaningfully participate in our democracy. One of the most persistent is this lack of diversity in newsrooms. This is a problem because newsrooms that do not reflect their communities are not able to serve their communities. Full stop.
So what’s going on? The leadership of majority-white newsrooms still latches onto the myth that there’s a pipeline problem — blaming the lack of diversity on a lack of job candidates. But past research has shown that graduates of color are hired by newsrooms at lower rates than their white counterparts, while a recent survey shows a disturbing trend of mostly mid-career, Black women exiting the industry. Namely, the candidates are there, but newsroom leadership is failing to hire and retain them. Let’s dig into why this pipeline myth is so persistently harmful, what’s really happening, and what funders can do.
A look under the hood of the pipeline myth
Basically, what’s happening is that some newsroom leaders are relying on exclusionary recruiting efforts, such as:
- Prioritizing applicants from elite journalism schools that are often alienating institutions themselves
- Trying to attract talent via unpaid internships that are prohibitive for professionals from low-income backgrounds
- Calling on their existing networks that reflect and replicate the same inequities
When instead they could be lifting barriers by:
- Looking beyond top-ranked journalism schools (or even college degrees!)
- Shifting recruiting efforts to focus on the talent found inside groups like the Asian American Journalists Association, National Association of Black Journalists, National Association of Hispanic Journalists, National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association, Native American Journalists Association, South Asian Journalists Association – by building authentic relationships, not just reaching out when newsrooms want to circulate a job posting.
- Hacking the hiring process.
But the real myth of the “pipeline problem” is that diversifying newsrooms is all about hiring. It’s not. It’s also about building an inclusive culture that supports the growth and leadership of journalists from all backgrounds.
The deeper issue: newsroom culture
For years, journalists of color have been sounding the alarm on an industry that consistently undermines their lived experiences, excludes them from leadership roles, and pushes them out when they dare to push back.
Last summer, when Black reporters spoke up about the emotional trauma of covering the killings of Black men and women, editors responded by disqualifying them from being objective. They failed to provide them with the support that covering these traumatic stories require. And still, many Black journalists bore the burden of reporting on civil unrest and racism in this country in newsrooms that lacked a deep understanding of racism. Journalists of color, and specifically Black women in journalism, are disproportionately targets of the worst online abuse and harassment when covering these issues. These stories made front pages and headlines, but they came at a steep personal and professional cost.
These issues contribute to hostile environments for journalists from marginalized communities, who are expected to leave their identities at the door until they’re forced to educate their colleagues on issues that hit close to home.
There are many things that newsrooms can do to create a more inclusive environment — from turning to guidance from groups like Journalists of Color on Slack and the Journalists of Color Resource Guide that offer a community for minorities to access support and resources that help them navigate the field, to engaging in difficult conversations about media industry biases that hinder journalists of color. One of these is the myth of “objectivity”, which is rooted in the lens of white men and largely ignores the perspectives and expertise of Black and brown reporters.
As funders, it is our responsibility to follow the lead of these reporters. It is critical that we center the experiences of those most frequently and deeply marginalized within their newsrooms and journalism in our grantmaking practices. We must ensure our investments are not propping up harmful institutions with bandaid solutions, and instead supporting genuine, radical change.
Funding power building is key
If you’re going to fund efforts around increasing newsroom diversity and building more inclusive newsrooms, you must also invest in the power building and sharing efforts that journalists of color are leading. This means funding programs who address retention, mentorship, promotion, leadership, safety, and community building for journalists of color. This is the only way to move from surface-level representation to centering equity and justice in journalism.
Some organizations we currently fund that seek to build and share power with traditionally excluded journalists include:
- The Ida B. Wells Society, an organization dedicated to increasing and retaining journalists of color in investigative reporting.
- Press On, a Southern media collective that catalyzes change and advances justice through the practice of movement journalism through solidarity with oppressed communities that birth social movements.
- OpenNews, a community of journalism peers strengthening relationships across organizations to build a more equitable future for journalism.
- Free Press, whose Media 2070 team is inviting all of us to reimagine the future of journalism with reparations and justice.
Talented job candidates from Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Hispanic Serving Institutions, Tribal Colleges and Universities, and women’s colleges across the country are ready to launch their journalism careers. Funding these organizations will provide support to journalists of color to stay in the industry long enough to build power: become editorial decision makers, become hiring managers, and mentor new staff. They are building the structures, culture, and practice that will help become the next generation of newsroom leaders.
Blog
Tackling Democracy’s Cybersecurity Problem Requires Collective Action
For several years, Democracy Fund has been pushing for greater platform transparency and working to protect against the harms of digital voter suppression, surveillance advertising, coronavirus misinformation, and harassment online. But the stakes for this work have never been higher.
One in five Americans rely primarily on social media for their political news and information, according to the Pew Research Center. This means a small handful of companies have enormous control over what a broad swath of America sees, reads, and hears. Now that the coronavirus has moved even more of our lives online companies like Facebook, Google, and Twitter have more influence than ever before. Yet, we know remarkably little about how these social media platforms operate.
With dozens of academic researchers working to uncover these elusive answers, it is essential that we fund and support their work despite Facebook’s repeated attempts to block academic research on their platform.
Earlier this month Facebook abruptly shut down the accounts of a group of New York University researchers from Cybersecurity for Democracy, whose Ad Observer browser extension has done pathbreaking work tracking political ads and the spread of misinformation on the social media company’s platform.
In full support of Cybersecurity for Democracy, Democracy Fund today joined with its NetGain Partnership colleagues to release this open letter in support of our grantee, Cybersecurity for Democracy, and the community of independent researchers who study the impacts of social media in our democracy.
The Backstory
For the past three years, a team of researchers at NYU’s Center for Cybersecurity has been studying Facebook’s advertising practices. Last year, the team, led by Laura Edelson and Damon McCoy, deployed a browser extension called Ad Observer that allows users to voluntarily share information with the researchers about ads that Facebook shows them. The opt-in browser extension uses data that has been volunteered by Facebook users and analyzes it in an effort to better understand the 2020 election and other subjects in the public interest. The research has brought to light systemic gaps in the Facebook Ad Library API, identified misinformation in political ads, and improved our understanding of Facebook’s amplification of divisive partisan campaigns.
Earlier this month, Facebook abruptly shut down Edelson’s and McCoy’s accounts, as well as the account of a lead engineer on the project. This action by Facebook also cut off access to more than two dozen other researchers and journalists who relied on Ad Observer data for their research and reporting, including timely work on COVID-19 and vaccine misinformation.
As my colleague Paul Waters shared in a deep dive blog on this topic:
“Platforms have strong incentives to remain opaque to public scrutiny. Platforms profit from running ads — some of which are deeply offensive — and by keeping their algorithms secret and hiding data on where ads run they avoid accountability — circumventing advertiser complaints, user protests, and congressional inquiries. Without reliable information on how these massive platforms operate and how their technologies function, there can be no real accountability. When complaints are raised, the companies frequently deny or make changes behind the scenes. Even when platforms admit something has gone wrong, they claim to fix problems without explaining how, which makes it impossible to verify the effectiveness of the “fix.” Moreover, these fixes are often just small changes that only paper over fundamental problems, while leaving the larger structural flaws intact. This trend has been particularly harmful for BIPOC who already face significant barriers to participation in the public square.”
This latest action by Facebook undermines the independent, public-interest research and journalism that is crucial for the health of our democracy. Research on platform and algorithmic transparency, such as the work led by Cybersecurity for Democracy, is necessary to develop evidence-based policy that is vital to a healthy democracy.
A Call to Action
Collective action is required to address Facebook’s repeated attempts to curtail journalism and independent, academic research into their business and advertising practices. Along with our NetGain partners, we have called for three immediate remedies:
- We ask Facebook to reinstate the accounts of the NYU researchers as a matter of urgency. Researchers and journalists who conduct research that is ethical, protects privacy, and is in the public interest should not face suspension from Facebook or any other platform.
- We call on Facebook to amend its terms of service within the next three months, following up on an August 2018 call to establish a safe harbor for research that is ethical, protects privacy and is in the public interest.
- We urge government and industry leaders to ensure access to platform data for researchers and journalists working in the public interest.
The foundations who make up the NetGain Partnership share a vision for an open, secure, and equitable internet space where free expression, economic opportunity, knowledge exchange, and civic engagement can thrive. This attempt to impede the efforts of independent researchers is a call for us all to protect that vision, for the good of our communities, and the good of our democracy.
Blog
Democracy in Crisis: Preparing for the Road Ahead
In the past year, during a pandemic and national uprising for racial justice, our grantees rose to the challenge of authoritarianism, attacks on journalism, rampant misinformation, a crisis election, and increased political violence. We are truly grateful for and proud to support these efforts. As we look to the future, we will build upon the strengths of our grantee community and what we have learned together.
While we have made great strides towards an open and just multi-racial democracy, that progress has triggered a profound and dangerous backlash that threatens the very core of our republic. It is imperative that across the sector, we reflect on how this reality challenges the foundational assumptions of our work and craft strategies commensurate to this moment.
Last year, ongoing political crises culminated in our choice to anchor Democracy Fund’s identity in our democratic principles instead of bipartisanship. But we have planned to review our strategy since our launch, when we committed to formally revisiting our strategy every five years. Currently our organization is engaging in some deep thinking — while continuing our current grantmaking — and plan to wrap up in 2022 as we know the need to take up this work now could not be more urgent.
We are still early in the process of developing a new organizational strategy, but a few central ideas have emerged as anchors in our exploration:
- We cannot achieve a healthier democracy unless we deal with the longstanding structural barriers designed to prevent majority-rule. To address these barriers effectively, a focus on racial justice and equity must be embedded across our work.
- The racist, illiberal, authoritarian faction that is ascendant in our political system represents an existential threat to our democracy. Failure to withstand the threat posed by this faction could lead to irreparable damage. Over the coming years, we must weaken this coalition and defend against its attacks on our democracy, while strengthening the pro-democracy movement.
- An incremental approach to reform without a vision for transformational change will not succeed. We must disrupt the culture, institutions, and rules of the game to unrig our political system and transform the fight for a more open and just democracy.
We don’t expect to have clarity on all program areas until at least mid-2022, as the expertise of our grantees and other field leaders are crucial to our approach. We have already engaged some partners in our work thus far, and we anticipate many more opportunities to do so in the months to come.
We feel energized by these powerful ideas. They align with our values and the communities we support. Integrating these concepts into our strategies and grantee portfolios will take time and our team is ready to dive in. It is clear that there are no silver bullets or easy answers for our democracy. But we are ready to join with our many partners to do what’s needed — listening to and building on the work of the leaders and organizations who came before us. We are grateful, as always, for those who have already engaged in our process and continue to be champions for our democracy.
Blog
Want to support accurate journalism? Fund solidarity reporting.
Last summer, solidarity became a national buzzword. Thousands of people declared and demanded solidarity against racism in the wake of police murdering George Floyd and Breonna Taylor. Some news organizations swiftly moved beyond the statement by implementing and amplifying solidarity reporting: the practice of going directly to marginalized communities to inform accurate coverage instead of relying on authorities and elites to tell the story. But many news outlets did not go this route, and remain caught between a desire to appear neutrally “balanced” and the growing understanding that mistaking balance for accuracy can promote misinformation with grave repercussions.
As journalism funders regularly pledge to support accurate reporting, it’s time to be more specific – and more discerning – about what qualifies as accurate reporting, particularly in coverage of marginalized people.
Journalistic accuracy must be substantive — not surface-level
News organizations often achieve surface-level accuracy by amplifying the words they hear on a police scanner or during a press conference without mistyping or omitting any talking points. The problem is that accurately repeating what someone says doesn’t mean their statements are true: distortions, decontextualized self-validation, and outright lies are common. And as we know from research in the last five years alone, fact-checking after publishing doesn’t easily fix misinformation.
Substantive accuracy, on the other hand, is a hallmark of solidarity reporting and means more than centering institutions of power and people employed by them. It means amplifying the voices of those who live the news every day. These reporting practices represent affected communities first.
Think of it this way: if a reporter were writing a story about injustice affecting the house you live in, who would know the most about it? The answer is likely you. Imagine, though, that the reporter never reaches out to you. Instead, they speak with the city council, police officers, and your landlord or mortgage lender. This story might provide surface-level accuracy through amplifying “expert” voices, but it would lack the substantive accuracy that your perspective, as the most directly affected person, would provide.
Members of marginalized communities don’t need to imagine this scenario. They live it every day when even the best-resourced local news outlets persistently quote credentialed experts, law enforcement, and bureaucrats at the expense of representing the people who are living, struggling, and dying due to the unjust conditions under discussion.
Solidarity journalism prevents misinformation
Surface-level accuracy sets the stage for journalism to amplify misinformation, while substantive accuracy through solidarity practices remedies it.
Let’s consider a recent example: When police murdered George Floyd, the initial report made no mention of a police officer’s knee on his neck. At a surface-level, it is technically true that this report said, “Officers were able to get the suspect into handcuffs and noted he appeared to be suffering medical distress.” It is far from true that this report accounts for how George Floyd died. We know this because of more reliable sources who lived the moment. Four children who witnessed the murder provided the most accurate account of what happened. And in March 2021, in stark and undeniable contrast to the original police report, they provided accurate court testimony about how George Floyd was killed.
Cases like this make it so clear that when reporters center sources with institutional power and stop there, the public does not get a substantively accurate story. All too often, surface-level reporting further amplifies misinformation. Fortunately, we know that solidarity reporting can address this problem.
Solidarity reporting strengthens substantive accuracy across a range of issues
Any newsroom that covers timely and important issues should provide substantively accurate coverage. Solidarity reporting improves accuracy across a range of these issues and communities, including:
- COVID-19, by addressing and accounting for the disproportionate impact on Black and brown communities in the U.S. and abroad – even when elected leaders deny the crisis.
- Anti-Asian violence such as the Atlanta shooting, by representing the perspectives and experiences of Asian and Asian American people.
- Extreme weather, by focusing on the dangers and struggles for people who must go without electricity and water for an indefinite amount of time.
- Gun violence, by centering the perspectives of families of victims and survivors and reporting on continued calls for specific action from within affected communities.
As news organizations promise to learn from their past mistakes, journalism funders can support solidarity reporting as a way to help news outlets move beyond statements and apologies and toward achieving greater substantive accuracy.
A call for funders: Supporting accurate reporting means supporting solidarity reporting
Funders have the power to accelerate a trajectory toward a more accurate, ethical, and equitable news ecosystem. As more foundations invest in a growing range of news outlets, news initiatives, and news partnerships, solidarity reporting offers a set of criteria that funders can use to make – and justify – their decisions.
Next time you’re reviewing a proposal, ask yourself these three questions to understand how or if solidarity is part of the reporting process:
- Is the project aligned with substantive accuracy in journalism, which means including the perspectives of people directly affected by ongoing injustice?
- Are the terms, frames, and definitions of the project aligned with affected communities’ self-described needs?
- In the face of injustice, will leadership and contributors be able to name it and stand against it, or is the project structurally tied to maintaining a façade of neutrality?
A minimal standard of surface-level accuracy in journalism cannot suffice. Such a low standard breeds misinformation about marginalized communities and perpetuates harm against them. It’s time to support solidarity reporting and the substantive accuracy within it to help build a more just future.
Anita Varma, PhD leads the Solidarity Journalism Initiative. She is an incoming assistant professor at UT Austin’s School of Journalism & Media and senior faculty research associate at the Center for Media Engagement. Previously, she was at the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics (Santa Clara University). The Solidarity Journalism Initiative helps journalists implement solidarity in their reporting on marginalized communities. If you are a journalist or journalism supporter and would like to learn more about Solidarity Journalism, please contact anita.varma@austin.utexas.edu. You can also follow her on Twitter.
Blog
Holding Ourselves Accountable: How Democracy Fund is Supporting Media Equity Now
Last year, we published “Dear Funders: What Does it Mean to Care About Equity in Journalism?” where we outlined three priorities for foundations seeking to support equitable journalism: investing in journalism created for and by people of color; supporting groups that are building a more equitable industry overall; and closing the resource gaps that philanthropy has helped perpetuate.
This piece went up at the start of one of the most tumultuous times in our country’s history: the rise of COVID-19 and marches for racial justice in the wake of George Floyd’s murder. White-centric and led media struggled to tell these stories from the lens of communities of color, while pushing out reporters of color who were.
Following this surge, an unprecedented amount of philanthropic dollars went towards racial equity, as many newsrooms began to grapple with their histories of racism. But it’s now one year later and many funders still struggle to center POC-led organizations, while real progress on equity within newsrooms has yet to materialize.
Righting these wrongs will take incredible amounts of time and money from the field of philanthropy. But doing this work gives us energy and brings us joy. We’re investing in the incredible efforts of leaders of color that are shaping the future of journalism, and we hope you’ll join us.
Here are some of the things we have been doing:
In 2020, we increased investments to several partner organizations, including an additional $500,000 to the Racial Equity in Journalism Fund to ensure dollars could go directly to POC-led and serving newsrooms and to address the legal needs of journalists of color. We also provided an additional $100,000 to the Center for Community Media at CUNY to help ensure their media partners across the country had access to critical training and resources.
We increased the flexibility of our grant structures, like removing annual audit requirements, providing more mediums for annual reporting, and moving project grants to general operating (excluding grants with fiscal sponsors or agents). And we committed ourselves to using public platforms, as well as industry events like Media Impact Funders, the United Philanthropy Forum, and Council of New Jersey Grantmakers to highlight mediamakers of color and push our peers to increase their support of them.
And our team is continuing this work in 2021. We’ve committed over $1.5 million dollars to grant amendments and renewals to organizations like the Maynard Institute, Emma Bowen Foundation, and the Asian American Journalists Association, all of which support the growth and leadership of journalists of color while holding the journalism industry accountable for more fair and representative coverage. We’ve also renamed our portfolio “Equitable Journalism” to better reflect our funding priorities and guide future strategy.
We know this is just the beginning. The violent racism that communities of color have experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic is nothing new. Journalism has too often historically contributed to propping up racialized violence and harms, and philanthropy has persistently underinvested in journalism led by and serving POC communities or divested altogether. We don’t want to continue this legacy of harmful funding practices, and we hope you don’t either. We are collaborating more intentionally across our media grantmaking strategies to ensure equity is at the forefront. And Democracy Fund is working to infuse racial equity across the organization, while continuing to examine how our external grantmaking and internal culture uphold white supremacy.
We’re calling on our peer funders to join this transformative moment, and share their plans and actions so we can all learn from each other. We look forward to sharing more about how we are increasing our investments in organizations led by and serving communities of color, LGBTQ communities, and other historically marginalized groups, and continuing to work on our internal practices and culture to ensure this support is sustained.
Blog
Why we’re urging funders to support AAPI women’s leadership in journalism now
This week’s tragedy could have been avoided. For months, AAPI women in journalism have been sounding the alarm on the dramatic rise in racist and xenophobic attacks. Unfortunately, their calls were not only largely ignored by the public and policy makers, they were also minimized within their own news outlets. This historic silencing of the AAPI community, and AAPI women especially, must end.
This is why we are committed to supporting AAPI women’s leadership in journalism. AAPI journalists and media leaders have shown incredible dedication to bringing nuanced, inclusive and community-based reporting to their audiences over the last year, while risking physical, mental and emotional harm.
This week, they carried the tremendous burden of providing responsible coverage, while fearing for their own safety. They have gone to work while grieving not only the loss of life from the Atlanta attacks, but the ongoing disproportionately high rates of COVID-19 cases and fatalities affecting the AAPI community.
The work of AAPI women journalists — spanning decades and even centuries — has continuously centered AAPI communities’ experiences, perspectives and information needs. They have pushed the entire journalism industry forward by demonstrating how to center and serve those who have been historically excluded by the media. This is why we’re urging our fellow funders to join us in supporting these leaders.
The work of AAPI women journalists… has continuously centered AAPI communities’ experiences, perspectives and information needs. They have pushed the entire journalism industry forward by demonstrating how to center and serve those who have been historically excluded by the media.
At the core of much of our work in growing trusted and equitable journalism is the leadership of AAPI women. Here are just a few of the groups at the helm of this work:
- The Asian American Journalists Association, led by Executive Director Naomi Tacuyan Underwood, is a membership organization working to increase the visibility and inclusion of AAPI journalists and promote fair and accurate reporting of the AAPI community.
- The Maynard Institute, co-directed by Evelyn Hsu, develops and champions the leadership of journalists of color and drives more diverse and inclusive practices within news outlets across the industry.
- Open News brings together journalists, editors, developers, and designers to create shared processes and tech within media. Sisi Wei, their Director of Programs, leads initiatives focused on creating a more just and inclusive journalism industry, including Vision25, a new coalition with Maynard Institute and the Online News Association.
- Solidarity Journalism is an initiative led by Dr. Anita Varma at the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at Santa Clara University dedicated to improving coverage of historically marginalized communities by centering their experiences and perspectives in reporting.
- URL Media, co-founded by Mitra Kalita, is a new, decentralized network of Black and Brown news organizations that focuses on content, distribution and other shared resources to build long-term sustainability.
Across our grantees other leaders like Anna Nirmala at the American Journalism Project, Alison Go at Chalkbeat, Anika Anand at LION Publishers, and Christina Shih at the News Revenue Hub are working to align journalism’s business model with more equitable and just coverage of communities.
The media’s historic stereotyping and exclusion of communities of color has done incredible harm. It’s time for a transformation. As funders, we must invest in the leadership of individuals and organizations doing the work to ensure fair and accurate reporting of AAPI communities. We must support their leadership not only in times of crisis — like the events of this week — but throughout our long-term strategies to build more community-driven journalism.
For those wondering where to get started, Asian Americans/Pacific Islanders in Philanthropy (AAPIP) has put together a list of resources, organizations and coalitions that foundations can invest in to support AAPI communities.
Report
A new tool to measure the health of local news ecosystems
The new report “Healthy Local News & Information Ecosystems: A Diagnostic Framework,” presents a framework to help local news funders assess whether a community’s information environment is actually becoming healthier. This assessment approach was tested and refined across nine U.S. communities of various sizes.
Accompanying the report is a playbook designed as a tool to help funders and other community organizations evaluate strengths and opportunities in their locale.
Photo by Matt Donders on Unsplash.
Blog
How we are holding ourselves accountable to equity in democracy and in journalism
Independent journalism is an essential instrument of accountability and critical to the health of our republic. Without it, the public’s ability to check the power and influence of those who represent them is severely limited. While our elected officials may not always appreciate or agree with the criticism they receive, it is their responsibility to support a vigorous free press.
The world of philanthropy is no different. As funders, we must hold ourselves accountable to — and be willing to be held accountable by — the communities and grantees we support. As institutions with substantial power that is derived from private wealth — and not from a democratically accountable body — we have a special responsibility to embrace transparency. We should welcome dialogue and public critique if we are committed to the best interests of the communities we serve.
At Democracy Fund, we acknowledge that — through our systems, structures, and choices — we have been complicit in upholding white supremacy. We are therefore examining our external grantmaking and internal culture to ensure that we live up to the values we want to see in our democracy. Last year, we formally moved away from our previous commitment to bipartisanship because we were unwilling to compromise on the fundamental principles of a healthy democracy. Instead, we decided that we must ground ourselves in our values, including a belief that “a just and equitable political system must eliminate structural barriers to ensure historically excluded communities have meaningful influence in our democracy.” Key to this work has been listening and being accountable to our own staff, especially women of color, who have raised these issues and helped move us forward.
Specifically, our Public Square program has interrogated what it means to support racial equity in journalism (and encouraged other funders to join us). We expanded our investment in newsrooms led by and serving historically marginalized groups (and will continue to do so). We funded Black, Indigenous and people of color led organizations holding tech platforms accountable for combatting discrimination, harassment and hate. We supported new leaders working to shift industry culture. We recognize that we have much more to do to achieve justice and a democracy that works for all.
Last year we announced a number of commitments regarding how Democracy Fund will be part of the solution. Expanding on those ideas in the field of journalism, our Public Square program is working this year to:
- Expand the proportion of grantees led by or serving BIPOC, LGBTQIA+, and other historically marginalized communities across our strategies.
- Invest in trailblazers and leadership within diverse communities who are building power and organizing for equity.
- Confront systemic racism, white supremacy, and white dominant culture when it shows up in our own processes and community.
We applaud those who have come forward with feedback for foundations in the past, often at risk to themselves and their livelihoods. We saw that last week when a public critique was published about the Knight Foundation, one of our philanthropic peers and partners in the journalism field. As the journalism community comes together this week at the Knight Media Forum (KMF), we hope it is an opportunity to talk more openly about how systems of power, wealth, and white supremacy shape philanthropy, and how we all can work towards a holistic system rooted in equity and inclusion.
Make no mistake, Democracy Fund has its own work to do. We will continue to take steps to live our values more closely and to address systemic racism within our organization and within democracy. We encourage our partners and grantees to examine how their own systems may be complicit in maintaining a culture of white supremacy and be open to the uncomfortable discussions and decisions that could follow. You can expect to hear more from us on these topics throughout this year and beyond. We welcome accountability as we do the work.
We are eager to continue the conversation. If you have feedback you can email us at info@democracyfund.org, and we also encourage people to provide anonymous feedback about Democracy Fund on Grant Advisor.