Blog

Tackling Democracy’s Cybersecurity Problem Requires Collective Action

/
August 17, 2021

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:

  1. 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. 
  2. 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.  
  3. 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. 

Read the NetGain Partners’ Open Letter to Facebook 

Blog

Democracy in Crisis: Preparing for the Road Ahead

/
July 29, 2021

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:

  1. 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.  
  2. 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. 
  3. 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. 

/
July 28, 2021

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:

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 . You can also follow her on Twitter.

Blog

Holding Ourselves Accountable: How Democracy Fund is Supporting Media Equity Now

/
June 16, 2021

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

/
March 19, 2021

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 nuancedinclusive 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 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

/
March 3, 2021

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

/
March 1, 2021

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.

Op-Ed

Philanthropy’s Inauguration March: What the Real Work of Protecting Democracy Demands Now

/
January 20, 2021

After a heroic effort to maintain the integrity of our election system over the past year, Wednesday’s inauguration marks a key turning point, one that requires philanthropy’s continued focus on the health of our democracy.

Statement

Philanthropies Condemn Political Violence, Call on Leaders to Protect Democracy

/
January 13, 2021

As representatives of nonpartisan philanthropic institutions, serving rural, urban, and suburban communities across the nation, we condemn the violence that broke out at the U.S. Capitol this week. The events in Washington are a stain on our nation’s history and a painful break in the peaceful transition of power that has been a defining hallmark of American democracy for more than 200 years.

Blog

Centering Equity in Journalism during the 2020 Election — and Beyond

/
December 16, 2020

2020 was a marathon for journalists preparing for an election that seemed very likely to go off the rails. They did it while also facing unprecedented issues of safety, security, and stability in a global pandemic, a census year, and becoming increased targets for police violence. Journalists of color, Black journalists in particular, tackled all of the above while continuing to navigate systemic racism and leading a reckoning over racial justice in the industry.

In the lead-up to November and throughout election week, many of us were tuned into cable networks and refreshing news feeds around the clock, but national election coverage — predictably — failed us in many ways. As in past years, it often dealt in generalizations and erased identities. In one notable high-profile failure, CNN labeled Native Americans and presumably other unidentified voters as “something else,” rather than naming their demographics. Communities of color were also overwhelmingly targeted by misinformation.

But reporters and newsrooms around the country rose to the challenge of engaging communities, holding candidates accountable, and centering equity. If you’re a regular EJ Lab reader, it will come as no surprise that the best place to look for examples of equity-first election coverage is from newsrooms by and serving people of color. Here’s a snapshot of what these newsrooms did:

The accomplishments above didn’t just happen by chance. They are the result of long-term commitment and relationship building between journalists of color and their communities, and they were fueled by funders who understood the urgency of 2020 and worked together to coordinate and drive resources to support capacity building, staffing, and targeted projects focused on serving communities. As we turn the corner into 2021, the urgency is still with us, and the need for more coordination, more resources and more commitment to journalists of color continues.

As we turn the corner into 2021, the urgency is still with us, and the need for more coordination, more resources and more commitment to journalists of color continues.

We have seen what we can do when we work together to drive support to these newsrooms — and it’s time to keep building momentum. Here’s what funders can do to support engaged, equitable reporting in 2021:

  • Give more. Join the Racial Equity in Journalism Fund to deliver resources directly to newsrooms led by and serving communities of color. Many of the newsrooms mentioned above are grantees of the Fund.

For our part, the Engaged Journalism team at Democracy Fund will be identifying clear action steps to shift our internal structures and practices to put equity first in our grantmaking. Stay tuned for updates on how this goes in 2021.

Published with research support from Public Square Intern Areeba Shah.

Democracy Fund
1200 17th Street NW Suite 300,
Washington, DC 20036