How the assault on DEI undermines journalism

As the assault on diversity, equity and inclusion sweeps across higher education, 12 journalism students lost $46,000 in scholarships because Ohio University officials said the scholarships – meant to make the journalism program more diverse – could illegally discriminate against white students. 

Last week’s OU scholarship freeze follows last year’s U.S. Supreme Court decision that college admissions policies that consider race are unconstitutional. As predicted, advocates are seeking to apply the decision to other areas, claiming that any federally funded institution can’t consider race when providing support, even if the goal is to counter centuries of discrimination.

The implications for journalism are significant. The field desperately needs more journalists who reflect the increasing diversity of the U.S., which is on track to be majority-minority around 2045. Already struggling to diversify their newsrooms, news organizations will lose their main source of young, diverse talent if colleges and universities cave to legal pressure.

This may just be the tip of the iceberg if advocates find ways to challenge journalism grantmaking designed to address inequity. Clearly, foundations and other deep-pocketed organizations that care about journalism need to step up and confront the assault on DEI in court. In the meantime, publishers can take steps to protect themselves, including diversifying funding sources and strengthening community engagement and support.

The argument that scholarships for BIPOC students discriminate against white students looks particularly fallacious at OU, where 354 of the 419 students in the journalism program are white. 

“How can 12 scholarships discriminate against white students who make up 84 percent of journalism majors?” Eddith A. Dashiell, director of OU’s E. W. Scripps School of Journalism, asks in an op-ed. 

Yet it’s not an isolated case. In August 2023, a federal complaint was filed against the Johnny Carson Center for Emerging Media Arts and Black Public Media at The University of Nebraska-Lincoln, challenging a public media residency program that provides $5,000 to $10,000 grants to increase Black creators’ participation in storytelling through emerging technology. 

Attacks on DEI are also threatening how students are being prepared to cover a multicultural country. A month before events at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Texas A&M recruited a top University of Texas professor, Kathleen McElroy, to revive its journalism program. The school backtracked on the job offer after detractors within the A&M system expressed issues with McElroy’s experience at The New York Times and her work on race and diversity in newsrooms.  

This month, UNC-Chapel Hill trustees will likely decide whether to defund and dismantle DEI efforts. The Committee on University Governance, within the University of North Carolina Board of Governors that oversees 17 schools, voted in less than four minutes to reverse and replace a policy related to DEI. The full board of 24 members is to vote on the matter again this month, and if approved, the repeal would take effect immediately. 

UNC-Chapel Hill is the alma mater of Pulitzer Prize-winning writer Nikole Hannah-Jones. In 2022, the school denied her a tenured position after the university’s board of trustees failed to approve the journalism department’s recommendation. They cited Hannah-Jones’ work on race and the 1619 Project, which was named for the year that slavery began in the colonies that would become the United States.  

If the DEI policy is fully repealed, the UNC system will join other major universities in dismantling diversity offices. Among the most notable, the University of Florida announced in February that it was scrapping its DEI office and shifting its funding for faculty recruitment instead.

Richard Prince, who writes a column about diversity issues in the news business, recently hosted a virtual conversation with top journalists. The participants discussed the dismantling of diversity initiatives and how newsrooms should respond. 

“DEI may have roots in employment, but especially on college campuses, and in journalism, issues are related to recruitment, retention, mental health, community engagement and protection against harm,” offered Letrell Crittenden, Director of Inclusion and Audience Growth at the American Press Institute. Crittenden questioned whether the emphasis on employment hinders a larger discussion on the modern purpose of DEI. “Would re-education on the modern purpose impact messaging perception?” he asked.

Marc Morial, president of the National Urban League and former mayor of New Orleans, delivered a history of DEI and implored journalists to use their power to debunk myths and falsehoods about diversity, equity, and inclusion.

“The root of DEI is the 1964 Civil Rights Act. We once called what is now characterized as DEI, EEO, Equal Employment Opportunity,” Morial explained. “There was once a time when it was called Fair Employment Practices. There was a time when it was called Affirmative Action. And when the attacks on affirmative action intensified in the 1980s and 1990s, the response was ‘We need a more inclusive term, a more palatable term’ to describe what is fundamentally equal economic opportunity. 

“And so DEI was invented– it was said to be less offensive, less antagonistic,” he continued. “Now we see an effort to trash, smear, and pejoratize the terminology diversity, equity, and inclusion. Each and every one of us, and many others, have benefitted from post-1964 America in some way, shape, or form. Are we where we hope to be? No. Are we where we want to be? No. But has the nation changed since 1964? Absolutely.”

DEI has also benefited newsrooms. BIPOC journalists have helped news outlets reach new audiences and think differently about what is newsworthy—from coverage of OJ Simpson to the murder of George Floyd to the Uvalde school shootings.

The backlash against DEI initiatives will not only hurt deserving students who are losing scholarships. It will also stifle discussions on race in journalism schools, impacting newsroom diversity and future reporters' readiness to cover a country that will only become more multiracial and multicultural.

While the Supreme Court decision on affirmative action is likely to stand for the foreseeable future, it has an inherent contradiction that opens the way for diversity advocates to challenge it. The court exempted the military academies from the ban on using affirmative action, recognizing how important it is for the military to reflect the country it serves. 

It’s even more important for journalism – the Fourth Estate, one of the pillars of American democracy – to reflect the country and communities we serve.