Journalists and experts detail what’s missing from coverage on diversity, equity and inclusion. They explain what DEI truly is, give historical context and help reporters better cover the topic and federal/state attacks on it.
Photo credit: alyssasieb/nappy.co
After taking office Jan. 20, President Donald Trump swiftly unleashed a string of executive orders seeking to broadly dismantle diversity, equity and inclusion programs. Arguing that DEI efforts, which generally aim to level the playing field for historically marginalized groups, instead “undermine our national unity,” the Republican president took aim at public and private institutions alike.
Building on recent state-level moves by conservative lawmakers, Trump mandated the elimination of positions, policies, grants and other initiatives designed to expand access to and equity in both K-12 and higher education. The orders also sought to force compliance with the administration’s stances on transgender students and race-related instruction, threatening federal funding cuts if schools failed to get in line.
The federal Department of Education followed with a sweeping letter doubling down on the president’s directives and vowing “vigorous” enforcement. This prompted several panicked colleges and universities to wipe web pages, cancel cultural events and scale back targeted outreach. Other K-12 and higher ed leaders, backed by advocacy organizations and attorneys, resisted, questioning the legality of Trump’s orders and funding threats.
The administration has forged ahead, yanking written DEI resources from government websites, slashing support for Minority-Serving Institutions and nixing civil rights complaints over book bans. DEI-related investigations into dozens of colleges and universities, at least one school district and a state education agency are in progress, even as the Department of Education sees its own ranks decimated.
The speed and volume of these developments can make it difficult for reporters to cut through the noise, particularly given the widespread misrepresentation and politicization of DEI efforts. Properly contextualizing the actions of policymakers and institutions—and forcing leaders to answer for their decisions—is essential, according to Carlos Hoyt, who along with Minna Ham authored Diversity Without Divisiveness: A Guide to DEI Practice for K-12 Educators.
“Energetic investigation and, I think, revelation of what’s really at play is what’s missing right now in coverage,” Hoyt said. When it comes to journalists getting this right, “so much hangs in the balance—not just in terms of inclusivity, but also an informed citizenry.”
Here are some tips from Hoyt and other experts, as well as reporters and editors covering the fight over DEI.
The dictionary defines diversity, equity and inclusion as “a framework that promotes fair treatment and full participation of all people, particularly those who have historically been underrepresented or discriminated against.”
But in practice, “DEI means different things to different people,” according to Naaz Modan, who covers policy and equity issues for K-12 Dive.
“The best way to make sure readers are on the same page is to explicitly define what it means in a given story,” Modan said. “In a story about students with disabilities, DEI might mean something like offering some kind of accommodation that makes a certain program more inclusive. In another story about colleges, maybe it means something about race-conscious admissions.”
Despite the misconception that DEI exists solely to help Black and brown communities, diversity, equity and inclusion efforts benefit everyone, from rural residents and veterans to first-generation college students, people with disabilities and nursing moms.
“I find that spelling it out in layman’s terms, translating what’s behind the buzzword of DEI—it gives it more context, and at the same time also undoes some of the anxiety around it,” Modan said.
Hoyt and Ham, for their part, contend that DEI is an inescapable part of social existence: Every human interaction necessarily involves considering who belongs (diversity), who benefits (equity), and who is heard (inclusion).
“DEI is a reality we all participate in, either by expanding its reach or by restricting it,” they write in their book. According to Hoyt, that means reporters should reject misleading framings, such as “eliminating DEI” if what they’re actually talking about is an effort to restrict certain resources to a privileged group.
“To suggest that we can ‘end DEI’ is as nonsensical as suggesting we can end social interaction,” he said. “The question is not whether DEI is happening—it is always happening—but who is shaping it, and to what end.”
The fight over diversity, equity and inclusion—as contentious as it may feel right now—is not a new phenomenon. Though DEI efforts surged following the 2020 murder of George Floyd, they have deep roots in American history.
As Hoyt and Ham point out in their book, the country was built on the promise that “all men are created equal,” even if it frequently failed to live up to that ideal. The authors highlight key historical milestones, such as the Civil War, women’s suffrage and military desegregation as early markers of DEI progress.
Various experts noted that major expansions in inclusion or access have tended to spur periods of backlash seeking to counteract them, leading to a pattern of “pendulum swings” throughout U.S. history. They cited the school desegregation efforts of the 1960s and the resulting violence and “white flight,” as well as the election of President Barack Obama and the corresponding surge in white nativism.
“From civil rights to women’s rights, when gains are made … the reaction is swift and fierce,” Hoyt said. He and others maintain that the current rollback is not about returning to neutrality but rather eroding longstanding civil rights protections to reestablish a “privileged order.”
Pamela D’Andrea Martínez, an assistant professor of education at Wellesley College, implored reporters not to let “all these seemingly new, sensational efforts” to reverse strides in diversity, equity and inclusion cause them to “lose track of what the history of those efforts are.”
“There are people that have been shaping these policies, organizing for these policies” for years, she said of attempts to crack down on DEI.
D’Andrea Martínez has publicly criticized institutions in the past for implementing DEI policies and programs that “check the diversity box” without meaningfully changing power structures or more equitably distributing resources.
Still, she said, even if DEI initiatives continue to be “sites of struggle” for some vulnerable groups, eliminating them entirely would make schools even more elite and less equitable.
That type of complex view can be tricky to cover given the “all or nothing tendency right now in how we see these issues,” D’Andrea Martínez said—but that doesn’t mean reporters shouldn’t try.
A straightforward way to capture more nuanced perspectives: Ask students and faculty of color how they feel about DEI initiatives at their schools, according to Daarel Burnette, senior editor for The Chronicle of Higher Education.
“You’re gonna get a gazillion different answers,” he promised during a March webinar hosted by the Education Writers Association.
Modan, of K-12 Dive, said she feels journalists have comprehensively covered the immediate effects of executive orders and related actions. Yet most haven’t explored what schools’ responses could mean for student outcomes over the next several years, something she urged reporters to do once they have the bandwidth.
“If this college’s DEI office is closed down and outreach to this certain Black community stops … what does that mean for the acceptance rates or the test scores in this community?” she asked. “What does it mean for representation? What does it mean for things like graduation rates, careers for these students? And what does it mean generations from now?”
On the K-12 front, areas ripe for monitoring include:
Data will be key in telling these stories, as will the voices of those directly affected (Burnette said his “biggest frustration about DEI policy stories is that there are no recipients of DEI policies” featured.) But it’s important to note that the current climate has left some individuals fearful to speak out.
“I’ve spoken to so many people who are like, ‘Oh, my child is transgender,’ or “I still haven’t told my parents, and now this makes it even worse for me. Now I’m even more afraid,’” Modan said. “Honestly, it’s tough because so many people don’t want to go on the record.”
Have those conversations anyway, she said. They can help guide next steps and connect you to additional sources, some of whom might be more willing to go public.
Trump’s orders are the apparent culmination of years of conservative efforts to rebrand DEI as reverse discrimination. Republican leaders have asserted that initiatives intended to even the playing field for underrepresented groups undermine merit-based hiring, promotions and educational opportunities for white people.
While journalists should fairly represent all perspectives, experts said they must also challenge those working to dismantle DEI to explain their reasoning and justify the exclusion of certain groups in favor of others.
“The goal, as always, is not to take a side but to demand accountability and expose underlying agendas,” Hoyt said. Otherwise, journalists risk allowing political leaders to manipulate the debate.
He recommended pressing politicians for answers to, and independently investigating, the following questions:
“The key is that there’s something that is being lost and gained in each one of these decisions,” D’Andrea Martínez said. “Reporting should focus on who is being made most vulnerable by certain policy decisions and who is most benefited.”
Your post will be on the website shortly.
We will get back to you shortly