The so-called “critical race theory” controversy gives education journalists a chance to shine. A baker’s dozen ideas for covering the challenging topic.
By Alexander Russo
I’ve rarely had as much sympathy and concern for education journalists as during these past few weeks.
The summer is just beginning, but the debate over how race and history are taught has consumed school board meetings and generated enormous amounts of media attention. How can you not cover it? It’s a hard story to miss.
The controversy — commonly boiled down to a misleading use of the academic term “critical race theory” (CRT) — demands a certain amount of attention.
Just this past week, we saw national stories from PBS NewsHour, AP, Reuters, the Washington Post, and TIME magazine. Controversies have also been covered by the Courier-Journal (Jefferson County, Kentucky), LoHud (Hudson Valley, New York), Dallas Morning News (Fort Worth, Texas) and San Diego Union Tribune (San Diego).
When your school board meetings are going haywire, you have to report it.
At the same time, there are doubts about whether schools are actually engaging in indoctrination of students or any other practices that would generate concerns from most parents — or how extensive these practices might be.
“There is little to no evidence that critical race theory itself is being taught to K-12 public school students,” notes a recent Associated Press story. “Though some ideas central to it, such as lingering consequences of slavery, have been.”
In addition, VICE, the New Yorker, and the Washington Post have all reported on the political machinations that have fueled the media frenzy. “This has all the red flags of a dark money astroturf campaign,” tweeted the New Yorker’s Jane Mayer.
So the CRT debate is exciting and easy to cover in the sense that people shouting at each other are easy to cover. And it’s an important story for the public to understand. But it’s a tough story to tell in any constructive way.
To help those who may be called on to cover the debate, I’ve collected some advice, based on coverage I’ve seen, insights from experts, and lessons from education reporters who have been covering the story.
The gist of it is to think carefully about how you frame the story, make sure to assess the extent of the problem, and give context to readers. Address the heated emotions without necessarily taking them at face value —or making them your central focus. Avoid producing what one expert called “hasty journalism” that could exaggerate the situation, mislead your readers, or lead to unintended results.
The CRT debate is exciting and easy to cover in the sense that people shouting at each other are easy to cover. But it’s a tough story to tell in any constructive way.
AN EXPLAINER WOULD BE GOOD
Where to start? You might do well to produce an explainer that can be referenced repeatedly.
EdWeek ran an explainer in mid-May that’s been useful to many readers and reporters: What Is Critical Race Theory, and Why Is It Under Attack?. The Washington Post and New York Times also ran helpful explainers relatively early in the process.
Even if you’ve already covered the story, an explainer might help serve as a reference point for subsequent coverage.
They’re not sexy, but they can be incredibly useful. “Decisions about how race is talked about in schools isn’t new in most districts,” reminds The Tennessean’s Meghan Mangrum.
“It is unlikely that CRT itself is being taught in schools, but the concept may have influenced teachers as they wrote their own curriculum and led classroom discussions,” notes the Atlanta Journal-Constitution in its story, Is CRT currently taught in Georgia schools?
SEEK OUT LOCAL EXPERTISE
“The best advice I can give is to ask a local college or university professor that specializes in education how they would describe CRT,” advised education reporter Emily Bloch from Jacksonville’s Florida Times-Union.
“I’d also ask them for examples of how CRT ties into current things that may be impacting the respective school district. “
FIND ANOTHER WAY TO DESCRIBE IT
One of your first and most difficult decisions is whether to frame the story around the idea of CRT — and how much to use the phrase or acronym in your piece.
Some coverage has managed to explain CRT without getting tangled up in a long discussion of what CRT is and whether it is being taught in schools, as opposed to diversity or equity work.
But other stories have gotten tied up in the language and the academic distinctions and may have unintentionally led readers to gain a wrong impression of this academic discipline.
Referencing a mid-June Stateline article, journalist Melinda Anderson proposed reporters avoid language “intended to mislead & inflame.”
For accuracy and clarity, some outlets have described the conflict as a conflict over the teaching of American history, or culture, or racial inequality.
The heart of the dispute is over “more frequent and frank discussions of subjects like slavery,” according to a New York Times piece. “Parents are also pushing back against the loosely related trend of antibias training for students and staff members, which has led to dust-ups across the country.”
GET SPECIFIC
“Those listening to left-leaning outlets and pundits could be forgiven for thinking that the bills outright ban discussion of slavery,” according to a blog post from the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education.
“Those listening to right-leaning outlets and pundits could be forgiven for having no idea of the breadth and vagueness of a lot of the clauses in these bills.”
CONTEXT FRONT AND CENTER
Just how much genuine controversy exists over CRT in your area, as opposed to political theater – and just how much of what could be called CRT is actually being taught to kids or fed to teachers?
The starting point for any local reporter is “noting what local parents or lawmakers are trying to ban and what is actually taught in their school district or state,” emailed Mangrum, who’s covered the story extensively.
If at all possible, put your basic finding as high up in the story as possible.
In a recent post, How the media’s helping GOP fuel critical race theory hysteria, PRESS RUN’s Eric Boehlert critiqued Washington Post and St. Petersburg Times stories that downplayed or delayed telling readers that CRT is not being taught and that Republican operatives don’t know or care what it really is.
AVOID ‘HASTY’ JOURNALISM
“Historically, these kinds of school panics have relied on hasty journalism to feed their false rumors,” according to SUNY Binghamton professor Adam Laats, who wrote about past such panics in Slate.
The good news, according to Laats? “A lot of the journalists I’ve been reading on the anti-CRT stuff — writers such as EdWeek’s Andrew Ujifusa, The Guardian’s Julia Carrie Wong, and TIME’s Olivia Waxman — have in my opinion done a great job of not rushing in to assume the claims of the anti-CRT crowds are factual.”
DETAIL THE RACIAL AND POLITICAL DYNAMICS
Are the concerned parents mostly white or conservative? Is the school system increasingly diverse in terms of students and teachers? How did the area vote in the last election?
Beat reporters have a long tradition of trying to produce color-blind coverage, ignoring or downplaying racial and political dynamics in their stories, or focusing on nuance and exceptions. But this is probably not the time for that.
TELL THE STORY FROM ANOTHER POINT OF VIEW
It’s easy to tell the CRT story from the point of view of the parents and community members who are upset at what they think is going on in their schools.
But what about others, including educators and parents who might support the effort to revamp history and address racial bias?
USA Today, the New York Times, and NPR have produced helpful stories about CRT including teachers’ points of view.
You could also think about focusing your coverage on the concerns of Black and brown parents and students, whose views may differ and whose experiences may be getting drowned out.
FIGHT TO KEEP THE CONTEXT
“I wish more reporters fought for an extra paragraph (or two!) to fully explain the context surrounding issues of race/racism they are writing on,” tweeted journalist and author Anderson, who’s written extensively on the experiences of Black families in schools. “I can’t help but wonder how much more coherent these pieces would be if the reporter had added a single graf just clarifying, contextualizing for readers.”
GO BEHIND THE SCENES AND TELL THE LOCAL HISTORY
It might be helpful to ground your coverage in students’ lives or a district’s recent history, rather than jumping into the controversy or focusing on the talking heads.
That’s what PBS NewsHour did this past week, opening with an interview with a kid who talked about what he had and hadn’t learned about American history in school and a parent who joined an anti-racism Facebook group to help local schools address long-standing problems.
A recent Chalkbeat story described the genesis of a Philadelphia suburb’s equity initiative – which includes efforts to address longtime segregation, racial discrimination, and systemic inequality in education outcomes – before moving on to describe recent concerns over what’s being taught.
‘COME PREPARED’
“My top piece of advice: Come prepared. You want to be able to know if something that is said is inaccurate so you can avoid amplifying misinformation without the correct information,” advises the Courier-Journal’s Olivia Krauth.
“Know what critical race theory is, and what opponents think critical race theory is. Know what is being taught in your school district. Have links to previous coverage prepared if you’re live tweeting so you can fact-check in real time.”
IDENTIFY SOURCES CAREFULLY
As in the past, it’s important to know and share with readers the professional and organizational affiliations of the parents and teachers and community members you quote. In heightened situations like this, they may not be entirely who they say they are.
That’s what NBC reported based on a Media Matters research brief. People identified as parents were also “Republican strategists and lobbyists, staff of conservative think tanks, and media personalities.”
At the same time, be careful to avoid disqualifying parents based on their jobs, campaign contributions, or participation in various political groups. Identify the connections for readers, then move on.
CALM YOUR COVERAGE
In heightened situations like this, amping up the drama is unnecessary and often unhelpful. But that’s what too many stories do in situations like these.
Mainstream media “too often chases clicks and gossip over substance, turns minutiae into mountains,” wrote the Washington Post’s Margaret Sullivan just a few days ago (about journalism in general, not specific to this debate).
What’s the alternative? You could tell readers that roughly half the states have some sort of legislation or policy under discussion, but only eight states have taken steps to rein in real or perceived CRT practices in schools, according to the EdWeek tracker. You could point out that students are unlikely to be brainwashed by exposure to ideas that they read or hear about at school, or point to the well-documented inadequacies of many schools’ instruction around slavery.
Most of all, you could avoid the heightened tabloid language that’s so common to today’s news. Don’t be that reporter who suggests the sky is falling, everyone hates each other, and people can’t think for themselves. We’ll probably read your story — we can’t resist — but we’ll hate you a little bit, too.
Additional resources: The Journalist’s Resource at Harvard recently put out a tip sheet, including eight questions to help journalists unearth important details often missing from news coverage. CRT expert Gloria Ladson Billings kindly offered a list of questions reporters should ask. And a recent EWA panel on the topic was also helpful
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Alexander Russo
Alexander Russo is founder and editor of The Grade, an award-winning effort to help improve media coverage of education issues. He’s also a Spencer Education Journalism Fellowship winner and a book author. You can reach him at @alexanderrusso.
Visit their website at: https://the-grade.org/