A free email with news, trends, and opinion articles about the nonprofit world, as well as links to our tools, resources, and webinars. Delivered every weekday. Philanthropy Today subscribers also get a bonus weekly email called Philanthropy Today — The Commons, about how America’s nonprofits and foundations are working to heal the nation’s divides.
From: The Chronicle of Philanthropy
Subject: Grant Maker Bolsters Human Connection as a Way to Take on Polarization
We are unable to fully display the content of this page.
The most likely cause of this is a content blocker on your computer or network.
Please allow access to our site, and then refresh this page. You may then be asked to log in, create an account if you don't already have one, or subscribe.
If you continue to experience issues, please contact us at 571-540-8070 or cophelp@philanthropy.com
A conservation nonprofit in Massachusetts suggested it could fell hundreds of thousands of trees on nearly 10,000 acres of protected forest in a bid to take part in California’s carbon-offset program. The Massachusetts Audubon Society made the claim to California regulators in order to be awarded carbon credits for saving the trees. Then it sold those credits for about $6 million to polluters in California who wanted to exceed their emissions quotas. Critics of such deals say they are not a net benefit to the climate because they “save” trees that were never in danger while allowing excess emissions. California regulators say they cannot “read the mind” of an applicant to divine that person’s intentions and point out that a court has upheld their approach. A Mass Audubon scientist said the group is confident the program “provides a net carbon benefit to the atmosphere.” (ProPublica and MIT Technology Review)
Years of staff churn, frustration, and ethical quandaries at the nonprofit Appeal newsroom have coalesced into a call to unionize, followed swiftly by layoffs. In addition to allegations of bullying and unrealistic performance goals, current and former staffers at the organization, which covers the criminal-justice system, say they negotiated uncertain boundaries between the newsroom and its partner organization, the Justice Collaborative. Editors have stressed the Appeal’s editorial autonomy, but they have blurred the lines between journalism and advocacy, the employees say. Earlier this year, the Appeal and the Justice Collaborative merged. (Daily Beast)
As business leaders try to steer their companies through this polarized era, Patagonia’s tradition of open advocacy has worked well for it. The outerwear retailer has for decades embraced progressive causes, weathering periodic boycotts and harassment by its critics. But Patagonia executives say boycotts have little impact on its bottom line because most threats do not materialize and because many who claim to be aggrieved customers do not shop there anyway. Other companies that have embraced causes, including Ben & Jerry’s and Nike — which “blew through sales projections” in the same quarter that it featured Colin Kaepernick in an ad — say much the same. “Trying to thread a mushy middle and create something that’s inoffensive to everyone is a recipe for disaster,” said Chris Miller, who directs global activism strategy for Ben & Jerry’s. (Los Angeles Times)
Religion News
The Arts
