Funding Media, Strengthening Democracy: Grantmaking for the 21st Century

Despite the pervasiveness of media, the amount of philanthropic dollars in support of public interest media remains minuscule and, therefore largely ineffective. The report, based on a survey of the the funding sector, calls on philanthropists to embrace a practice of transparency and information sharing via technology, to determine how existing funds are being used and how they can best be leveraged to increase philanthropic impact within the media field

Higher Education Exchange: 2009

This annual publication serves as a forum for new ideas and dialogue between scholars and the larger public. Essays explore ways that students, administrators, and faculty can initiate and sustain an ongoing conversation about the public life they share.The Higher Education Exchange is founded on a thought articulated by Thomas Jefferson in 1820: "I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education."In the tradition of Jefferson, the Higher Education Exchange agrees that a central goal of higher education is to help make democracy possible by preparing citizens for public life. The Higher Education Exchange is part of a movement to strengthen higher education's democratic mission and foster a more democratic culture throughout American society.Working in this tradition, the Higher Education Exchange publishes interviews, case studies, analyses, news, and ideas about efforts within higher education to develop more democratic societies

Internet Information and Communication Behavior during a Political Moment: The Iraq War, March 2003

This article explores the Internet as a resource for political information and communication in March 2003, when American troops were first sent to Iraq, offering us a unique setting of political context, information use, and technology. Employing a national survey conducted by the Pew Internet & American Life project. We examine the political information behavior of the Internet respondents through an exploratory factor analysis; analyze the effects of personal demographic attributes and political attitudes, traditional and new media use, and technology on online behavior through multiple regression analysis; and assess the online political information and communication behavior of supporters and dissenters of the Iraq War. The factor analysis suggests four factors: activism, support, information seeking, and communication. The regression analysis indicates that gender, political attitudes and beliefs, motivation, traditional media consumption, perceptions of bias in the media, and computer experience and use predict online political information behavior, although the effects of these variables differ for the four factors. The information and communication behavior of supporters and dissenters of the Iraq War differed significantly. We conclude with a brief discussion of the value of "interdisciplinary poaching" for advancing the study of Internet information practices

Digital Democracy: Episode IV—A New Hope*: How a Corporation for Public Software Could Transform Digital Engagement for Government and Civil Society

Although successive generations of digital technology have become increasingly powerful in the past 20 years, digital democracy has yet to realize its potential for deliberative transformation. The undemocratic exploitation of massive social media systems continued this trend, but it only worsened an existing problem of modern democracies, which were already struggling to develop deliberative infrastructure independent of digital technologies. There have been many creative conceptions of civic tech, but implementation has lagged behind innovation. This article argues for implementing one such vision of digital democracy through the establishment of a public corporation. Modeled on the Corporation for Public Broadcasting in the United States, this entity would foster the creation of new digital technology by providing a stable source of funding to nonprofit technologists, interest groups, civic organizations, government, researchers, private companies, and the public. Funded entities would produce and maintain software infrastructure for public benefit. The concluding sections identify what circumstances might create and sustain such an entity

Moving Forward on Racial Justice Philanthropy

This is the fifth volume of the Critical Issues Forum series, which aims to deepen the discourse around important progressive racial justice issues within philanthropy. As PRE celebrated our 10th anniversary last year and engaged allies within the nonprofit and philanthropic sectors to mark the occasion with us, we heard "Have you seen any progress?" repeatedly and knew it was important to take stock of what many of us have been collectively aiming to move for decades. Through focus groups, webinars and direct interviews, our team has sought to get a strong sense of both funders' and activists' perspectives on progress particularly over the past two decades. We have heard real frustration, especially as the needs are so critical and the level of urgency among activists and communities is so high. However, in spite of these very real concerns, we have also seen clear commitment and depth of understanding in other quarters. We are pleased that through funder case studies and activist essays about structural racism analysis, intersectionality and media justice, we're able to share real progress, even as each piece recognizes there is still much more to be done

Government By and For Millenial America: A Blueprint for 21st Century Government

Using this generation's unique ethos and commitment to pragmatic problem-solving, Millennials across the country have collaborated to design their vision for a 21st century democracy and reject the idea that our system is too broken, too stagnant, and too outdated. They have identified the parts of the system that need to be fixed while articulating what a true democracy should look like. Government By and For Millennial America, the third installment of our blueprint series, tackles some of the most fundamental, divisive, and difficult questions on the purpose of government in furthering our country's progress: how can we hear from more voices? How can we be more transparent? How can government be more egalitarian? How can we both support individual communities and the common good of every American? Most importantly, this pursuit is grounded in one fundamental idea that defines America's distinctive pursuit of self-governance: in the words of our namesake, Let us never forget that government is ourselves and not an alien power over us. The ultimate rulers of our democracy are not a President and senators and congressmen and government officials, but the voters of this country. - President Franklin D. Roosevelt We set out to craft a blueprint, and discovered, in conversations with over a thousand young people across the country, that the Millennial generation is not yet ready to give up on America's ever evolving experiment in a government by and for the people

Proceedings From the First Annual Researcher/Practitioner Forum: The State of Research on Diversity in Philanthropy

This report summarizes the discussions that took place at the first annual Researcher/Practitioner Forum which was held on September 27 and 28, 2007 at El Pomar Foundation's Penrose House conference facilities in Colorado Springs, CO. The Forum was co-sponsored by the Council on Foundations, ARNOVA and the Foundation Center and was made possible by a grant from the Lumina Foundation. The first annual Researcher/Practitioner Forum brought together 25 researchers and foundation representatives to discuss the state of research on diversity in philanthropy

Higher Education Collaboratives for Community Engagement and Improvement

Our society is in a period of dramatic change with the transition from an industrial-based to a knowledge-based economy, as well as technological advances, fiscal challenges of higher education, and cultural shifts in society as a whole. Increasing collaborations between communities and universities in order to influence the public good becomes paramount during this time of dramatic change. As frustratingly slow as the movement to strengthen the relationship between higher education and society sometimes seems to be, few social institutions are better situated than colleges and universities to stimulate significant community improvement. Individually and collectively, institutions of higher education possess considerable resources—human, fiscal, organizational, and intellectual— which are critical to addressing significant social issues. Additionally, these institutions are physically rooted in their communities. Therefore, investing in the betterment of their immediate environments is good for both the community and the institution. However, it is recognized that higher education institutions often fall short of making a real impact in their home communities. Therefore, a conference was convened to examine the current and evolving role of higher education institutions, particularly those operating within the context of coalitions, consortia and state systems, to catalyze change on issues affecting communities and society as a whole. Specifically, the focus of the conference was to develop and strengthen an understanding of how higher education might work more effectively with communities and we believe that consortia or collaboratives of higher education institutions, along with community partners, can learn from one another. Cooperation between efforts is important. The papers offered in this monograph are the result of the Wingspread Conference on Higher Education Collaboratives for Community Engagement and Improvement, conducted on October 27-29, 2004, in Racine, Wisconsin. The conference, the second of a three-part series, was sponsored by the National Forum on Higher Education for the Public Good at the University of Michigan School of Education, the Johnson Foundation, Atlantic Philanthropies, and the W.K. Kellogg Foundation. The first conference in the series held in October 2003 and titled Public Understanding, Public Support and Public Policy focused on higher education’s role in society and the concluding conference will be held in the fall of 2005

The FairShares Model: a communitarian pluralist approach to constituting social enterprises?

Objectives - This paper is an exploration of the intellectual antecedents and philosophical assumptions that underpin the FairShares Model - a set of brand principles and Articles of Association published by the FairShares Association. It contributes to knowledge of the history of the social enterprise movement and its link to contemporary developments in mutual social enterprises. Prior Work - Previous contributions to the literature on social economy have drawn on communitarian philosophy to develop insights into mutual principles. This paper sets out a theoretical framework to evaluate whether the FairShares Model represents a communitarian pluralist discourse on the constitution of social enterprises. Approach - In January 2013, the FairShares Association published guidance on the FairShares 'brand' and 'model' (drawing on work presented at ISBE) to develop the concept of a ‘socialised’ enterprise . The framework developed from prior work is used to assess which aspects of communitarian philosophy are emphasized in both antecedent model rules (identified by the FairShares Association) as well as the FairShares Model (v1.2a). Results - The FairShares Model is theorised as a predominantly communitarian pluralist discourse with some ‘corporatist’ commitments. It represents an evolving set of guidelines for the ‘socialisation’ of enterprise by devising membership rights for two primary stakeholders (labour, users), and two secondary stakeholders (founders, investors). It is designed to reverse the centralising and accumulating tendencies of the private sector without returning assets to state control. It differs from philanthropic models by offering co-operative (par value) shares to three member classes: founders, labour and users, and (ordinary) ‘investor’ shares to all classes of member. Implications - The FairShares Model contributes to knowledge on the 'socialisation' of enterprise by identifying core characteristics of member-owned enterprises that deploy strategies for multi stakeholder ownership, governance and management. Value – By operationalising a communitarian pluralist discourse in the process of constituting a social enterprise, the FairShares Model offers an alternative to private sector models based on the subordination of labour and mutual models based on the primacy of a single stakeholder group

Democratic Enterprise : Ethical Business for the 21st Century

Published with the support of the Scottish Government and the Economic and Social Research CouncilPublisher PD