Andrea Gabor is the Bloomberg Professor of Business Journalism at Baruch College, which is part of the City University of New York. Gabor has written insightful articles about education in the New York Times and at Bloomberg.com. She is the author of After the Education Wars: How Smart Schools Upend the Business of Education Reform.
The following is a summary of a chapter in her forthcoming book, MEDIA CAPTURE: HOW MONEY, DIGITAL PLATFORMS, AND GOVERNMENTS CONTROL THE NEWS, which will be published by Columbia University Press in June. She prepared this excerpt for this blog.
She writes:
For the past twenty years, American K-12 education has been on the receiving end of Big Philanthropy’s efforts to reengineer public schools based on free-market ideas, with foundation-funded private operators taking over large swaths of school districts in cities like Los Angeles and New Orleans.
Between 2000 and 2005 alone, three foundations—the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Walton Family Foundation and the Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation—quadrupled their spending on K–12 education to $400 million. By 2010, the top 15 foundations had spent $844 million on public education.
Moreover, these Big Philanthropies coordinated their spending, investing in what Harvard’s Jal Mehta and Johns Hopkins’s Steven Teles call “jurisdictional challengers”—efforts aimed atupending traditional educational institutions, in particular public schools and school boards. Instead, the foundations funded a range of private and public institutions, including charter-management organizations and alternative teacher-development institutions such as Teach for America, as well as school-board candidates who would back the philanthropists’ reform agenda and help break the “monopoly” of public-school districts.
Diane Ravitch and a slew of other academics, bloggers and writers have documented the growing influence of Big Philanthropy and its convergence with federal education policies, especially under Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama, creating what the political scientist Sarah Reckhow calls “a perfect storm.”
As part of its soup-to-nuts strategy designed to maximize the impact of its gifts and expand its influence, Big Philanthropy has expanded its reach to universities, think tanks, government institutions, and the news media.
My chapter, “Media Capture and the Corporate Education-Reform Philanthropies,” in Media Capture, explores the efforts of the Big Philanthropy to shape public opinion by ratcheting up its spending on advocacy and, in particular, by investing in local news organizations. The philanthropies have supported education coverage at a range of mainstream publications—investments that often helped promote the foundations’ education-reform agenda. In addition, they have founded publications specifically dedicated to selling their market-oriented approach to education.
For the news media, battered by internet companies such as Craigslist and Facebook, which have siphoned off advertising revenue, funding from philanthropies comes at an opportune time. Nor can private foundations be faulted for supporting the news media, especially given the rise of “alternative facts” and demagoguery during the Trump era. Foundation funding has long been important to a range of respected news organizations such as The New York Times and National Public Radio, as well as established education publications, such as Education Week.This is not to say that this funding has unleashed a spate of pro-reform coverage. Indeed, I have published essays critical of the education-reform philanthropies in many foundation-funded publications. However, logic suggests that publications desirous of repeat tranches of funding will at least moderate their critical coverage.
What is particularly troubling are the large contributions to local news organizations—many of them earmarked specifically for education coverage—by foundations that explicitly support the takeover of local schools and districts by private operators. My chapter explores how philanthropic support of news organizations—including new publications founded and run by education-reform advocates—is aimed at creating a receptive audience for the foundations’ education-reform agenda.
The Gates Foundation’s effort to influence local and national policy via the news media is a case in point.
The Gates Foundation alone devoted $1 billion in the decade from 2000 to 2010 to so-called policy and advocacy, a tenth of the foundation’s $3 billion-a-year spending, according to an investigation by The Seattle Times.
Although much of that money went to analyze policy questions—such as the efficacy of vaccine-funding strategies—“the ‘advocacy’ side of the equation is essentially public relations: an attempt to influence decision-makers and sway public opinion.”
In 2011, The Seattle Times published an exhaustive article about its leading hometown philanthropic organization and asked: “Does Gates funding of media taint objectivity?” (At the time, the Gates Foundation also was bankrolling a slew of education policies, including the common core, and building political support for “one of the swiftest and most remarkable shifts in education policy in U.S. history.”)
The Seattle Times showed how the Gates Foundation funding goes far beyond providing general support for cash-strapped news organizations:
“To garner attention for the issues it cares about, the foundation has invested millions in training programs for journalists. It funds research on the most effective ways to craft media messages. Gates-backed think tanks turn out media fact sheets and newspaper opinion pieces. Magazines and scientific journals get Gates money to publish research and articles. Experts coached in Gates-funded programs write columns that appear in media outlets from The New York Times to The Huffington Post, while digital portals blur the line between journalism and spin.”
Indeed, Gates usually “stipulates” that its funding be used for reporting on issues the philanthropy supports—whether curing diseases such as HIV or improving U.S. education. And although Gates does not appear to dictate specific stories, the Seattle Times noted: “Few of the news organizations that get Gates money have produced any critical coverage of foundation programs.”
The Seattle Times story was written before the newspaper accepted a $530,000 grant, in 2013, the bulk of it from the Gates Foundation, to launch the Education Lab. The paper described the venture as “a partnership between The Seattle Times and Solutions Journalism Network” that will explore “promising programs and innovations inside early-education programs, K–12 schools and colleges that are addressing some of the biggest challenges facing public education.” The Gates Foundation contributed $450,000, with the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation funding the rest.
In a blog post, the newspaper addressed the potential conflict of interest posed by the grant: “The Seattle Times would neither seek nor accept a grant that did not give us full editorial control over what is published. Generally, when a grant is made, there is agreement on a specific project or a broad area of reporting it will support.” The newspaper earmarked its funding for so-called “solutions journalism.”
It may be laudable for a publication to focus on “solutions” to societal problems. But almost by definition, a mission that effectively targets “success stories” diminishes journalism’s vital watchdog role.
Then too, Gates’s influence extends well beyond Seattle. The Associated Press documented the Gates foundation’s soup-to-nuts effort, in 2015, to influence education policy in Tennessee.
“In Tennessee, a Gates-funded advocacy group had a say in the state’s new education plan, with its leader sitting on an important advising committee. A media outlet given money by Gates to cover the new law then published a story about research funded by Gates. And many Gates-funded groups have become the de facto experts who lead the conversation in local communities. Gates also dedicated millions of dollars to protect Common Core as the new law unfolded.”
Meanwhile, the same year in Los Angeles, fellow philanthropist,Eli Broad, identified Gates as a key potential investor in his $490 million plan to dramatically grow the city’s charter-school sector. The plan included a six-year $21.4 million “investment” in “organizing and advocacy,” including “engaging the media”and “strategic messaging.” (The charter-expansion plan itself followed an $800,000 investment by a Broad-led group of philanthropists to fund an initiative at The Los Angeles Times to expand the paper’s coverage of K–12 education.) In 2016, Gates invested close to $25 million in Broad’s charter-expansion plan.
The Gates Foundation also served as a junior partner in one of the most audacious, coordinated efforts by Big Philanthropy to influence coverage of the education-reform story—the establishment, in 2015, of The 74 Million, which has become the house organ of the education-reform movement. The 74 has been a reliable voice in favor of the charter-school movement, and against teachers’ unions. In 2016, it published The Founders, a hagiography of the education-reform movement. And it has served as a Greek chorus of praise for the education reforms in New Orleans, the nation’s first all-charter district, while ignoring the experiment’s considerable failings.
Key contributors to the publication, which boasts a $4 million-annual budget, were the Walton Foundation, Bloomberg Philanthropies, the Carnegie Foundation, and the Dick and Betsy DeVos Family Foundation. Soon after it’s founding, The 74 acquired a local education publication, the L.A. School Report, which itself had been heavily funded by Broad. In 2016, Gatescontributed, albeit a relatively modest $26,000, to The 74.
.
Billionaires have their thumb on the scale of democracy as well as free and independent press. Considering the vast amount of waste, fraud, embezzling that exists in charter schools, it is shocking how little attention it gets from the mainstream media. NPE is the only legitimate organization that has attempted to investigate and quantify the amount of money that has been misused by the charter school industry.
While billionaires continue to sink more money to forward the privatization agenda, they see education as a more than seven billionaire dollar market of opportunity for them to access. They also see an opportunity to reduce their tax burden. They do not care about other people’s children, They know their children will continue to get the best education possible in high priced private schools.
In think you meant “more than seven hundred billion dollar market”, but more than seven billionaire market also works.
The billionaires want to corner the education market.
“free and independent press.”
The who and the what? We’re clearly talking about different people here.
Charter schools are just one of the favorite ways politicians launder taxpayer dollars back into their own pockets.
That thought also crossed my mind. I considered the money laundering analogy in reference to CMOs. Although the money is technically clean, without any accountability, who knows where the money winds up? A lot of the “profit” could be funneled into an offshore account, and the public would have no record of it.
It’s like the carwash in Breaking Bad. The whole point of charters and vouchers is the same — to wipe the traces of public accountability from taxpayer dollars.
And the charters make their money dealing crystal math.
And hide behind fronts like Los Charteros Successos
The only thing the charters lack is the “charter RV”.
Or maybe I’m mistaken and one does exist.
I guess that would prolly be CharteRV (TM)
Would make for a quick getaway.
CharteRV
Here today
But not in year
CharteRV
Will disappear
And the pest control front would be perfect.
The charters would not even have to pretend.
what hedge fund managers know well
“these Big Philanthropies coordinated their spending, investing in what Harvard’s Jal Mehta and Johns Hopkins’s Steven Teles call “jurisdictional challengers”
They forgot to mention the funding of University professors and departments .
For example, professors within Harvard’s Education department (of which Mehta is a member) and Harvard’s econ department.
Harvard has been neck deep in Deform but it’s probably too much to ask for professors to critique their own colleague, departments and even institutions.
Institutions like Harvard have played the critical role of lending “scientific” (cough cough) credibility to the whole deform operation, so it’s no accident that they have received money from the billionaires behind it.
Anyone who believes this has anything to do with real science and scholarship is simply fooling him or herself.
AJal Mehta on teachers
“With respect to human capital, we need to take seriously the entire pipeline: attracting, selecting, training, and retaining our next generation of teachers. The current focus on teacher evaluation serves only to sort our existing teachers. … we will not make progress in the long run without a strategy that addresses all aspects of the pipeline.”
Billyanthropists talk about educational “investments”, but
calling teachers “human capital” is just one more example of the “education as a business” model.
It’s completely wrong headed.
Sure am glad ole Bill is interested un us down here in little Tennessee. Makes me feel important. If he ever gits down thisaway, I will kiss the ring like a possum eats catfood.
My childhood cat had a possum friend. She would stand at the back door at night and howl to be let out to play with her friend.
My childhood possum had a raccoon friend.
And both would get together to visit my neighbor’s grizzly bear.
Hope you’re doing well, Diane.
Buying media coverage is also a thing in Dallas. The Dallas Morning News welcomed the contributions of a bunch of deformers they shill for free and then pretend there is a Chinese wall between the deformers and the paper circling the drain from lack of insightful coverage. Education content is no better or worse than before; that is, just as insipid and inaccurate as before.
Here is something to put a big smile on your face when you’re ready to read this, Diane. Breaking news: 2021 state testing for grades 3-8 is cancelled in Los Angeles Unified! There will be no SBAC destruction in the second largest school district. Take that and place it ever sooo gently where the sun doesn’t shine, Racist Bill Gates and Racist Billionaire Boys and Girls! I will be teaching instead of wasting time this May. Yes!
Huge thanks to everyone here, to all the national and state affiliates of my great teachers union, and to UTLA for all the hard work that went into making this happen. Keep up the fight. End testing forever!
They buy our elections. They buy our universities. They buy our press. They have all the money. We have the numbers. When we act collectively, we have the power.
I wish NYS would follow LA’s example. My state asked for an exemption from this year’s assessments from the federal government and were denied. At least the exams are only one day each.
The justification is they want to determine how far behind the students are after this “Covid” year. Ironically, the students who are fully remote won’t be included in the testing. That leaves one to ask about the relevancy of the results (not that they were ever relevant).
Good news is that in many school districts in NYS, parents have to “opt in” if they want their kids to participate. It’s a start.
Look on the bright side.
Andrew Cuomo’s days are numbered.
While I’m not a member of the Cuomo booster club, I’m also not part of the get rid of Cuomo fan base. He’s been a strong leader, even though there have been some gaffs and I don’t always agree with his policies/tactics.
flos56, my fear (my conviction, unfortunately) is that what comes after Cuomo is will be worse.
The California State Board of Education made it possible because the Biden administration made it possible for the California SBE to give districts low stakes options. There were options provided at all levels. There are options available at all levels in many places.
Just like New York’s Opt-In, Los Angeles’ new digs are great, but not perfect. The district is going to have to give its own uniform test. The district tests are business products. There are plenty of issues related. Still, I can’t help but do a little dance. The SBAC state tests are meaningless and cumbersome in-person. They are a terrible, cruel joke online.
The district tests take minutes instead of hours and don’t require ridiculous numbers of test security ceremonies. That’s the very good side. Huge good side.
What kind of anchor baby is trying to portray gates as racist? Link it.
Also, good news from Oakland. SBAC has been canceled as well.
And what will they say down the road if the education system wakes up and rejects all these Gates’ led educational policies?
Oops!
The demagoguery of trump you mean? You tried to imprach the guy for everything you elected tge next guy FOR ffs. How long do you expect you can confuse all these turd lickers?
Im concerned about all these anti-gates rhetorical puke comments. What good does it do to bring down your own nation’s successes? Gates is far less involved in media than google twitter facebook. Msn is minor compared to the rest of this british loyalist trash that sell you out on a daily basis. Everything you ever uploaded to facebook is sold to enemies of the state. What do these slime have on you? What kind of honey trap are you in? All i got to say, slime as dumb or partisan as yall shouldnt be teaching how to tie shoes let alone k-12.
Your trolling stinks. And you’re uninteresting and demonstrably uninformed. Stop embarrassing yourself. I think Breitbart is more your speed. .
Thanks, Callisto.
So grateful to Diane for posting this. A small correction: this one chapter is by me, but the book is edited by Anya Schiffrin, with chapters on media capture by several other excellent authors. My chapter is called Media Capture and the Corporate Education-Reform Philanthropies. Here’s a link to the book: https://www.amazon.com/Media-Capture-Digital-Platforms-Governments/dp/0231188838
My last decade or so in Charlotte, NC was awash in Gates initiatives from the Small Schools effort to pay for performance schemes with teachers and administrators. I was on the committee of principals charged to develop the plan going forward. In working with Gates Foundation staff it struck me how truly clueless they were about the public schools in every aspect from culture to poverty to funding. A torturous adventure in futility. The low tax high entitlement perspective of the 1% continues to put up profound barriers for public education.
Fascinating. That is a book I must buy. Thank you very much for the heads-up.