May 15, 2025 • 22 mins
Today's special guest is Dedrick Asante-Muhammad , President of the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies. He joins Hosts Ramses Ja and Q Ward to discuss some of the critical issues impacting the Black Community that the Joint Center is working to address.
Part 1 of 2
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
The Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, America's black
think tank, provides compelling and actionable policy solutions to eradicate
persistent and evolving barriers to the full freedom of black
people in America. They are the trusted form for leading
experts and scholars to participate in major public policy debates
and promote ideas that advance black communities. They use evidence
(00:22):
based research, analysis, convenings, and strategic communications to support black
communities and a network of allies. The president of the
Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies is Diedrich Asanti Mohammad.
For the past twenty years, Asanti Mohammed has dedicated his
career to understanding and tackling racial and economic inequalities, and
he is our guest today. This is the Black Information
(00:46):
Network Daily Podcast. Now I'm your host, Ramsay's job. All right,
mister Asante Mohammad, Welcome to the show. We've been looking
forward to having this conversation.
Speaker 2 (00:56):
How are you doing today?
Speaker 3 (00:57):
I'm doing well. Thanks for having me.
Speaker 2 (00:59):
Absolutely pleasure to have you on.
Speaker 1 (01:01):
So for folks that don't know, obviously we gave you
a little bit of an introduction, but you know, for
folks that don't know, tell us a little bit about yourself,
just so folks know who we're talking to today. Maybe
a little bit about you know, your background, where you
grew up, and what led you to the position you
currently hold.
Speaker 3 (01:16):
Sure, I grew up in Maryland, Columbia, Maryland and actually
reside there now, you know, went to school in Massachusetts.
Lived a good part of my life in New York
as well. I was born in New York and at
a good part of my adult life in New York.
Speaker 4 (01:31):
I've been focused on racial economic issues, racial wealth divide
for say the last twenty years, worked at various organizations,
worked with the Reverend Sharpton I was living in New
York and his National Action Network, helping to make it
more of a national organization than New York focused organization.
Went on to eventually work at the NAACP, heading up
(01:51):
there National Economic Department, worked at think tank, Institute for
Policy Studies, and other organizations National Community Investment Coalition, Prosperity Now.
Then about a year ago I came over to Joint
Center for Political Economic Studies that has been in existence
for about fifty five years now, the first and still
(02:12):
leading black think tank in the country focused on developing
policy solutions to eradicating barriers of press barriers to progress
for African Americans.
Speaker 1 (02:24):
So let's go into that a little bit more, because
for folks who are unfamiliar with the organization, and of course,
beyond our introduction and beyond you know, what you've stated
just now, let's talk about like the work that the
Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies does, Like the
actual day to day how does that look.
Speaker 4 (02:44):
Yeah, let me just briefly say, you know, it's really
changed over time. Okay, in nineteen seventy when we were created,
you know, this is only five years after the Voting
Rights Act. I think there are only a few hundred
elected of black elected official across the country. You know
that increase around fifteen hundred into today we have over
(03:05):
ten thousand black elected officials across the country. And our
first ten years we focus a lot of people think,
you know, you just elect someone and they go into
the office and then they just you know, start to
advocating for their communities. But there's really, particularly at the
federal level, but actually at all levels, a policy infrastructure
that needs to be in place for elected officials to
(03:25):
do their jobs properly. And for we really spent our
first ten years serving black elected officials, particular at the
congressional level, helping them understand how Congress actually works, Helping
to create associations like the National Association for Black Journalists,
the National Association for Black Mayors, the National Association for
(03:46):
Black State Legislators, Helping to create institutions that could support
these newly elected black officials happening across the country.
Speaker 3 (03:54):
Even produced for.
Speaker 4 (03:55):
Decades the book that had listed all the black elected
officials across the country so black collective officials can learn
from each other.
Speaker 3 (04:03):
I'd say about nineteen.
Speaker 4 (04:04):
Eighty onward, we made that shift to becoming more of
a traditional.
Speaker 3 (04:08):
Think tank where you are.
Speaker 4 (04:10):
Developing policy analysis, highlighting policies that are then you share
with elected officials, their staff, with nonprofits, with civil rights
groups to help them as they're either trying to enact
legislation or advocate for particular legislation. And that's really the
area that Joint Center has continue to focus on.
Speaker 3 (04:32):
We have four primary issue areas.
Speaker 4 (04:35):
We have tax and wealth, and there's a lot happening
on the tax policy and wealth policy fronts now as
we're talking about tax cutting, job acts, we have technology,
which is a BIEP we're going to get into more
in depth today. We have workforce development, and then we
have government diversity, particularly the importance of having black staff
(04:57):
at high levels all throughout government. So those are the
four main areas we're focused on today.
Speaker 2 (05:03):
Okay, yeah, that makes a lot of sense.
Speaker 1 (05:05):
And you know, I see why those have been like
the areas of focus because especially with the we'll call
it the implementation and then the uh, how would I
the rolling back of diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives in
(05:26):
the past, call it five years across the country. I
think that many people learned that, you know, having black
voices at the table certainly helps shape shape outcomes for
the better for everyone, and some people they are still
(05:46):
probably needing to learn that lesson, and this is why
we're seeing some of the rollbacks.
Speaker 2 (05:50):
And so at least politically speaking, it's good.
Speaker 1 (05:52):
To know that there's an organization that's kind of ensuring
that we're having that conversation and that people that are
in a position to actually lead have the resources that
they need. No man is an island, as the saying goes,
and so helping with policy, coming up with the language
and you know, helping get things accomplished and your guard.
Speaker 4 (06:15):
You know, we need institutions that are regularly promoting black
voices right back.
Speaker 3 (06:21):
Aren't just heard by themselves. You need institution to support that.
And just one thing I'll note.
Speaker 4 (06:25):
You're talked about how DEI has kind of been pushed
back for say, the last five years. It's interesting it
was really about five years ago that DEI became greatly
embraced with the murder George. But what that shows is
how little time there was of this corporate embrace of diversity,
equity inclusion. You know, I've been writing about racial wealth
(06:47):
divide for twenty years. I used to tell people my
first ten years, if there was an article on the
racial wealths gap, I knew the author.
Speaker 3 (06:54):
There's so few people doing it.
Speaker 4 (06:55):
But then you know, post twenty twenty, all organizations are
having racilal im going to quality, racial wealth gap, diversity
equity inclusion. But that last of like maybe three years before,
there was a pushback, you know, and now we're kind
of at hopefully what is a height of a pushback.
And I think the saddest thing about it, it's a
pushback and it's not even we're not even clear how
(07:18):
much we move forward with diversity, the equity and inclusion
policies because they had such limited time to be enacted
and to learn about them before there was a regression
in trying to destroy these policy initiatives.
Speaker 1 (07:31):
Yeah, and it's funny, and I don't want to, you know,
get too far into the weeds here because I know
we're here to talk about something else. But rarely do
we have an opportunity to have a conversation with someone
who literally does the work, the actual work, and someone
who's so well informed. But you bring up an interesting
point in one that you know, we've kind of talked around.
Speaker 2 (07:50):
I suppose on the show before.
Speaker 1 (07:55):
Racism had hundreds of years in the sun to be
well entrenched into the country, into the to the fabric
the DNA of the country.
Speaker 3 (08:01):
Right.
Speaker 1 (08:02):
Additionally, you know, you bring up an excellent point that
you know, in terms of like a bona fide diversity,
equity and inclusion campaign in terms of economics, not in
terms of academics, not in terms.
Speaker 2 (08:19):
Of you know, you know, other things.
Speaker 1 (08:20):
Because there was affirmative action, and to be fair that
that was kind of the order of the day, but
the good faith DEI initiatives, you know, to your point,
were more fully embraced around twenty twenty one. Yeah, yeah,
after the death of George Floyd and the summer that followed,
(08:41):
and so you know, there's there's this interesting conversation that
again that we've kind of talked around on the show before.
Speaker 2 (08:51):
Where.
Speaker 1 (08:53):
An idea that's based in empathy, it's based in healing,
it's based in you know, bridging communities, it's based in
remedying past injustices and so forth, should not be required
to be perfect day one. It should have an opportunity
to have its growing pains and you know, have the
(09:16):
better aspects of it fleshed out and the ineffective aspects
revised right, And that takes time and in many instances
trial and error. And you know, we've seen this time
and again where if a plan is not one hundred
percent effective or it doesn't appease everyone all at once
(09:41):
in the beginning, then it's vulnerable to attacks by what
we've considered to be bonafide racist factions of this country
who just don't want to see any progress. Because again,
if you and I have a conversation and we say,
is it good for human beings? Most sapient sapiens to
(10:01):
incorporate diversity into their their practice, the economic practice, or
otherwise equitable treatment of each other and inclusivity.
Speaker 2 (10:14):
We would as human beings.
Speaker 1 (10:16):
Say, yes, this makes perfect sense, and to have it
be rebranded as DEI and then weaponized, and then for
people that do have some semblance of an argument to
take the aspects of it that.
Speaker 2 (10:30):
Could still use some refinement, you know, like.
Speaker 1 (10:33):
Like I have to forgive me, but I have to
understand what ultra conservatives, far right conservatives take issue with
with a lot of these policies, and so we have
to research and I'm sure the same is true for
you to find out what their arguments are based on.
It seems they all seem like bad faith arguments to me.
(10:56):
But to be fair, I have to be able to
address those if they come up in conversation, and so
I have to almost give the the arguments credibility. And
the fact is is that ultimately, at the end of
the day, it ends up being the case that if
there were time to refine these things, if there were
time to get data, collect data, and then adjust accordingly,
(11:16):
then we ultimately could end up with diversity, equity and
inclusivity that does affect.
Speaker 2 (11:22):
Everyone and brings up the tide and lifts all the boats.
Speaker 1 (11:26):
And so your point about it only having really more
like three years in the sun is well made, and
I just wanted to make sure that that was better
fleshed out because I've actually kind of been wrapping my
head around this as well.
Speaker 4 (11:38):
And I think too, you know, I think diversity, equity
inclusion it's always been. It's more of an approach in
particular subjects, right, And with that it can also become
a buzzword on the positive side and on the negative side, right.
And I think generally in politics, diversity and equity inclusion,
for those who like it is whatever aspects they like,
and for those who oppose it, whatever aspects.
Speaker 3 (12:01):
They don't like. Right.
Speaker 4 (12:02):
Absolutely, At Joint Center, we're really trying to focus on
quantitative metrics of inequality and what do you call it
DEI whether you call it anti discrimination, whether you call
it affirmative action, we're just trying to bridge this inequality
that we know is you know, causing serious divides in society,
(12:24):
serious challenges.
Speaker 3 (12:26):
For these particular communities.
Speaker 4 (12:27):
And so whatever you want to call the programs, you know,
the reality is that there's a massive income and equalities still.
Speaker 3 (12:33):
Between African Americans and White Americans.
Speaker 4 (12:35):
Wealth and equality still, employment disparities, and the question is
how are we going to address those issues? Knowing that
has been rooted in discriminatory behavior and the history of
white supremacy that we're still struggling to overcome in this country.
Speaker 2 (12:50):
Yeah, Hey, what's up?
Speaker 5 (12:52):
This is Ramsy's job and I am q Ward and
we're inviting you to subscribe to CIVI Excipher.
Speaker 2 (12:57):
Are we the social justice podcast right here in the app.
Speaker 6 (13:00):
We pride ourselves on creating a show that busters allyship
empathy and understanding, all the while conducting journalistically credible research
featuring influential, noteworthy yests and empowering historically marginalized communities.
Speaker 5 (13:11):
The African proverb breeds, if you want to go far,
go together. So we are asking you to search for
and subscribe to CIBY cipher.
Speaker 2 (13:18):
That civ I c cip h e R right here
in the app.
Speaker 1 (13:25):
We are here today with the President of the Joint
Center for Political and Economic Studies, Diedrich.
Speaker 2 (13:30):
Asante Mohammad Well.
Speaker 1 (13:36):
I would love to ask how the fight, the nature,
the approach to accomplishing all that has changed in the
past five months i'd call it, but really the past
three months since Donald Trump has kind of been signing
(13:56):
all these executive orders. But that's not on my list.
But you know, we're here, so you know has talked
to us about how things have shifted. How does that
fight continue now?
Speaker 4 (14:05):
I'll say that in some ways it hasn't shifted that
much for the Joint Center right now, and that like
I am a new president, I've only been president for
about a year, bringing the new staff. We're really working
on strengthening our fundamentals, strengthening our team, our coalitions, solidifying
our historic relations with institutions like the Congressional Black Caucus
(14:28):
and the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation, and historic civil rights
organizations and other think tanks. So we needed to have
that focus regardless of who won the election in November
twenty twenty four. I think you know what it does
allow us is that the Trump administration is an administration
not full of kind of of figures that have been
(14:53):
in government for long periods of time where there's really
clear relations with the Joint Center. So we haven't been
pulled in to the Executive Office like we were more
so with the body administration, so it's allowed us to
focus much more in on our nuts and bolts.
Speaker 3 (15:09):
We knew, regardless of who's going to.
Speaker 4 (15:10):
Be elected that the tax cuts and job acts that's
really going to define tax policy for the next ten years.
What's going to be a major issue coming up, as
is the budget, and so we are still you know,
focused on those areas and trying to do education.
Speaker 3 (15:24):
But in many ways, you.
Speaker 4 (15:25):
Know, I think what has surprises of a bit is
we didn't expect over one hundred and forty executive orders
to be put forward in the first one hundred days,
or the conversations about the Department of Education, you know,
being almost eradicated, and of diversit inequity inclusion offices that
we had helped us support and helped fight for we're
(15:47):
being dismantled. So you know, we are having to deal
with having less of an infrastructure within government to utilize
to advance our ideas and policies.
Speaker 3 (15:58):
But the nuts and bolts work of.
Speaker 4 (16:02):
Our foundational work we were going to do in twenty
twenty five and we still need to do it, and
they're just maybe more to react and respond to.
Speaker 2 (16:09):
Gotcha, gotcha? Okay? All right, so let's shift gears here.
Speaker 1 (16:13):
You know, I came about this when I was kind
of doing a little bit of homework here. Talk to
us about Section two thirty of the Communications Decency Act
and what we need to be aware of.
Speaker 4 (16:25):
Sure, well, you know, the Communications Decency Act is legislation
that came out in nineteen ninety six, part of the
Telecommunications Act in nineteen ninety six. You know, you think
about all the way back then in the nineties. It's
really trying to help understand how do you regulate this
new online content and checking the focus around obscenity and
decency and how.
Speaker 3 (16:44):
To protect minors.
Speaker 4 (16:45):
Right, So it's just kind of big, comprehensive legislation as
the Internet is really growing and building, and you know,
social media is at its infasy. And there is a
section called section two thirty which grants online platforms immunity
from liability, meaning that if someone says that we never
(17:09):
landed on the moon in a Facebook post, is Facebook
liable for that piece of information?
Speaker 3 (17:17):
Right?
Speaker 4 (17:18):
Dark If someone slanders someone in a post, is that
platform liable for what that person posted? And the you know,
it was put forward that in general platforms aren't held
responsible for what people post on their platforms, right, they
are not. It is not a newspaper that could be
(17:38):
held liable if they put out an article on these things.
It's more of a hosting mechanism. And you know, there's
great conversation now as to how we are performing and
addressing section two thirty with all of this. You know,
this was almost thirty years ago. Today people always are
(17:59):
talking about misinformation and and and how and you know,
and actually social media and platforms being the primary spaces
that people are getting their information. Well, what type of
regulations should we be revisiting this section two thirty and
how that affects news intake and even kind of understanding
(18:19):
of society.
Speaker 2 (18:21):
Well, how about this now?
Speaker 1 (18:23):
You mentioned that, you know, the social media platforms are
not responsible for what is ultimately posted, but are they
responsible for the algorithms?
Speaker 2 (18:37):
And I guess are they?
Speaker 1 (18:40):
Are they not responsible for the radicalization of the individuals
who are subjected to the algorithms? Like how does that
part work?
Speaker 3 (18:48):
Yeah?
Speaker 4 (18:48):
I mean, you know, it's interesting, and you know, we've
done kind of three We've done three briefs.
Speaker 3 (18:53):
On There was a report that came out last year.
Speaker 4 (18:55):
It's more of an academic report around section two thirty,
and it's a effect on the African American community, meaning,
you know, what are the positives and negatives, particularly as
relates to the black community around this idea that platforms
are not held liable for the things that are being posted.
I'll just note, you know, I think we can guess
(19:17):
get too easily in our heads how this could have
negative effects about misinformation or slanderous conduct or what have you.
But part of the positive is that it has allowed
for activism, thought discussion. People talk a lot about black Twitter,
these types of things that it allowed for more of
(19:38):
a kind of broader speech in these platforms that have
allowed for black activism and black discussion that might have
been limited if companies were deeply involved with every type
of content moderation and we're being legally responsible for all
the conversation that was occurring. So that was kind of
the positive, and we've kind of talked a little bit
(20:00):
about the negative.
Speaker 3 (20:01):
Now. I think your algorithmic.
Speaker 4 (20:05):
Space is something that you know, there is a lot
of concerned on because it's one thing about well, you're
not going to be held responsible for what one person posts,
but should a social media company in particular, be held
responsible for.
Speaker 3 (20:18):
An algorithm that promotes.
Speaker 4 (20:22):
Misinformation, right, our information that gets a lot of hits,
which is probably most likely controversial information and could be
used to help spread what people are calling misinformation. So,
you know, there are a lot of questions back, and
there's so little that is made mandatory about revealing algorithms
(20:44):
people hold very closely, you know, what is the algorithms
they use. So you know, that is something we discuss
in the paper about algorithmic carve outs and should the
you know, and you know, I'll just jump to you know,
one of the main things we put forward is that
we think in general it is good that platforms aren't
going to be held liable for every post that is
(21:06):
put out there, but there should be some carve outs, right,
and there are carve outs like you can't platforms can't
you know, just keep calls for murder, you know, or
these types of things or their platforms and then promoting that.
We also think that there should be a carve outs
around you know, breaking civil rights law, like if there
(21:26):
is a company that is you know, promoting hey, you know,
we are renting out these apartments but no blacks allowed.
Well that you know, is something that is breaking civil
rights law, discrimination anti discrimination law, and companies should be
held liable. So, you know, promoting this idea of a
(21:47):
civil rights carve out, we also have an idea of
an advertisement carve out. Like that's different than people posting
and people are paying to put forth advertisements. Well, then
maybe the social platform should be held liable to understanding
what is on these ads and the claims that these
advertisements are making.
Speaker 3 (22:05):
So it's it's not it's not you.
Speaker 4 (22:07):
Know, there's it's always more complicated than is there no
liability or some liability.
Speaker 3 (22:12):
You know. I think generally there shouldn't be too much.
Speaker 4 (22:15):
Liability, but there are areas that need to be carved
out to hold companies responsible.
Speaker 1 (22:21):
This concludes part one of our two part conversation with
the president of the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies,
diedrich Asante Muhammad. Check back in with us tomorrow for
part two right here on the Black Information Network Daily Podcast.
The Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, America's black
think tank, provides compelling and actionable policy solutions to eradicate
persistent and evolving barriers to the full freedom of black
people in America. They are the trusted form for leading
experts and scholars to participate in major public policy debates
and promote ideas that advance black communities. They use evidence
(00:22):
based research, analysis, convenings, and strategic communications to support black
communities and a network of allies. The president of the
Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies is Diedrich Asanti Mohammad.
For the past twenty years, Asanti Mohammed has dedicated his
career to understanding and tackling racial and economic inequalities, and
he is our guest today. This is the Black Information
(00:46):
Network Daily Podcast. Now I'm your host, Ramsay's job. All right,
mister Asante Mohammad, Welcome to the show. We've been looking
forward to having this conversation.
Speaker 2 (00:56):
How are you doing today?
Speaker 3 (00:57):
I'm doing well. Thanks for having me.
Speaker 2 (00:59):
Absolutely pleasure to have you on.
Speaker 1 (01:01):
So for folks that don't know, obviously we gave you
a little bit of an introduction, but you know, for
folks that don't know, tell us a little bit about yourself,
just so folks know who we're talking to today. Maybe
a little bit about you know, your background, where you
grew up, and what led you to the position you
currently hold.
Speaker 3 (01:16):
Sure, I grew up in Maryland, Columbia, Maryland and actually
reside there now, you know, went to school in Massachusetts.
Lived a good part of my life in New York
as well. I was born in New York and at
a good part of my adult life in New York.
Speaker 4 (01:31):
I've been focused on racial economic issues, racial wealth divide
for say the last twenty years, worked at various organizations,
worked with the Reverend Sharpton I was living in New
York and his National Action Network, helping to make it
more of a national organization than New York focused organization.
Went on to eventually work at the NAACP, heading up
(01:51):
there National Economic Department, worked at think tank, Institute for
Policy Studies, and other organizations National Community Investment Coalition, Prosperity Now.
Then about a year ago I came over to Joint
Center for Political Economic Studies that has been in existence
for about fifty five years now, the first and still
(02:12):
leading black think tank in the country focused on developing
policy solutions to eradicating barriers of press barriers to progress
for African Americans.
Speaker 1 (02:24):
So let's go into that a little bit more, because
for folks who are unfamiliar with the organization, and of course,
beyond our introduction and beyond you know, what you've stated
just now, let's talk about like the work that the
Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies does, Like the
actual day to day how does that look.
Speaker 4 (02:44):
Yeah, let me just briefly say, you know, it's really
changed over time. Okay, in nineteen seventy when we were created,
you know, this is only five years after the Voting
Rights Act. I think there are only a few hundred
elected of black elected official across the country. You know
that increase around fifteen hundred into today we have over
(03:05):
ten thousand black elected officials across the country. And our
first ten years we focus a lot of people think,
you know, you just elect someone and they go into
the office and then they just you know, start to
advocating for their communities. But there's really, particularly at the
federal level, but actually at all levels, a policy infrastructure
that needs to be in place for elected officials to
(03:25):
do their jobs properly. And for we really spent our
first ten years serving black elected officials, particular at the
congressional level, helping them understand how Congress actually works, Helping
to create associations like the National Association for Black Journalists,
the National Association for Black Mayors, the National Association for
(03:46):
Black State Legislators, Helping to create institutions that could support
these newly elected black officials happening across the country.
Speaker 3 (03:54):
Even produced for.
Speaker 4 (03:55):
Decades the book that had listed all the black elected
officials across the country so black collective officials can learn
from each other.
Speaker 3 (04:03):
I'd say about nineteen.
Speaker 4 (04:04):
Eighty onward, we made that shift to becoming more of
a traditional.
Speaker 3 (04:08):
Think tank where you are.
Speaker 4 (04:10):
Developing policy analysis, highlighting policies that are then you share
with elected officials, their staff, with nonprofits, with civil rights
groups to help them as they're either trying to enact
legislation or advocate for particular legislation. And that's really the
area that Joint Center has continue to focus on.
Speaker 3 (04:32):
We have four primary issue areas.
Speaker 4 (04:35):
We have tax and wealth, and there's a lot happening
on the tax policy and wealth policy fronts now as
we're talking about tax cutting, job acts, we have technology,
which is a BIEP we're going to get into more
in depth today. We have workforce development, and then we
have government diversity, particularly the importance of having black staff
(04:57):
at high levels all throughout government. So those are the
four main areas we're focused on today.
Speaker 2 (05:03):
Okay, yeah, that makes a lot of sense.
Speaker 1 (05:05):
And you know, I see why those have been like
the areas of focus because especially with the we'll call
it the implementation and then the uh, how would I
the rolling back of diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives in
(05:26):
the past, call it five years across the country. I
think that many people learned that, you know, having black
voices at the table certainly helps shape shape outcomes for
the better for everyone, and some people they are still
(05:46):
probably needing to learn that lesson, and this is why
we're seeing some of the rollbacks.
Speaker 2 (05:50):
And so at least politically speaking, it's good.
Speaker 1 (05:52):
To know that there's an organization that's kind of ensuring
that we're having that conversation and that people that are
in a position to actually lead have the resources that
they need. No man is an island, as the saying goes,
and so helping with policy, coming up with the language
and you know, helping get things accomplished and your guard.
Speaker 4 (06:15):
You know, we need institutions that are regularly promoting black
voices right back.
Speaker 3 (06:21):
Aren't just heard by themselves. You need institution to support that.
And just one thing I'll note.
Speaker 4 (06:25):
You're talked about how DEI has kind of been pushed
back for say, the last five years. It's interesting it
was really about five years ago that DEI became greatly
embraced with the murder George. But what that shows is
how little time there was of this corporate embrace of diversity,
equity inclusion. You know, I've been writing about racial wealth
(06:47):
divide for twenty years. I used to tell people my
first ten years, if there was an article on the
racial wealths gap, I knew the author.
Speaker 3 (06:54):
There's so few people doing it.
Speaker 4 (06:55):
But then you know, post twenty twenty, all organizations are
having racilal im going to quality, racial wealth gap, diversity
equity inclusion. But that last of like maybe three years before,
there was a pushback, you know, and now we're kind
of at hopefully what is a height of a pushback.
And I think the saddest thing about it, it's a
pushback and it's not even we're not even clear how
(07:18):
much we move forward with diversity, the equity and inclusion
policies because they had such limited time to be enacted
and to learn about them before there was a regression
in trying to destroy these policy initiatives.
Speaker 1 (07:31):
Yeah, and it's funny, and I don't want to, you know,
get too far into the weeds here because I know
we're here to talk about something else. But rarely do
we have an opportunity to have a conversation with someone
who literally does the work, the actual work, and someone
who's so well informed. But you bring up an interesting
point in one that you know, we've kind of talked around.
Speaker 2 (07:50):
I suppose on the show before.
Speaker 1 (07:55):
Racism had hundreds of years in the sun to be
well entrenched into the country, into the to the fabric
the DNA of the country.
Speaker 3 (08:01):
Right.
Speaker 1 (08:02):
Additionally, you know, you bring up an excellent point that
you know, in terms of like a bona fide diversity,
equity and inclusion campaign in terms of economics, not in
terms of academics, not in terms.
Speaker 2 (08:19):
Of you know, you know, other things.
Speaker 1 (08:20):
Because there was affirmative action, and to be fair that
that was kind of the order of the day, but
the good faith DEI initiatives, you know, to your point,
were more fully embraced around twenty twenty one. Yeah, yeah,
after the death of George Floyd and the summer that followed,
(08:41):
and so you know, there's there's this interesting conversation that
again that we've kind of talked around on the show before.
Speaker 2 (08:51):
Where.
Speaker 1 (08:53):
An idea that's based in empathy, it's based in healing,
it's based in you know, bridging communities, it's based in
remedying past injustices and so forth, should not be required
to be perfect day one. It should have an opportunity
to have its growing pains and you know, have the
(09:16):
better aspects of it fleshed out and the ineffective aspects
revised right, And that takes time and in many instances
trial and error. And you know, we've seen this time
and again where if a plan is not one hundred
percent effective or it doesn't appease everyone all at once
(09:41):
in the beginning, then it's vulnerable to attacks by what
we've considered to be bonafide racist factions of this country
who just don't want to see any progress. Because again,
if you and I have a conversation and we say,
is it good for human beings? Most sapient sapiens to
(10:01):
incorporate diversity into their their practice, the economic practice, or
otherwise equitable treatment of each other and inclusivity.
Speaker 2 (10:14):
We would as human beings.
Speaker 1 (10:16):
Say, yes, this makes perfect sense, and to have it
be rebranded as DEI and then weaponized, and then for
people that do have some semblance of an argument to
take the aspects of it that.
Speaker 2 (10:30):
Could still use some refinement, you know, like.
Speaker 1 (10:33):
Like I have to forgive me, but I have to
understand what ultra conservatives, far right conservatives take issue with
with a lot of these policies, and so we have
to research and I'm sure the same is true for
you to find out what their arguments are based on.
It seems they all seem like bad faith arguments to me.
(10:56):
But to be fair, I have to be able to
address those if they come up in conversation, and so
I have to almost give the the arguments credibility. And
the fact is is that ultimately, at the end of
the day, it ends up being the case that if
there were time to refine these things, if there were
time to get data, collect data, and then adjust accordingly,
(11:16):
then we ultimately could end up with diversity, equity and
inclusivity that does affect.
Speaker 2 (11:22):
Everyone and brings up the tide and lifts all the boats.
Speaker 1 (11:26):
And so your point about it only having really more
like three years in the sun is well made, and
I just wanted to make sure that that was better
fleshed out because I've actually kind of been wrapping my
head around this as well.
Speaker 4 (11:38):
And I think too, you know, I think diversity, equity
inclusion it's always been. It's more of an approach in
particular subjects, right, And with that it can also become
a buzzword on the positive side and on the negative side, right.
And I think generally in politics, diversity and equity inclusion,
for those who like it is whatever aspects they like,
and for those who oppose it, whatever aspects.
Speaker 3 (12:01):
They don't like. Right.
Speaker 4 (12:02):
Absolutely, At Joint Center, we're really trying to focus on
quantitative metrics of inequality and what do you call it
DEI whether you call it anti discrimination, whether you call
it affirmative action, we're just trying to bridge this inequality
that we know is you know, causing serious divides in society,
(12:24):
serious challenges.
Speaker 3 (12:26):
For these particular communities.
Speaker 4 (12:27):
And so whatever you want to call the programs, you know,
the reality is that there's a massive income and equalities still.
Speaker 3 (12:33):
Between African Americans and White Americans.
Speaker 4 (12:35):
Wealth and equality still, employment disparities, and the question is
how are we going to address those issues? Knowing that
has been rooted in discriminatory behavior and the history of
white supremacy that we're still struggling to overcome in this country.
Speaker 2 (12:50):
Yeah, Hey, what's up?
Speaker 5 (12:52):
This is Ramsy's job and I am q Ward and
we're inviting you to subscribe to CIVI Excipher.
Speaker 2 (12:57):
Are we the social justice podcast right here in the app.
Speaker 6 (13:00):
We pride ourselves on creating a show that busters allyship
empathy and understanding, all the while conducting journalistically credible research
featuring influential, noteworthy yests and empowering historically marginalized communities.
Speaker 5 (13:11):
The African proverb breeds, if you want to go far,
go together. So we are asking you to search for
and subscribe to CIBY cipher.
Speaker 2 (13:18):
That civ I c cip h e R right here
in the app.
Speaker 1 (13:25):
We are here today with the President of the Joint
Center for Political and Economic Studies, Diedrich.
Speaker 2 (13:30):
Asante Mohammad Well.
Speaker 1 (13:36):
I would love to ask how the fight, the nature,
the approach to accomplishing all that has changed in the
past five months i'd call it, but really the past
three months since Donald Trump has kind of been signing
(13:56):
all these executive orders. But that's not on my list.
But you know, we're here, so you know has talked
to us about how things have shifted. How does that
fight continue now?
Speaker 4 (14:05):
I'll say that in some ways it hasn't shifted that
much for the Joint Center right now, and that like
I am a new president, I've only been president for
about a year, bringing the new staff. We're really working
on strengthening our fundamentals, strengthening our team, our coalitions, solidifying
our historic relations with institutions like the Congressional Black Caucus
(14:28):
and the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation, and historic civil rights
organizations and other think tanks. So we needed to have
that focus regardless of who won the election in November
twenty twenty four. I think you know what it does
allow us is that the Trump administration is an administration
not full of kind of of figures that have been
(14:53):
in government for long periods of time where there's really
clear relations with the Joint Center. So we haven't been
pulled in to the Executive Office like we were more
so with the body administration, so it's allowed us to
focus much more in on our nuts and bolts.
Speaker 3 (15:09):
We knew, regardless of who's going to.
Speaker 4 (15:10):
Be elected that the tax cuts and job acts that's
really going to define tax policy for the next ten years.
What's going to be a major issue coming up, as
is the budget, and so we are still you know,
focused on those areas and trying to do education.
Speaker 3 (15:24):
But in many ways, you.
Speaker 4 (15:25):
Know, I think what has surprises of a bit is
we didn't expect over one hundred and forty executive orders
to be put forward in the first one hundred days,
or the conversations about the Department of Education, you know,
being almost eradicated, and of diversit inequity inclusion offices that
we had helped us support and helped fight for we're
(15:47):
being dismantled. So you know, we are having to deal
with having less of an infrastructure within government to utilize
to advance our ideas and policies.
Speaker 3 (15:58):
But the nuts and bolts work of.
Speaker 4 (16:02):
Our foundational work we were going to do in twenty
twenty five and we still need to do it, and
they're just maybe more to react and respond to.
Speaker 2 (16:09):
Gotcha, gotcha? Okay? All right, so let's shift gears here.
Speaker 1 (16:13):
You know, I came about this when I was kind
of doing a little bit of homework here. Talk to
us about Section two thirty of the Communications Decency Act
and what we need to be aware of.
Speaker 4 (16:25):
Sure, well, you know, the Communications Decency Act is legislation
that came out in nineteen ninety six, part of the
Telecommunications Act in nineteen ninety six. You know, you think
about all the way back then in the nineties. It's
really trying to help understand how do you regulate this
new online content and checking the focus around obscenity and
decency and how.
Speaker 3 (16:44):
To protect minors.
Speaker 4 (16:45):
Right, So it's just kind of big, comprehensive legislation as
the Internet is really growing and building, and you know,
social media is at its infasy. And there is a
section called section two thirty which grants online platforms immunity
from liability, meaning that if someone says that we never
(17:09):
landed on the moon in a Facebook post, is Facebook
liable for that piece of information?
Speaker 3 (17:17):
Right?
Speaker 4 (17:18):
Dark If someone slanders someone in a post, is that
platform liable for what that person posted? And the you know,
it was put forward that in general platforms aren't held
responsible for what people post on their platforms, right, they
are not. It is not a newspaper that could be
(17:38):
held liable if they put out an article on these things.
It's more of a hosting mechanism. And you know, there's
great conversation now as to how we are performing and
addressing section two thirty with all of this. You know,
this was almost thirty years ago. Today people always are
(17:59):
talking about misinformation and and and how and you know,
and actually social media and platforms being the primary spaces
that people are getting their information. Well, what type of
regulations should we be revisiting this section two thirty and
how that affects news intake and even kind of understanding
(18:19):
of society.
Speaker 2 (18:21):
Well, how about this now?
Speaker 1 (18:23):
You mentioned that, you know, the social media platforms are
not responsible for what is ultimately posted, but are they
responsible for the algorithms?
Speaker 2 (18:37):
And I guess are they?
Speaker 1 (18:40):
Are they not responsible for the radicalization of the individuals
who are subjected to the algorithms? Like how does that
part work?
Speaker 3 (18:48):
Yeah?
Speaker 4 (18:48):
I mean, you know, it's interesting, and you know, we've
done kind of three We've done three briefs.
Speaker 3 (18:53):
On There was a report that came out last year.
Speaker 4 (18:55):
It's more of an academic report around section two thirty,
and it's a effect on the African American community, meaning,
you know, what are the positives and negatives, particularly as
relates to the black community around this idea that platforms
are not held liable for the things that are being posted.
I'll just note, you know, I think we can guess
(19:17):
get too easily in our heads how this could have
negative effects about misinformation or slanderous conduct or what have you.
But part of the positive is that it has allowed
for activism, thought discussion. People talk a lot about black Twitter,
these types of things that it allowed for more of
(19:38):
a kind of broader speech in these platforms that have
allowed for black activism and black discussion that might have
been limited if companies were deeply involved with every type
of content moderation and we're being legally responsible for all
the conversation that was occurring. So that was kind of
the positive, and we've kind of talked a little bit
(20:00):
about the negative.
Speaker 3 (20:01):
Now. I think your algorithmic.
Speaker 4 (20:05):
Space is something that you know, there is a lot
of concerned on because it's one thing about well, you're
not going to be held responsible for what one person posts,
but should a social media company in particular, be held
responsible for.
Speaker 3 (20:18):
An algorithm that promotes.
Speaker 4 (20:22):
Misinformation, right, our information that gets a lot of hits,
which is probably most likely controversial information and could be
used to help spread what people are calling misinformation. So,
you know, there are a lot of questions back, and
there's so little that is made mandatory about revealing algorithms
(20:44):
people hold very closely, you know, what is the algorithms
they use. So you know, that is something we discuss
in the paper about algorithmic carve outs and should the
you know, and you know, I'll just jump to you know,
one of the main things we put forward is that
we think in general it is good that platforms aren't
going to be held liable for every post that is
(21:06):
put out there, but there should be some carve outs, right,
and there are carve outs like you can't platforms can't
you know, just keep calls for murder, you know, or
these types of things or their platforms and then promoting that.
We also think that there should be a carve outs
around you know, breaking civil rights law, like if there
(21:26):
is a company that is you know, promoting hey, you know,
we are renting out these apartments but no blacks allowed.
Well that you know, is something that is breaking civil
rights law, discrimination anti discrimination law, and companies should be
held liable. So, you know, promoting this idea of a
(21:47):
civil rights carve out, we also have an idea of
an advertisement carve out. Like that's different than people posting
and people are paying to put forth advertisements. Well, then
maybe the social platform should be held liable to understanding
what is on these ads and the claims that these
advertisements are making.
Speaker 3 (22:05):
So it's it's not it's not you.
Speaker 4 (22:07):
Know, there's it's always more complicated than is there no
liability or some liability.
Speaker 3 (22:12):
You know. I think generally there shouldn't be too much.
Speaker 4 (22:15):
Liability, but there are areas that need to be carved
out to hold companies responsible.
Speaker 1 (22:21):
This concludes part one of our two part conversation with
the president of the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies,
diedrich Asante Muhammad. Check back in with us tomorrow for
part two right here on the Black Information Network Daily Podcast.
Popular Podcasts
Are You A Charlotte?
In 1997, actress Kristin Davis’ life was forever changed when she took on the role of Charlotte York in Sex and the City. As we watched Carrie, Samantha, Miranda and Charlotte navigate relationships in NYC, the show helped push once unacceptable conversation topics out of the shadows and altered the narrative around women and sex. We all saw ourselves in them as they searched for fulfillment in life, sex and friendships. Now, Kristin Davis wants to connect with you, the fans, and share untold stories and all the behind the scenes. Together, with Kristin and special guests, what will begin with Sex and the City will evolve into talks about themes that are still so relevant today. "Are you a Charlotte?" is much more than just rewatching this beloved show, it brings the past and the present together as we talk with heart, humor and of course some optimism.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.