Should Trump Have Been Excluded from NABJ Convention?

This summer, I attended my third National Association of Black Journalists (NABJ) convention, this time in Chicago. Whether in-person or online, I’ve always left these conventions beaming with pride and enthusiasm for my future career in journalism and communications.

This year, however, there was a different energy in the air. A few days before the convention, the NABJ announced that former President Donald Trump would be in attendance for a live interview. None of the regular attendees I spoke with were aware of the decision until roughly 48 hours before we arrived in Chicago. It was a shocking surprise for many of us.

I felt betrayed by the decision at first. The NABJ, to me, has always been a safe and sacred space where Black journalists across the spectrum of beliefs, age, wealth and experience can gather in the community. I’ve found it to be a beautifully productive and inspiring space.

Knowing that Trump would be in attendance, my feelings about the upcoming event changed. The event now had become a platform for a 34-count convicted felon who has lied repeatedly and made racist policies a cornerstone of his political agenda. His appearance potentially opened the convention attendees to violence from his base. I couldn’t fathom how this could be considered a good idea.

I had no intention of attending the Trump interview. I don’t engage in political journalism, as I don’t believe partisan politics help our society. I vote Green. Instead, I attended a session called “So You Wanna Be a Culture Journalist? From Basics to Bylines,” hosted by NPR producer Corey Rose and featuring former UO-NABJ Region IV Director Tre’vell Anderson, Shar Jossell and Brittany Luse.

Although I chose to go in a different direction, other attendees and I followed the interview on our cell phones.

Interviewer Rachel Scott, the senior congressional correspondent for ABC News, did an excellent job keeping Trump on track. She asked good questions, spoke clearly and professionally, and maintained composure.

Still, the interview was a disaster in true Trump fashion, complete with lies, gaslighting and contempt. Trump falsely claimed he was the best president of all time for Black Americans. He questioned Vice President Kamala Harris’s racial identity. He defended the Jan. 6 insurrectionists. And when asked about Project 2025, he was whisked away by his PR team.

Despite my shock at the decision to invite Trump, I’ve since realized it was apt to give him this forum. The NABJ has invited many presidential candidates and sitting presidents to its conventions, such as former presidents George W. Bush, Bill Clinton and then-Sen. Barack Obama. Vice President Kamala Harris, U.S. Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton and U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch have also attended the convention.

The NABJ's mission to provide a platform for Black journalists and to shine a light on the racial tensions and trauma faced by Black Americans is more critical than ever. More than any other group in America, Black Americans have used the media to reflect the continued violence and racism faced daily for generations, which is the reason why on Dec. 12, 1975, the NABJ was founded with the implied mission of helping to change the narrative of Black Americans in the media. This mission is not just critical, it's a call to action for all of us.

I see no clear winner in this scenario. I would prefer that the NABJ remain a safe place for journalists to network and be in the community. However, I understand the power and responsibility that the NABJ has to American media. Regardless, I will be in attendance next year, potentially as an ambassador for the UO School of Journalism and Communication, with empathy and consideration for the organization's challenges. 

Originally posted on the School of Journalism and Communication blog.