What happens when research into Diversity, Equity and Inclusion training produces findings that indicate, as many people have been testifying, that it is potentially harmful? How will the legacy media, usually automatic supporters of diversity initiatives, react? In his recent blog post, Dr Colin Wright discusses the recent actions by The New York Times and Bloomberg to shelve any reporting of a groundbreaking study showing the negative psychological impacts of DEI pedagogy.
He writes: “The study, conducted by the Network Contagion Research Institute (NCRI) in collaboration with Rutgers University, found that certain DEI practices could induce hostility, increase authoritarian tendencies, and foster agreement with extreme rhetoric. With billions of dollars invested annually in these initiatives, the public has a right to know if such programs—heralded as effective moral solutions to bigotry and hate—might instead be fueling the very problems they claim to solve. The decision to withhold coverage raises serious questions about transparency, editorial independence, and the growing influence of ideological biases in the media.”
Wright goes on to make some important points about media censorship which are relevant to therapy professionals (clinicians/scholars and educators) who have to deal with the fallout from DEI trainings and policies. It is up to all of us to use our own networks and media platforms to draw attention to this important piece of research. We can also cite it to provide supporting empirical evidence for multiple anecdotal reports from many sources revealing the antitherapeutic nature of DEI. As Wright notes: “Perhaps most troubling, the study revealed a chilling convergence with authoritarian attitudes, suggesting that such training is fostering not empathy, but coercion and control.”
Leave a Reply