‘DISMANTLE’: our new report on how racism and white supremacy shows up in charity brands

As THE anti-racism brand strategy agency, we’ve seen first-hand how pervasive white supremacy can be in workplace dynamics and also in brand strategy and communications. So we decided to share our learnings and practices on building anti-racism and equity into brand strategy with our wider community. We embarked on a deep dive into the barriers and opportunities for progress.

What’s going on in the charity sector?

We started with the charity sector because many of our clients sit within this sector, so we have a lot of data on hand related to how racism and white supremacy show up in organisations and brands. From our report, we saw that charities in certain sectors don’t engage with anti-racism, thinking it’s not really relevant to their cause or audience. 

But  it’s precisely this mindset that can actually feed into a white supremacist viewpoint. When a charity only highlights white experts or assumes whiteness as the default, it’s sending a pretty clear message, even if unintentionally. Every charity, no matter its focus, needs to make anti-racism a priority to ensure they’re truly inclusive and equitable. One of the most important things to note is that saying that you’re “not racist” is not the same as being anti-racist – it’s like the difference between just sitting on the sidelines and actually getting in the game. In the research we did for our report, we only picked up on a handful of overtly racist communications. However the absence of overt racism in an organisation’s culture  is not the same as anti-racism. 

We only caught a few blatantly racist comments, but just because there’s no overt racism doesn’t mean brands are all in the clear. Anti-racism is about actively working to dismantle racism, not just avoiding saying or doing obviously racist things. So, let’s roll up our sleeves, get proactive, and make sure we’re not just passively “not racist”, but actively fighting for equity and justice for everyone.

Prioritise impactful anti-racist actions

Representation matters, but it’s just the tip of the iceberg – we need to go deeper! Sure, increasing the visibility of Global Majority communities in our communications is a step in the right direction, but it can’t stop there. It needs to be meaningful and showcase the rich diversity within these communities, highlighting both agency and voices. It’s not just about sprinkling a few diverse faces here and there; it’s about telling their stories authentically and respectfully. And let’s not forget, this should all be paired with real, impactful anti-racist actions. So, let’s make sure our representation isn’t just a box we tick, but a genuine celebration of diversity and a commitment to equity!

Only featuring white experts is a subtle yet powerful way of promoting white supremacy. When brands exclusively spotlight white experts, they’re sending a not-so-subtle message that whiteness is synonymous with being “heroic”, “right”, and “knowledgeable”, and the only folks who can be trusted. This kind of implicit bias reinforces outdated stereotypes and ignores the rich diversity of talent and wisdom that exists across all communities. So, let’s shake things up and make room for experts of all backgrounds to shine – because heroism, knowledge, and trustworthiness aren’t exclusive club perks for just one race.

Our rating scale, explained

We have provided a scale for each of the charities in this report, along with recommendations for anti-racist progress. This scale gives our analysis of the organisation’s anti-racism progress based on what we observed through their brand. We have not taken into account any internal initiatives or anything that may have happened outside of the platforms that we’ve reviewed, simply because part of anti-racism work is the ability to be open and transparent about process and action. We think it’s key that there is a consistent way of evaluating the anti-racist process throughout the report. 

🟢(Green): Clearly on an anti-racism journey. The brand has made clear anti-racism commitments, actively speaks out about systemic racism and is centering anti-racism consistently in its communication. 

🟠(Amber): Dabbling with diversity. The brand is showing signs of diversity in its communication, and spotlights minoritised groups consistently, or on multiple occasions (for example, culturally significant days) but the brand has made no clear or visible commitment to anti-racism.

🔴(Red): Blocked by white supremacy. The brand shows little or no signs of any racial diversity in its communications and most or all of its communications centres whiteness and the white gaze. Any attempts at diversity seem performative or limited, with no intersectional focus.

‍

Top findings from our report: How racism shows up in brands and organisations

“Diversity/Representation as a defense”

“Diversity/Representation as a defense” refers to the practice where an organisation diversifies its communications materials, showcasing a variety of faces and backgrounds, without actually addressing the underlying issues of inequity or structural racism within the organisation or sector. This approach often serves as a superficial tactic to deflect criticism rather than making meaningful changes to promote genuine inclusivity and equity.

For example, consider a large corporation that has faced allegations of discriminatory practices and/or  a lack of diversity in its leadership team. In response to the negative publicity, the company launches a new marketing campaign featuring a diverse array of individuals from various ethnic backgrounds, emphasising their commitment to diversity and inclusion. The advertisements showcase employees from different races, genders, and cultural backgrounds working together harmoniously.

However, behind the scenes, the company's leadership remains predominantly white and male, with little effort made to address the systemic barriers that prevent people from marginalised communities from advancing within the organisation. There are no significant changes to recruitment policies, mentorship programs, or opportunities for professional development aimed at fostering a truly inclusive environment. The diverse imagery in the campaign serves as a defense mechanism, deflecting attention from the persistent inequities within the company.

“Instrumentalism” 

“Instrumentalism” involves using individuals from racialised backgrounds as ‘props’ to demonstrate an issue or make a point, often without providing any context or agency to those individuals. This approach treats people as tools for conveying a message rather than recognising and valuing their unique stories and perspectives.

For example, consider a health and wellness brand that launches a campaign about the importance of mental health. They use images of people from diverse racial backgrounds looking distressed or contemplative to highlight the universal impact of mental health issues. However, these individuals are not given any voice or context within the campaign. There are no stories or quotes from them, and no information about their personal experiences or challenges. They are simply used as visual representations to support the brand’s message.

A more effective approach would involve giving these individuals a platform to share their own stories, providing context and dept
h to their experiences, and ensuring they are portrayed as active participants in the narrative rather than passive props.

‍

“Deficit framing”‍

‍
“Deficit framing” is a harmful practice where people from Global Majority backgrounds, especially those within Global Majority contexts, are consistently portrayed as lacking agency, knowledge, capacity, or resources. This approach often goes hand-in-hand with oversimplification, reducing complex socio-economic and political issues to a simplistic narrative of helplessness and need. It perpetuates stereotypes and ignores the resilience, strengths, and capabilities of these communities.

For example, consider an international aid organisation which runs a fundraising campaign to support education somewhere in East Africa. The campaign features images and videos of children in rural areas sitting in dilapidated classrooms or learning under trees, with captions like “Help these children get the education they need”. The imagery and messaging focus solely on the lack of resources and dire conditions, depicting the children and their communities as passive recipients of aid, who can only be saved through external intervention.

While the campaign might successfully evoke sympathy and drive donations, it fails to acknowledge the efforts of local teachers, parents, and community leaders who are working tirelessly to improve education in the area despite the challenges they face. It overlooks the innovative solutions and resilience within the community, reinforcing a narrative that these populations are helpless and dependent on aid from higher income countries .

For more examples of how racism show up in brands and organisations and tips on how brands and organisations can implement anti-racist campaigns, messaging and actions, download the Brand By Me DISMANTLE report (Charities Edition preview).