Projects
Other Salons and Workshops
Salon Series, Conferences and Workshops:
Working in cooperation with FAIR, the Policy Forum organized a program of vibrant salons. Harkening back to the Harlem Renaissance, our salons have three variations: outreach and education sessions, strategic brainstorming sessions, and follow-up sessions to begin to implement innovative interventions into the public debate. Salons bring together journalists, activists, scholars and policy professionals for forthright debates and strategic discussions of specific issues. These events also provide a venue for the solicitation of "nontraditional" experts to write op-eds and articles and/or to serve as media spokespersons; and for media training wherein ideas and "talking points" are developed to prepare spokespersons for participation in a range of media debates.
The Policy Forum continues to reach both domestic and international audiences by sponsoring and participating in a wide range of events. A partial list of the highlights is described below.
AAPF Collaborates with Aspen Institute to Address Structural Racism (2003-2009)
Since 2003, AAPF has collaborated with the Aspen Institute’s Roundtable for Community Change to facilitate a series of workshops and conferences throughout the
Post -Election Questions (February 2001):
In one of our vibrant salon series, we examined the public and media response to what many termed a "judicial coup d’etat," the Supreme Court appointment of George W. Bush as president after an election featuring widespread charges of voting irregularities. In the media, the increased vulnerability of the very groups who were disproportionately disenfranchised in the election was a virtual non-story, with major outlets moving quickly to shore up the “legitimacy” of the new regime. Participants discussed specific ways to combat media inattention. Panel discussants included Laura Flanders, Katha Pollitt, Faran Griffin, Farai Chideya and Janine Jackson.
The National Coalition of 100 Black Women, Annual Leadership Conference (June 2000):
Intersectional analysis was the focal point of a plenary panel organized by Kimberle Crenshaw for the National Coalition of 100 Black Women. Crenshaw organized and moderated a discussion designed to facilitate gender awareness in the development of the Coalition’s outreach programs. Panelists included economist Radhika Balakrishnan, psychotherapist Muriel Paige and Natalia Kanem, MD.
The National Conference on Black Women and the Law (May 2000):
Representing the Policy Forum, Luke Harris and Kimberle Crenshaw both participated in the National Conference on Black Women and the Law, sponsored by the Lawyers Committee on Civil Rights Under Law. Harris served on the Conference’s National Organizing Committee while Crenshaw delivered a keynote address on the urgency of creating an intersectional politics for the empowerment of African American women. Organized as a precursor to the upcoming UN World Conference against Racism, the two-day event sought to gather information to support the development of a report on the status of Black women in the United States.
Civil Rights Training Conference, Flourinopolis, Brazil (September 1999):
Among the Policy Forum’s international activities was its participation in a conference on Civil Rights for Black Movement lawyers in Brazil. Joined by Barbara Arwine of the Lawyer’s Committee and sponsored by Ford, Crenshaw and Harris each facilitated a day long workshop on Race, Gender and Law, and Affirmative Action, respectively. These hands-on workshops gave the Policy Forum an opportunity to extend to international audiences the scope of our efforts to redress significant distortions in the manner in which race more generally, and civil rights policy more specifically is covered by the American media. The conference also strengthened the Policy Forum’s grasp on the global dimensions of racism and facilitated efforts here in the U.S. to link anti-racist activities to important work elsewhere.
Bill & Monica & Ken & Feminists (October 1998):
Mainstream media coverage of the Clinton/Lewinsky story provoked widespread outrage; but it presented a special problem for feminists, whose responses to events were widely disparaged and misrepresented by pundits and reporters. Interviewing Patricia Ireland, for example, CNN’s Larry King compared U.S. feminists to Nazis, and US News & World Report’s Michael Barone claimed of feminists, “We’ve now found what profession they’re in and the only question is their price.” This salon sought an articulate response to such vitriol. Discussion began with Professor Katherine Franke then of the Fordham Law School, who delineated the legal meaning of harassment and its role in the Monica Lewinsky case. Subsequently, participants held a frank and lively discussion, suggesting a range of strategies for combating the skewed presentation of feminist views on sexuality and power.
State of the State (September 1997):
The second salon, which grew naturally out of issues raised at the first, focused on the nature of state power in an era of globalization. We aired concerns about the ‘mainstreaming’ of the right-wing vision of reduced government responsibility for social welfare and the support this view gains, ironically, from the left-wing argument that the power of global capital makes the nation-state irrelevant. Discussion focused on the reality that state power continues to function in repressive and decisive ways, especially in the lives of women and people of color; and on the new strategies and new alliances needed to press social justice demands in the face of changing conceptions of the state.
Race and the Welfare Debate (April 1997):
The first of the salon series focused on welfare policy and the media’s treatment thereof. It drew an overflow responsive crowd and was very useful both in clarifying our perspectives and in providing a place for activists and scholars to exchange ideas, stories and phone numbers with journalists and one another. The multiple goals of the salon were to 1) analyze the mis-coverage of the issues by drawing on the expertise of a range of contributors, 2) critique the rhetorical strategies of allies whose non-intersectional analysis of welfare reform was partial and ineffective and 3) create a coherent counter-narrative that linked resistance to welfare reform to a broader vision of social justice. The brainstorming of strategic responses to media mis-coverage of vital issues and the generation of concrete resources to aid us in that work, along with large, enthusiastic crowds, continue to shape salon meetings.