Black churches back Smithsonian African American museum after Trump's order

Apnews - Apr 23rd, 2025

The Rev. Robert Turner, pastor of Empowerment Temple African Methodist Episcopal Church in Baltimore, walked 43 miles to Washington, D.C., advocating for reparations and showing solidarity with the National Museum of African American History and Culture. His journey came in response to President Donald Trump's executive order criticizing the museum for embracing a 'divisive, race-centered ideology.' Turner, along with other clergy, is encouraging church members to support the museum through membership and donations to preserve its narrative of Black history and contributions.

The executive order, which calls for purging 'improper ideology' from Smithsonian institutions, has sparked criticism from Democrats and Black church leaders, who see it as an attempt to erase crucial aspects of American history. The museum, which recently saw a leadership change, faces challenges in maintaining its educational mission. Clergy leaders like the Rev. Otis Moss III and Bishop Timothy Clarke are rallying support, emphasizing the importance of teaching authentic history and resisting efforts to distort it. The situation underscores ongoing tensions in the U.S. regarding race, history, and national identity.

Donald Trump Executive Order Reparations Smithsonian Institution National Museum Of African American History And Culture Robert Turner Race And History

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

6.2

Moderately Fair

Read with skepticism

The article provides a compelling narrative centered around Rev. Robert Turner's activism and the broader support for the National Museum of African American History and Culture. It effectively highlights the intersection of religion, culture, and politics, particularly in the context of race relations in the United States. However, the story's accuracy is somewhat undermined by a lack of detailed evidence and diverse perspectives, limiting its overall impact and engagement potential. While the article is timely and addresses issues of public interest, it could benefit from more comprehensive sourcing and transparency to enhance its credibility and balance. Overall, the story succeeds in raising awareness of important cultural and political issues but falls short in providing a fully-rounded analysis.

Accuracy

The story presents several factual claims that align with known events, such as Rev. Robert Turner's march to Washington and his support for the National Museum of African American History and Culture. However, some claims require further verification, such as the specifics of President Trump's executive order and its implications for the Smithsonian Institution. The narrative about the museum's leadership changes and the support from Black churches are plausible but would benefit from additional sources for confirmation. Overall, the story is mostly accurate but lacks detailed evidence to support all its claims.

Balance

The article provides a predominantly one-sided perspective, focusing on the criticisms of President Trump's executive order and the support for the museum from African American communities. It includes voices from various church leaders but does not offer perspectives from those who support the executive order or from the Smithsonian Institution's administration. This imbalance could lead to a skewed understanding of the issue, as it omits potential justifications for the executive order and the viewpoints of those who might agree with it.

Clarity

The article is generally clear and well-structured, with a logical flow that guides the reader through the narrative. The language is straightforward, making the content accessible to a general audience. However, the inclusion of technical terms, such as 'executive order' and references to specific institutions, could benefit from further explanation for readers unfamiliar with these concepts.

Source quality

The article relies on quotes from church leaders and references to President Trump's executive order, but it lacks a diversity of sources. It does not provide direct citations or detailed descriptions of the executive order, nor does it include responses from the Smithsonian Institution or other governmental sources. This reliance on a limited number of sources, primarily religious figures, reduces the overall credibility and depth of the reporting.

Transparency

While the article clearly states the positions and actions of the individuals involved, it does not disclose the methodology for gathering information or the potential biases of the sources. The lack of detailed context about the executive order and its implications suggests a need for greater transparency in how the information was obtained and interpreted. Additionally, the article does not address any potential conflicts of interest among the sources.