What the landmark ‘1619 Undertaking’ taught Nikole Hannah-Jones - Poynter

Even when the award-winning “1619 Undertaking” was simply the seed of an concept, Nikole Hannah-Jones knew the immensity of her endeavor.

The formidable set of essays first revealed by The New York Instances in August 2019 centered the enslavement of Africans within the founding of America and aimed to unsettle long-held narratives that downplay the position of slavery within the improvement of the nation. The challenge beckons readers to contemplate 1619 as a founding date, and the follow of slavery because the nation’s true basis. “The 1619 Undertaking” additionally reshaped long-held narratives about Black People by telling a recent and factual 400-year story of a individuals.

“You don’t make these arguments and never count on that there’s going to be pushback,” Hannah-Jones advised Poynter.

The pushback was fierce. Hannah-Jones was ushered right into a harsh highlight. A invoice was launched to strip funds from faculty districts that taught the challenge. Former President Donald Trump created the 1776 Fee.

For Hannah-Jones, who has spent her profession connecting the historic and modern-day dots about faculty segregation, housing segregation and legal justice, it was simply extra proof of her resilience.

Historical past, she mentioned, “is shaping our society, whether or not we acknowledge it or not, whether or not we all know it or not.

“And so the absence of that historical past means there’s an absence of an actual understanding,” she mentioned.

The challenge went on to develop into {a magazine}, a e-book, a Hulu documentary sequence and a podcast. Hannah-Jones gained the 2020 Pulitzer Prize for Commentary for her essay.

5 years later, she has taken “1619” throughout the globe. She is a employees author at The New York Instances Journal and is constructing a center for journalism and democracy at Howard College, a traditionally Black faculty, and making a pipeline for the following era of investigative journalists.

“This is the reason we obtained into journalism,” Hannah-Jones mentioned. “We consider that folks want info, and that folks may be remodeled by info, and they are often.”

Hannah-Jones spoke with Poynter about what “The 1619 Undertaking” (and its many iterations) taught her, what Ida B. Wells would say in regards to the state of journalism right this moment, and what tales she nonetheless desires to tick off her concept checklist.

This written interview has been edited for brevity and readability. You can even hear a few of her solutions under.

TyLisa C. Johnson: While you look again and mirror on the early days of conceptualizing “The 1619 Undertaking,” what stands proud to you now from that point?

Nikole Hannah-Jones: What stands proud to me essentially the most is simply the ambition of the challenge, and understanding, as soon as I obtained the inexperienced gentle to do it, that I wanted to ship, and — I knew even again then — it was going to be a as soon as in a lifetime kind of challenge, and that there was so much driving on it. I used to be actually obsessing over each the way to get it proper, but in addition all of the alternative ways I may increase it, even from the primary time I pitched it, and what else may it’s? This was a challenge attempting to inform a individuals’s 400-year story. And so I simply was always serious about: What may make it stronger? What completely different tentacles may this challenge have? And will we do all of it within the quick period of time that we truly needed to publish it?

Johnson: How a lot time did you even have?

Nikole Hannah-Jones: Properly, I pitched it in February, and we revealed it in August, and the journal closes per week earlier than publication. So, for what we did that was a really quick timeline.

Johnson: Did you watched or have any inclination in regards to the reception or the criticism that’s unfolded across the challenge?

Nikole Hannah-Jones: Properly, I had no concept how individuals would obtain the challenge, whether or not anybody would learn it, anybody would care. I used to be actually apprehensive, in fact, that I’ve by some means been capable of marshal all these assets for this huge challenge on the legacy of slavery and in our type of frenzied ecosystem, it’s exhausting to maintain consideration on something, and particularly a challenge that had tens of hundreds of phrases on slavery and its legacy.

So no, I didn’t have any expectations over how it could go into the world. And I truly suppose that’s vital as to why the challenge has been so profitable, as a result of we have been simply targeted on making the challenge that we felt wanted to be made, and never attempting to suppose, properly, what’s going to drive site visitors to it? Or, what do readers need? What can they really take care of?

I actually knew that there was going to be some conservative pushback towards the challenge. And if there hadn’t been, the challenge wouldn’t have succeeded in my thoughts as a result of we have been attempting to unsettle established narratives about American exceptionalism and established narratives that basically downplay and embrace the centrality of slavery within the improvement of our nation. And so, once we argue that possibly what wouldn’t it imply to contemplate 1619, and the follow of slavery as our founding and never 1776, and the concepts of liberty, you don’t make these arguments and never count on that there’s going to be pushback. As a result of we have been wanting individuals to really feel uncomfortable and challenged.

So I actually anticipated some. And when the challenge first revealed, in fact, it was very profitable; exceeded something we may have imagined, even within the first few days and the approaching months. And there was the conventional type of anticipated conservative pushback, after which that type of went away, after which it got here again. And that’s the backlash that all of us speak about now, which is a handful of historians criticized the challenge, and I feel that basically emboldened the backlash that will come.

And no, we couldn’t have anticipated the president of the USA castigating the challenge. A invoice being launched by two highly effective senators to strip federal funds from faculty districts that taught the challenge. Trump creating a whole fee, the 1776 Fee, in opposition to the challenge. State legislative bans. And finally that complete anti-critical race principle frenzy.

No, no, nobody may have predicted that. I imply, that’s been awe-inspiring in that I don’t suppose a single work of journalism has ever confronted that kind of backlash.

Johnson: What did creating “The 1619 Undertaking” train you? What do you’re feeling such as you walked away with or realized?

Hannah-Jones: I’ve been learning this historical past since I used to be 15 years outdated. I’ve an undergraduate diploma in historical past and African American research. I’ve written about race and studied this my total grownup life. And but, I realized one thing in each single web page of the challenge.

And so in essentially the most type of literal interpretation of that query, I realized new details about our historical past, made new connections about how the legacy of slavery was shaping our society in each single iteration of the challenge, and that’s been such a present, as a result of in looking for to edify our nation, I, in fact, finally edified myself.

But when I take into consideration that query within the broader sense, it simply affirmed that you could possibly by no means fully inform this story, that the historical past is so huge that you could possibly examine this for the remainder of your life and solely know an iota of what there may be to know, and that if, in truth, somebody who has studied this historical past her complete life can study and make connections, the expectation that common People would be capable of have a baseline understanding of their nation, I feel, shouldn’t be actual.

And so what I realized from that is that so many People truly need a greater understanding of their nation, and we’re all type of fighting attempting to know the nation once we’ve been taught a historical past of a rustic that has by no means existed.

And so what I’ve realized is you may truly create one thing that’s difficult, that’s troublesome, that’s discomfiting, and that there will likely be an urge for food for that. That regardless of these e-book bans and these divisive idea legal guidelines and these efforts to say that we have to limit entry to this information as a result of it’ll train individuals to hate their nation, that really, individuals who have an awesome love for his or her nation need to study this in order that they will make their nation higher, and I wasn’t anticipating that.

It’s been 5 years. I’ve not left the street in 5 years. I’ve traveled everywhere in the world speaking about this challenge, as a result of it exhibits, actually, the facility. I imply, for this reason we obtained into journalism. We consider that folks want info, and that folks may be remodeled by info, and they are often. I actually couldn’t have imagined that once I once I first created the challenge, however that’s been wonderful, and it taught me that I’ve an amazing quantity of resilience, which I already knew, but it surely’s actually been affirmed by all the things that’s occurred to me personally and to the challenge and surrounding the challenge because it revealed.

I assume the very last thing I’ll say is, being fortunate sufficient to curate this work and to work with so many individuals for whom having only a tiny piece of the challenge has been so significant, and I can’t inform you how many individuals I’ve met who’ve shed tears as a result of they they felt seen on this challenge. They felt like, “My complete life I knew, I knew what they mentioned about us wasn’t true, however I didn’t have the information to push again on it.”

That sense of empowerment, that sense of just about having the ability to launch a disgrace that I feel so many people as Black individuals really feel, irrespective of how a lot delight our households tried to instill in us, the sense of disgrace that we hadn’t possibly contributed that a lot, that our legacy begins with slavery, that I feel after partaking with the challenge — whether or not it’s within the journal kind, the e-book kind, the podcast, the documentary sequence — that folks really feel seen and validated, and take away an amazing respect for our individuals and the way our battle has constructed this nation.

Johnson: You’re a historical past lover. We all know this. We love this about you. Has your expertise with “The 1619 Undertaking” affected your view on how historic subjects ought to be communicated or reported?

Hannah-Jones: I feel what it’s accomplished is affirmed what I’ve at all times believed. “The 1619 Undertaking” is 5 years outdated, however my work from its earliest days has at all times delved into historical past. I’ve at all times believed that as journalists, we can not simply report on what is occurring right this moment, as if there’s not a whole historical past that constructed it, and that it’s our job once we’re attempting to translate a coverage or clarify a neighborhood or clarify a hurt, it’s our job to know what created it. What’s the previous that constructed this factor that we’re attempting to explicate?

My work has at all times accomplished that. My work on housing segregation, my work on faculty segregation, on legal justice, I’m at all times going again and attempting to assist clarify that historical past, as a result of that historical past is shaping our society, whether or not we acknowledge it or not, whether or not we all know it or not. And so the absence of that historical past means there’s an absence of an actual understanding.

And I feel what engaged on this challenge has accomplished — it’s simply affirmed that. It’s affirmed that, once more, not solely is it vital, which I already knew, however that folks need that understanding, that folks really feel robbed as soon as they understand there’s all this historical past that they may have been taught, or that they need to have realized that will have helped them higher grapple with the society we’ve got, and that they hadn’t been taught it. And it simply exhibits the facility of that.

I typically inform this actually dangerous joke that my old flame is historical past, however I didn’t develop into a historian as a result of I truly wished individuals to learn what I write. And I do know that’s a foul joke, however kind of true, proper? Most individuals should not studying historical past on daily basis, but it surely doesn’t imply they don’t need that info.

I’ve the most effective job on this planet. I learn books for a dwelling. I learn research, I learn analysis, I discuss to essentially good individuals, after which I can translate that for a standard reader. I can export that information to the plenty. And I feel that’s the great thing about what “The 1619 Undertaking” did. It didn’t uncover new historical past, but it surely democratized it, and it not solely democratized it, but it surely made it actual to individuals in saying, “Oh, you need to perceive why you’re sitting in site visitors in Atlanta, and it doesn’t make any sense why they designed this freeway system this fashion?” Really, let me clarify that to you, that historical past of race, segregation, of planning infrastructure, not primarily based on how can it’s essentially the most environment friendly, however how can it’s best in hurting Black individuals, will assist you to perceive this factor that you simply’re coping with right this moment. And that’s actually the facility of journalism, however the energy of journalism that makes use of historical past as a instrument.

MORE FROM POYNTER: Nikole Hannah-Jones, 1619, and the power of the conceptual scoop

Johnson: Are there historic occasions or themes that you simply need to discover additional, both as a continuation of “1619” or in a brand new challenge?

Hannah-Jones: Yeah. After all. All the time, proper? I feel I’m like all good journalists, is my story checklist by no means will get shorter. You tick issues off, however you’re at all times including far more than you’re capable of tick off.

I actually am considering a lot about, in fact, this present second that we’re in, and the historic parallels. Notably with regards to civil rights regulation, with regards to the difficulty of reparations, I’ve much more work I need to do in reparations, as a result of, once more, even how I’m serious about it and understanding it has modified from 5 years in the past, as a result of the extra you learn, the extra our modern panorama adjustments, then your personal thoughts begins to alter and increase.

I’m truly actually interested by what parallels may be drawn by way of how this nation has handled Indigenous individuals, however notably as a class. Now we have Bureau of Indian Affairs, we’ve got sure rights, a whole code of regulation that’s constructed round native sovereignty, so not constructed round Native People as a race however as a bunch that has treaties with the USA.

I’ve been considering so much about what wouldn’t it imply to reenact the Freedmen’s Bureau, which, in fact, is what the California Reparations Activity Drive is recommending. What wouldn’t it imply to lastly have our personal distinctive ethnic group, acknowledged ethnicity for Black People whose ancestors have been enslaved on this nation? That’s type of a pure iteration of the work of “The 1619 Undertaking,” which very explicitly was not centered on like the worldwide transatlantic slave commerce, however was about what occurred right here in America. I feel that’s the following logical factor.

And finally, in doing that work, attempting to assist us determine when we’ve got a Supreme Court docket that’s making it inconceivable for us to keep up applications that explicitly grapple with race, what are the ways in which we will get round that and be sure that we’re nonetheless serving to the people who these legal guidelines have been initially made for.

Johnson: I do know we’re over time. Do you have got like yet another minute? I’ve a bonus query about advocacy journalism right this moment that I’m dying to ask you.

Hannah-Jones: OK, certain.

Johnson: OK, so numerous conversations have been swirling in regards to the validity and in regards to the position of advocacy journalism right this moment. I take into consideration the documentarian who secretly recorded Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito. I’m additionally serious about like, say, The Kansas City Defender and these different scrappy information startups that really feel like they’re strolling within the footsteps of Black press and journalists like Ida B. Wells. I’m curious, out of your perspective, what’s the position of advocacy journalism right this moment? Does it have a spot? What would Ida B. Wells say in regards to the state of our trade?

Hannah-Jones: Yeah, properly, I’ve been very specific and outspoken on this, in that I don’t really feel journalism is, by definition, an goal career or impartial career. The explanation I based the Middle for Journalism and Democracy at Howard is to say we’ve got to take a stance on sure issues. I typically quote the motto of The Washington Put up, which is, “Democracy dies in darkness.” That’s not a impartial stance. That’s saying that our position as journalists is to guard democracy, proper? So I truly see all good journalism as activism.

Now, it’s not the identical kind of activism as somebody like Ida B. Wells, proper? Ida B. Wells was actually an activist and a journalist. She was a suffragist, she was a civil rights activist and she or he was a journalist. So I feel there’s actually a spot for that. There’s at all times been a spot for that. That has by no means gone away, even because the mainstream press has tried to type of purge that spirit out of journalism.

However I additionally suppose simply mainstream press, that while you determine you need to be an investigative reporter, you’re not exposing wrongdoing simply since you suppose it’s fascinating. You might be exposing wrongdoing since you need our methods to serve weak individuals. You need justice. You need to work on, on behalf of excellent and what’s proper. So I feel that that’s our calling.

So there’s a place for advocacy journalism. I inform my college students on a regular basis that I perceive the urge that you simply need to exit and be a part of a protest when one thing occurs to your neighborhood, however our job as journalists — our activism — is we expose the factor that’s going to guide individuals to protest, proper? We empower individuals to understand how their communities are being harmed in order that they will do one thing about it.

Our official founders have been unsuitable on many, many, many issues, however one factor that they understood, that Thomas Jefferson understood, is {that a} free individuals should be an knowledgeable individuals. And there’s a motive ours is the one career that’s within the Structure. There’s a motive why the First Modification to the Structure protects a free press, as a result of we play a unparalleled position in a democracy, in a free society, and that’s not one thing that I take flippantly.

And I feel far too typically we are actually taught that objectivity requires us to stick to this notion of stability, even once we are reporting on a political system that has an amazing imbalance. I say our obligation is to not stability or objectivity, our obligation is to the reality.

We all know Ida B. Wells. I don’t should be the Ida B. Wells whisperer to know she could be a harsh and acerbic critic of media proper now, of mainstream media, and admittedly, of a lot of Black media, which isn’t following the custom, which is doing numerous, clearly, superstar reporting, and probably not doing the reporting essential for our communities.

However she actually would reserve her harshest phrases for a mainstream press that too typically feels very unsuited for this second, although there are actually examples of large reporting that’s occurring.