Museum TrendsWatch 2025: Facing the DEI Backlash

The TrendsWatch (TW) report, published annually by the Center for the Future of Museums (under the American Alliance of Museums), explores the most impactful challenges and opportunities facing museum professionals each year. This year’s theme (“Mapping Complexity”) emphasizes the need for an increasingly agile and adaptive approach to succeed in the museum field. 

This blog post series offers TW snapshots of the core trends covered in the report, practical takeaways, and advice to help museum professionals reflect and respond within their own contexts. 

In today’s post, we’ll focus on Trend #3: Facing the DEI Backlash. I’ll summarize how the Center frames this trend, its relevance to museums, and the recommendations offered in the report—along with some observations and input of my own.  

If you missed the earlier posts in this series, you can catch up here:

• Museum TrendsWatch 2025: The Next Era of Volunteerism 
• Stop, Look, Think: How to Manage Digital Vulnerabilities  

The DEI Challenge: Backlash, Funding Cuts, and Anti-DEI Activism

The report begins by outlining the challenges faced by both corporations and nonprofits nationally. Organizations engaging in Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives for hiring, school admissions, or other programming are under fire. Many have experienced protests or have been threatened with lawsuits. This has led many companies to abandon their DEI efforts while others hold staunchly to them. 

Now, since the report was written in 2024, it doesn’t account for the specific retaliatory tactics recently employed by the current US president. Nonprofits now face the danger of losing already-allocated federal funding, with additional threats to state funding, and the risk of revoking nonprofit status. Many, if not all, of these things are illegal, yet the only lawful recourse seems to be losing time in pursuit of justice through the courts—with verdicts the current administration will likely continue to ignore.  

The report also notes that leveling the playing fields via DEI action isn’t enough to make up for centuries of discrimination. However, by some politically oriented groups, DEI efforts are now being characterized as discriminatory—even though they were created to lessen traditional patterns of discrimination.   

TW refers to this backlash as anti-DEI activism, contending that it’s been receiving outsized attention. According to the report, the majority of high-profile lawsuits, protests, and other anti-DEI actions are driven by a relatively small number of wealthy individuals, lawmakers, and conservative think tanks. They add that there’s a duality to public opinion, with public polling indicating that Americans don’t want race to factor into job offers or college admission, but that the majority also support “DEI efforts”. 

We’ve seen this challenge playout from a legislative perspective, as covered in my Museum Forecast 2025: The Words We Use: 

“In the US, the majority of states fall into two categories: states with bills introduced or with bills signed into law. Both proposed and passed bills range in scope from restricting DEI in hiring or student admission decisions, banning staff from attending DEI trainings, and barring money spent on DEI programming.  

 

Many of the bills include the prohibition of promoting certain viewpoints, specifically calling out words and phrases that are seen to relate to DEI. Then there’s the ban on DEI statements which demonstrates the prohibition on words that are seen to embody—what are for some—controversial values. In fact, several of the proposed and adopted bills refer to these values as divisive concepts.” 

What This Means for Museums

The direct ties and implications of this issue are painfully apparent to the museum field. TW offers the following stats: 

• 11% of museums reported donors threatened to withdraw support in response to content seen to be DEI. 
• 7% of museums indicated that government entities had withheld funding for DEI related reasons. 
• 10% of museums stated educators have requested to view content ahead of time to guard against overt DEI angled content. 
• 5.6% of museums said they were constrained by legislation re: DEI training. 
• 2% of museums indicated they were facing lawsuits or threats of lawsuits regarding DEI-related internships, fellowships, or other programs. 

These statistics may seem remarkably low given the current state of affairs in the US, but keep in mind that the polling occurred pre-2025. The statistics are likely much higher now. Organizations are in a tough spot, especially when the cost of legal action, paired with loss of funding, can threaten their viability. 

Advice for Museum Professionals: “Museums Might…”

The following section is advice provided by TW for museums and their staff to consider: 

• Engage legal counsel to conduct an audit of policies and programs for DEI risks. 
• Assess the museum’s capacity to respond to DEI backlash. 
• Factor potential DEI backlash into exhibit planning and public programming. 
• Lead broad and inclusive (of all viewpoints) discussions, with an emphasis on creating a respectful space. 
• Consider areas where they may have more agency or freedom. For example, if they’re less at risk for losing vital funding streams. 
• Review hiring procedures to ensure there’s no perceived discriminatory practices. 
• Build deep and enduring connections with communities that should be nurtured regardless. 
• Ensure the physical and psychological safety of staff. 
• Study the data on DEI training programs. 
• Be sensitive to language and thoughtfully evaluate terminology. 

This last suggestion echoes my Museum Forecast 2025: The Words We Use:  

“My forecast is that this year (and likely years plural) will see cultural institutions in the United States and abroad grapple with intensified and politically-motivated examination. Museum administration, programs, catalog content, and exhibits will be impacted at an unprecedented level, and the field as a whole will find itself scrambling to find equilibrium. More specifically, the words we use as we conduct museum business will increasingly fall under intense scrutiny by politicians and politically-engaged citizens.” 

Which leads us to wonder: What language is “safe” to use? In my forecast, I highlight a session provided at the 2024 Future of Museums Summit, held by AAM. The session was titled, “Language and Legislation: Telling the Truth in 2024.”  During the panel, Sarah Jenks (Founder & Principal, Every Museum a Civic Museum) introduced the concept of “bridgey” words. According to Jenks, they define bridgey as a word that falls into the net positive and isn’t considered a polarizing word.  

Finally, TW includes an example from Colonial Williamsburg, stating: “Skilled interpretation can do the emotional and intellectual work needed to bridge conceptual and ideological divides.” While this example shows what’s possible in ideal circumstances, it’s important to recognize the toll such interpretive work can take on museum staff—especially during times of such high scrutiny and stress. See above for TW’s advice on ensuring the physical and psychological safety of staff. 

Make the Most of Moments to Share Support, Knowledge, and Strategies

This is a thorny issue, to put it mildly. A tremendous amount of research, thought, and practice will be required for museums to begin creating a non-discriminatory space, while addressing inequities, and without inflaming politically oriented groups nor harming historically harmed communities.  

At this moment in time, it’s a nearly impossible ask. Museums will need a space to explore and experiment, but the current political climate does not allow much grace for that to occur. In lieu of this, we must take advantage of the moments we have with each other (e.g., attending conferences). We need time and space to share knowledge, build strategies, and offer each other support and encouragement to engage in a daunting area of our work.