By Massarah Mikati

Analyses and hypotheses have been rolling in nonstop since this year’s presidential election results were finalized, with particular focus on what went wrong with the Democratic Party’s campaign. As the takes have been coming in, though, I couldn’t help but draw parallels between the complaints and criticisms lodged against the Democrats’ campaign tactics (or lack thereof), and those lodged against newsrooms.

Whether it’s elites in a political party or journalists in newsrooms, both have been seen by community members as disconnected from the very people they purport to represent. In both cases, critics argue that a failure to listen, engage authentically and address real concerns alienates voters and audiences alike. Ultimately, they are scenarios of institutions that create distance between themselves and the communities they are meant to serve.

This theme of distance — whether in political campaigns or journalism — is central to understanding the parallels between the shortcomings of the Democratic Party and the broader media landscape. For journalists, the complaints lodged against the Democrats offer valuable insights not just into politics, but into how their own institutions can bridge the divide between themselves and the people. 

Here are five key complaints that highlight this dynamic and what journalists can learn from them.

1) Democrats were out of touch with the people

One of the most frequent complaints about the Democrats this year is their failure to connect with the real concerns of voters. Instead of listening and responding to community needs, many felt that the party was pushing its own agenda without fully understanding or addressing the issues that mattered most to everyday people — especially affordability. This disconnect led to frustration, ultimately costing Democrats the election, especially among working-class voters and marginalized groups, who were rendered invisible by the top-down approach.

💡 Here’s how journalists can do it better: If you’re familiar with Hearken and Election SOS, you’ve probably heard us talk a lot about the Citizen’s Agenda approach. This essentially means going to your community to guide your reporting, political or otherwise, instead of letting politicians set your reporting agenda for you with their own talking points. Asking community members what they want to know from candidates or elected officials, what their concerns are and what information needs they have is a sure-fire way to stay connected with your communities and their needs. 

🎯 Example: We love the way Charlottesville Tomorrow did just that with their candidate questionnaires, which were created from 200 community responses to a voter survey they sent out.

2) Democrats distanced themselves from upset constituents 

From concerns about the economy to protests against Israel’s war in Gaza, there was no shortage of constituent frustration with the Biden administration this year. And many of those people felt that Democrats not only dismissed their concerns, but purposely sidelined them from the party and conversations about its direction. Take, for example, the decision to not allow a Palestinian American speaker on the stage at the Democratic National Convention — while days later, president-elect Donald Trump shared a stage with Muslim voters (performatively or not). This lack of engagement with people’s complaints not only alienated voters but also fueled a perception that the party was more interested in maintaining its image than in addressing real, on-the-ground issues. 

I’ve certainly seen newsrooms shut down community members that voice complaints about their stories or engagement strategies, and I’m sure you have, too. Here’s the thing: responding to criticism is never comfortable. But conflict can be good! It is actually an opportunity to deepen connections and understanding, and fast-track growth, ultimately leading to more success with community members. You just have to try. 

💡 Here’s how journalists can do it better: Effective journalism thrives on dialogue with community members, not avoidance. Approach your job, and your stories, with humility. When community members are upset, make a genuine effort to understand their perspectives and analyze where there’s space for improvement on your part. Check out this map we created for handling fall-outs for a step-by-step guide. 

🎯 Example: The Democrat and Chronicle had a longtime critic. When they finally stopped to listen and understand his complaints, the relationship shifted. 

3) Democrats had no follow-through

We hear it time and again: promises are made, communities are engaged with, but once the dust settles, the status quo continues as usual — relationships and commitments are forgotten. Without follow-through and accountability, trust erodes, and the connection with voters weakens.

The same stands for newsrooms. Engagement efforts may peter off or be conducted extractively for stories, or reporters may not circle back with vulnerable sources after stories are published. This is especially true when it comes to engaging with and covering communities of color. How many newsrooms put out anti-racist statements and pledged commitments to diversity, equity and inclusion in the aftermath of George Floyd’s murder in 2020? Four years later, how many of those newsrooms have incorporated real, structural change to their journalistic practices, deepened relationships with marginalized communities and created more psychologically safe work environments for employees of color? 

💡 Here’s how journalists can do it better: At Hearken, one of our favorite phrases is: “Don’t be an askhole.” When we ask community members to share their needs, perspectives and stories with us, and then fail to circle back with those community members, we are committing extractive, harmful engagement. So remember to close the loop: Tell community members how and where your engagement with them is informing your work. Be transparent about your work, with posts explaining what your goals, plans and progress are. 

🎯 Example: We love the way BridgeDetroit published reader responses to a call-out on how voters feel about the future. Plus, ProPublica publishes annual updates on their diversity initiatives. 

4) Democrats used lofty language that wasn’t relatable

In an interview with Joy-Ann Reid, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez highlighted a particular weakness the Democrats’ exhibited this election cycle: “Democrats very often in their messaging, they speak… in terms and in concepts, and not in the second person: I care about you.” 

While abstract ideals and policy jargon might resonate with certain progressive circles or elites, they left many everyday voters feeling excluded or misunderstood. The language didn’t humanize the issues or speak to the personal, lived experiences of the electorate. On the other hand, the clear language Trump used throughout his campaign, his strategy to sit down with popular podcasts, were all ways of reaching the people where they were. And what it all ultimately boiled down to for people who voted Republican was a sense of more access to Trump, and greater relatability to him.

Newsrooms, particularly when it comes to political reporting, often fall into the same trap. So much political reporting is more insider baseball than anything, neglecting to demonstrate how that news would impact the daily lives of their readers. 

💡 Here’s how journalists can do it better: Use straightforward language that breaks down political news in a way that’s easy and interesting for non-political junkies to understand. 

🎯 Example: We love the tone the Tangle newsletter strikes — informative yet digestible. 

5) Democrats did performative engagement through celebrities instead of grassroots engagement in communities

Many critics of the Democratic campaign pointed to the over-reliance on celebrity endorsements and performative acts of engagement, such as photo-ops or social media stunts. While these tactics may provide temporary attention, they do little to build lasting relationships or credibility with voters. Real, grassroots engagement — where leaders are genuinely present, listening, and collaborating with community members — was often absent.

Can you think of newsroom engagement that has been similarly performative? I know I can, such as constantly going to the same sources in the community, valuing and platforming the perspectives of powerful institutions over those of grassroots communities, or opening dialogue with community members only to resist changing harmful journalistic practices.

💡 Here’s how journalists can do it better: Prioritize building relationships with everyday community members, and the grassroots organizations and folks who work with them, over high-level executives at big institutions. Bonus points if your engagement actually serves community members. 

🎯 Example: We love the engagement Kansas City Defender does with their communities, such as the free clothing drive they recently organized. City Bureau also hosted an event for community members last month to build resource guides on holding elected officials accountable.

***

We know there’s no shortage of Monday morning quarterbacking going on right now. I hope these actionable examples don’t feel like piling on the blame, but rather inspire new and more effective ways of serving community information needs.