EPSTEINGATE — WHEN THE MEANS DO NOT JUSTIFY THE END

Andrea McManus, ViTreo Group Inc
October 22nd 2019

Ugh. It’s bad when you unknowingly accept funds from a donor who is ‘disqualified’. It’s beyond the pale when you accept funds knowingly from such a donor.

There are times when taking the money can be a really, really bad idea. Think MIT Media Lab soliciting donations from convicted sex offender, Jeffrey Epstein over a number of years. Apparently, Epstein also solicited funds on behalf of the prominent research centre. And said research centre buried the evidence.

It’s impossible to write about Ethics during the month of October 2019, the first officially declared Ethics Awareness Month by the Association of Fundraising Professionals (AFP) without talking about EpsteinGate. It’s unacceptable for MIT Media Lab to have accepted those funds under any circumstances. Seriously. What were they thinking?

What we need to consider when examining the MIT decision is what the nonprofit sector can learn from this situation.

In a recent AFP Global article, chair of its Ethics Committee, Roberta (Robbe) Healey, MBA, NHA, ACFRE, noted…

This is one of those situations where there was a single right answer. MIT Media Lab made the wrong decision. It said, ‘Yes’ when it should have said, ‘Absolutely not’.

And consider this — as fundraisers and nonprofit organizations, raising money at all costs should not be an option. Ever. In this world of instant and worldwide news, why anyone would think they can escape detection of unethical behaviour is mind-boggling. Yet, at an internal meeting after the MIT news came to light…

“Nicholas Negroponte, who cofounded the Media Lab in 1985 and was its director for 20 years, said he had recommended that Ito [the MIT Media Lab director who took the money and later resigned] take Epstein’s money. ‘If you wind back the clock,’ he added, ‘I would still say, ‘Take it.’ And he repeated, more emphatically, ‘Take it’…

Different people in attendance had conflicting interpretations of his statement. Some understood him to mean he would act the same way even knowing what he knows now about Epstein’s alleged sex trafficking. But Negroponte told the Boston Globe that in retrospect, ‘Yes, we are embarrassed and regret taking his money.’

The comments clearly stunned some of his listeners. A woman in the front row began crying. Kate Darling, a research scientist at the MIT Media Lab, shouted, ‘Nicholas, shut up!’ Negroponte responded that he would not shut up and that he had founded the Lab, to which Darling said, ‘We’ve been cleaning up your messes for the past eight years.’” (MIT Technology Review, MIT Media Lab founder: Taking Jeffrey Epstein’s Money Was Justified, Angela Chen and Karen Hao, September 04 2019)

MIT President Rafael Reif, after confirming the resignation of Ito, stated that because the allegations are so serious, he asked MIT’s General Counsel to engage a prominent law firm to investigate and report back to him, the Executive Committee and MIT’s Board of Directors (TechCrunch, Joi Ito Resigns As MIT Media Lab Head In Wake Of Jeffrey Epstein Reporting, Brian Heater and Danny Crichton, September 07 2019).

And so it should. What’s even more disturbing about this scandal and Negroponte’s viewpoint is his tone-deaf statements during that internal meeting — he said as a rich white man he had the privilege to “break into the social circles of billionaires. It was these connections, he said, that had allowed the Media Lab to be the only place at MIT that could afford to charge no tuition, pay people full salaries, and allow researchers to keep their intellectual property.” (MIT Technology Review, MIT Media Lab founder: Taking Jeffrey Epstein’s Money Was Justified, Angela Chen and Karen Hao, September 04 2019)

And consider this. On one hand, while having access to ‘billionaires’ who are philanthropic is something most of us aspire to, due diligence is something fundraisers worldwide must consistently undertake. And that due diligence should have been taken by MIT’s Media Lab. Yet, when those facts didn’t align with their goals, they chose to bury them. The state of uber wealthiness doesn’t infer someone is also ethical and above board in all their actions. Nor does it mean we should just take the money and run.

”The M.I.T. Media Lab, which has been embroiled in a scandal over accepting donations from the financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, had a deeper fund-raising relationship with Epstein than it has previously acknowledged, and it attempted to conceal the extent of its contacts with him. Dozens of pages of e-mails and other documents obtained by The New Yorker reveal that, although Epstein was listed as “disqualified” in M.I.T.’s official donor database, the Media Lab continued to accept gifts from him, consulted him about the use of the funds, and, by marking his contributions as anonymous, avoided disclosing their full extent, both publicly and within the university.” (The New Yorker, How an Élite University Research Center Concealed Its Relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, Ronan Farrow, September 06 2019)

And if we look at a recent guest blog post “32 Years of Ranting About Boards…” by Simone P. Joyaux, ACFRE, Adv Dip, FAFP of Joyaux Associates (who has been described as one of the nonprofit sector’s most thoughtful, inspirational, and provocative leaders) where she writes….

”Far too many board members – especially those with significant power (e.g., white power, male power, socially and economically high up in the community – and on and on) think they know everything or lots of almost everything. And they actually don’t know everything. They’re mostly basking in their own unearned privilege.”

- Simone Joyaux

What I’m seeing in this situation ties into what Simone was discussing in her blog. Although we are not talking about boards specifically in this blog post, when I read Negroponte’s words I’m struck by the message they convey. Elitism. Getting the money is the only goal. White male privilege. (Stay tuned for a future more in-depth blog about this).

So back to my earlier question — what can we, fundraisers and nonprofit organizations learn from this?

It has to pass the smell test. If something doesn’t feel right, it probably isn’t.

Don’t do it. Do your homework. All the good work our sector carries out, which helps so many, many people, can come unravelled by these types of scandals. No amount of money, no relationship with a billionaire, millionaire or anyone in a position of power is worth achieving your goals if it’s tainted. The AFP created the Code of Ethics for this very reason — if you’re not sure, review its guidelines. Contact the Ethics Committee. Ask others.

Do the right thing. Always.

Check in again next week when we focus on a more pleasant topic — acknowledging all the good work the charitable sector does in the world.

More information about AFP’s ethical code and standards are available at AFP Global.

As people and organizations doing good in the world, we should celebrate Ethics Awareness Month monthly.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Andrea McManus, Chair, Board of Directors, Partner
ViTreo Group Inc

Andrea McManus is a Partner with ViTreo with over 30 years’ experience in fund development, marketing, sponsorship and nonprofit management. A highly strategic thinker and change maker, Andrea has worked with organizations that span the nonprofit sector with particular focus on building long-term and sustainable capacity.