Analysis: European Americans’ unemployment rate was unchanged from July. Asian Americans decreased 30 basis points and Latino Americans increased 30 basis points from July, respectively. African America’s unemployment rate increased by 30 basis points from July.
AFRICAN AMERICAN EMPLOYMENT REVIEW
AFRICAN AMERICAN MEN:
Unemployment Rate – 7.1%
Participation Rate – 69.8%
Employed – 9,893,000
Unemployed – 753,000
African American Men (AAM) saw a increase in their unemployment rate by 10 basis points in August. The group had an increase in their participation rate in August by 190 basis points, there highest participation rate in the past five months. African American Men gained 270,000 jobs in August and saw their number of unemployed increase by 30,000.
AFRICAN AMERICAN WOMEN:
Unemployment Rate – 6.7%
Participation Rate – 61.4%
Employed – 10,260,000
Unemployed – 739,000
African American Women saw a increase in their unemployment rate by 40 basis points in August. The group increased their participation rate in August by 30 basis points. African American Women gained 13,000 jobs in August and saw their number of unemployed increase by 45,000.
AFRICAN AMERICAN TEENAGERS:
Unemployment Rate – 24.8%
Participation Rate – 29.3%
Employed – 590,000
Unemployed – 195,000
African American Teenagers unemployment rate increased by 310 basis points. The group saw their participation rate increased by 10 basis points in August. African American Teenagers lost 24,000 jobs in August and saw their number of unemployed also increase 25,000.
African American Men-Women Job Gap: African American Women currently have 367,000 more jobs than African American Men in August. This is an decrease from 624,000 in July.
CONCLUSION: The overall economy added 22,000 jobs in August while African America added 260,000 jobs. From Reuters,”The warning bell that rang in the labor market a month ago just got louder,” Olu Sonola, head of U.S. economic research at Fitch Ratings in New York, said in reference to the U.S. labor market. “A weaker-than-expected jobs report all but seals a 25-basis-point rate cut later this month.” Fed Chair Jerome Powell had already reinforced rate cut speculation with an unexpectedly dovish speech at last month’s Fed symposium in Jackson Hole.”
Analysis: European Americans’ unemployment rate increased 10 basis points. Asian Americans increased 40 basis points and Latino Americans increased 20 basis points from June, respectively. African America’s unemployment rate increased by 40 basis points from June.
AFRICAN AMERICAN EMPLOYMENT REVIEW
AFRICAN AMERICAN MEN:
Unemployment Rate – 7.0%
Participation Rate – 67.9%
Employed – 9,623,000
Unemployed – 723,000
African American Men (AAM) saw a increase in their unemployment rate by 10 basis points in July. The group had a precipitous drop in their participation rate in July by 90 basis points. African American Men lost 129,000 jobs in July and saw their number of unemployed increase by 2,000.
AFRICAN AMERICAN WOMEN:
Unemployment Rate – 6.3%
Participation Rate – 61.1%
Employed – 10,247,000
Unemployed – 694,000
African American Women saw a increase in their unemployment rate by 50 basis points in July. The group increased their participation rate in July by 20 basis points. African American Women lost 1,000 jobs in July and saw their number of unemployed increase by 60,000.
AFRICAN AMERICAN TEENAGERS:
Unemployment Rate – 21.7%
Participation Rate – 29.2%
Employed – 614,000
Unemployed – 170,000
African American Teenagers unemployment rate increased by 250 basis points. The group saw their participation rate decreased by 80 basis points in July. African American Teenagers added 37,000 jobs in July and saw their number of unemployed also increase 15,000.
African American Men-Women Job Gap: African American Women currently have 624,000 more jobs than African American Men in July. This is an increase from 496,000 in June.
CONCLUSION: The overall economy added 73,000 jobs in July while African America lost 166,000 jobs. From CNBC, “This is a gamechanger jobs report,” said Heather Long, chief economist at Navy Federal Credit Union. “The labor market is deteriorating quickly.” The weak report, including the dramatic revisions, could provide incentive for the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates when it next meets in September. Following the report, futures traders raised the odds of a cut at the meeting to 75.5%, up from 40% on Thursday, according to CME Group data.”
“When power makes truth expendable, only the brave will keep records.” — HBCU Money Editorial Board
On August 1, 2025, the United States crossed a threshold most democracies fear but few anticipate with precision the moment a nation’s statistical agency becomes a political target not for corruption, but for accuracy.
Following a weaker-than-expected jobs report with just 73,000 jobs added in July and significant downward revisions to prior months, President Donald Trump abruptly ordered the firing of Dr. Erika McEntarfer, Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). The justification? The data embarrassed him. The evidence? None. The implications? Profound.
For over a century, the BLS has served as the impartial scorekeeper of the American labor market. Its reports help inform everything from Federal Reserve monetary policy to wage negotiations, business expansion decisions, and university research. Most critically, the BLS is the foundation for public trust in employment data, a cornerstone of economic legitimacy.
Trump’s dismissal of Dr. McEntarfer, who was confirmed with bipartisan support and is regarded as a rigorous labor economist, did not challenge methodology, nor did it cite misconduct. Instead, it was an overt signal: when facts contradict the leader’s narrative, the facts must go.
This act is not merely executive overreach. It is an institutional decapitation. And it represents the clearest break yet from the post-WWII consensus that government data should be nonpartisan, methodologically sound, and politically untouchable. In a global economy, this is the equivalent of a currency devaluation not of the dollar, but of America’s data credibility.
When leadership no longer trusts or permits accurate data, policy becomes reactive, erratic, and performative. Investors, entrepreneurs, and institutions rely on the BLS to signal economic direction. Without it, credit markets misfire, fiscal policy lacks direction, and monetary policy becomes unmoored. For African American-owned banks, real estate firms, and HBCU endowment managers, this degrades their ability to assess employment trends in Black communities, apply for federal workforce grants, or time bond offerings based on unemployment benchmarks. Even philanthropic giving strategies may suffer if the poverty, wage, and employment data they are based on becomes manipulated or suppressed.
America’s strength lies in its institutions, not its individuals. By removing the head of a critical statistical agency on political grounds, the White House has signaled that no institution is beyond coercion. This undermines the rule of law and places civil servants especially those in technocratic roles on notice: loyalty matters more than evidence. African American civil servants, many of whom have worked tirelessly to diversify and reform these institutions from within, may see decades of credibility erased. It’s a chilling reminder that representation within agencies means little if those agencies are subject to autocratic whim.
International investors, trade partners, and credit agencies track U.S. labor data as a proxy for global economic health. If they begin to suspect that U.S. statistics are manipulated, they may hedge their investments, slow trade, or reevaluate the reliability of U.S. fiscal metrics. In the long-term, this can impact foreign direct investment in African American economic zones, HBCU research partnerships with global firms, and even diaspora remittance flows, if currency stability is affected by market anxiety.
Perhaps most dangerously, Trump’s decision follows a long trajectory of undermining truth-based systems elections, public health, the judiciary, and now economic data. This creates a vacuum in which conspiracy becomes conventional wisdom. In such an environment, fake facts become state currency. This has severe implications for African American institutions. Much of African American advocacy whether for reparations, investment, or educational equity rests on data. If national data sources are neutered or politicized, then the burden of proof shifts unfairly onto communities already under-resourced in research infrastructure.
HBCUs, Black think tanks, and African American foundations must view this firing not as a political blip, but a doctrine in action. When truth becomes negotiable, institutions that depend on it must move from passive reliance to active defense. HBCUs with strong economics, political science, or data science departments such as Howard, Spelman, and FAMU should develop Black-centered labor and socioeconomic data initiatives. These should complement, verify, or challenge federal data when necessary.
Institutions should also create safeguards digital, legal, and procedural to document how and when data manipulation may be occurring. This includes archiving historic BLS data, creating public dashboards, and writing explanatory briefs for the community. In addition, the next generation of data scientists, economists, and statisticians trained at HBCUs must be equipped not only with technical skill but a political consciousness of how truth is weaponized. Their work should be rooted not just in method, but in mission.
There is also an urgent need for civic engagement. African American policy organizations must pressure Congress to enact legal protections that insulate agencies like BLS, Census, and the Congressional Budget Office from political interference. Civil society must create watchdog coalitions that expose attempts to politicize data or intimidate public servants. Parallel to this, an emergency data defense fund backed by foundations and Black philanthropic leaders could help institutions respond rapidly to threats against data integrity.
Dr. McEntarfer’s firing is not merely about jobs data. It is about whether America will continue to govern itself by fact or by fiat. For African Americans, who have fought centuries of data invisibility, distortion, and misuse from redlining to police profiling the stakes are especially high.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics was once seen as above politics. That era is over.
African American institutions must now assume a new role not just consumers of data, but defenders of its integrity. If truth is to survive, it will not be because it was protected by tradition, but because it was guarded by those with the most to lose from its disappearance.
“In the absence of state support, those with capital must decide: will they merely enjoy the benefits of a stable society—or invest in the institutions that make it possible?” — Arielle Morgan, Senior Fellow, Institute for Civic Infrastructure
The withdrawal of $1.1 billion in federal funding from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting is not merely a fiscal adjustment—it is a structural dislocation. It marks the effective end of a decades-long social contract in which the U.S. government ensured the existence of a nationwide, non-commercial broadcasting ecosystem intended to serve the public interest. For PBS, NPR, and their hundreds of affiliate stations across the country, the clock is now ticking toward an uncertain future.
But if the U.S. government is no longer willing to fund public broadcasting, another powerful bloc may have to: the ultra-wealthy and the corporations that have long built brand equity on the back of public trust and public platforms. In other words, the very elite who most benefit from stability, reliable information, and a functioning democracy may now be expected to underwrite one of its most foundational institutions.
The price tag? $27.5 billion.
A Simple, Uncomfortable Equation
To replace $1.1 billion in federal funding with investment returns, the equation is straightforward. Using a conservative draw rate of 4%—commonly applied by universities and foundations to ensure long-term preservation of capital—an endowment of $27.5 billion would be required to generate that annual payout.
This is not a charity exercise. It is a capital strategy.
To reach this target, two basic donor models stand out:
275 individuals contributing $100 million each
2,750 individuals contributing $10 million each
These figures are within striking distance of the top echelon of American wealth. As of 2024, the United States had over 800 billionaires and more than 23,000 centi-millionaires (individuals with $100 million or more in net worth). Put bluntly, it would require only 1.2% of America’s centi-millionaires to secure the future of public broadcasting in perpetuity.
What’s at Stake for the Elite
There is a growing recognition—even among the ultra-wealthy—that civil society must be preserved, even if governments no longer have the capacity or political will to do so. The fragility of liberal democracy, demonstrated by political polarization, misinformation, and institutional distrust, poses long-term risks not only to the electorate but also to markets, capital flows, and reputational value.
Public broadcasting—independent, educational, and widely trusted—has long been a stabilizing force in this ecosystem. Its reach into rural towns, inner cities, and suburban households makes it a conduit for shared narratives and factual baselines. It is not exaggeration to say that NPR and PBS, through All Things Considered, NewsHour, Frontline, and Sesame Street, have helped preserve a measure of social cohesion in a deeply divided country.
For the ultra-wealthy, losing this infrastructure would not simply be a cultural loss. It would be a strategic risk.
Hence the question: if the state won’t fund it, why won’t they?
The Precedent Is There
Large-scale philanthropic endowments are nothing new. In the past two decades:
Michael Bloomberg has donated over $3.3 billion to his alma mater Johns Hopkins University.
MacKenzie Scott has given away over $16 billion since 2019.
The Gates Foundation operates with a $67 billion endowment and deploys billions annually to global health and education initiatives.
Ken Griffin recently contributed $300 million to Harvard University.
Yet public broadcasting—a sector with tangible civic impact—has rarely drawn the same scale of contribution. This may be due in part to its status as a federal recipient, which gave the impression of permanence and stability. That illusion has now evaporated.
What remains is the opportunity to build a truly private-public media model—one whose operating capital is drawn from private wealth but whose editorial independence is legally insulated from donor interference.
A Corporate Response to a Public Crisis
Philanthropists are not the only entities positioned to act. Corporations, particularly those with vested interests in news, content, or public trust, have a strategic imperative to help capitalise such an endowment. Among the most obvious candidates:
Technology firms such as Apple, Amazon, Google, and Meta, which dominate digital content distribution and advertising, but face persistent scrutiny over misinformation and platform responsibility.
Media conglomerates such as Comcast, Disney, and Paramount, whose own news divisions benefit from a well-informed public and a credible informational ecosystem.
Financial firms such as JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, and BlackRock, for whom geopolitical and social stability underpin long-term asset growth.
Indeed, a structured vehicle—such as a Public Broadcasting Endowment Corporation (PBEC)—could allow corporations to make long-term contributions that are tax-deductible, reputationally beneficial, and materially impactful. Their names need not appear on programming or editorial decisions; the return on investment would be brand credibility and a stronger civic framework.
Moreover, such a fund could become a flagship ESG initiative—aligning corporate interests with measurable civic outcomes.
Structuring the Capital Stack
A diversified funding approach would enhance resilience and buy-in. A potential framework:
Donor Type
Target Contribution
Total
275 HNWIs @ $100M
$27.5 billion
100%
OR
1,000 HNWIs @ $10M
$10 billion
36%
100 Corporates @ $100M
$10 billion
36%
Broad-based campaign
$7.5 billion
28%
Total
$27.5 billion
100%
A broad-based campaign could also complement elite contributions. Imagine a national “Democracy Dividend” campaign: one million Americans pledging $1,000 annually for ten years. That alone would yield $10 billion—a testament to public commitment alongside private wealth.
From Pledge Drives to Private Equity
Public broadcasting has traditionally raised funds through grassroots donations and corporate underwriting. But this model is no longer viable on its own. What is required is a transition from pledge drives to portfolio management.
The envisioned endowment would be governed by a professional board and investment committee, structured similarly to major university endowments. Earnings would be deployed annually to:
Sustain local PBS and NPR affiliates, especially in underserved areas
Support original investigative journalism and children’s educational content
Fund innovation in digital and streaming public media
Preserve and digitize historic programming archives
Maintain emergency broadcast systems and rural information networks
Crucially, editorial integrity would be enshrined by legal charter—preventing donors or sponsors from influencing content.
Philanthropy as Infrastructure
Too often, philanthropy is reactive—applied to symptoms rather than systems. An endowment, by contrast, is structural. It is a recognition that certain institutions are too important to be left at the mercy of annual budgets, market swings, or election cycles.
The erosion of federal support for public broadcasting is a warning signal. The infrastructure of civic life—fact-based journalism, educational programming, and communal storytelling—requires capital insulation, not just ideological support.
This is not about saving Big Bird or Masterpiece Theatre. It is about fortifying one of the last remaining platforms where Americans—regardless of political identity or geography—encounter one another not as algorithms or enemies, but as citizens.
Will the Wealthy Step Up?
The government has walked away. The funding gap is real. But the wealth to close it is readily available.
If even a fraction of the world’s wealthiest individuals and corporations stepped forward with capital rather than condolences, the future of public broadcasting could shift from a question of survival to a model of strategic, sovereign independence.
In the end, it is not about whether we can raise $27.5 billion. It is whether the people most capable of doing so will finally recognise that their wealth is not a wall—but a bridge to a more stable, informed, and democratic society.
🎯 Key Facts
Total CPB federal subsidy rescinded:$1.1 billion
This funding supports both PBS and NPR, primarily by supporting local member stations.
Goal: Replace $1.1 billion per year in perpetuity through investment returns from an endowment.
📊 Endowment Calculation Assumptions
To generate $1.1 billion annually, the endowment must safely yield that amount without depleting principal.
Scenario
Investment Return
Annual Draw Rate
Required Endowment
Conservative
5% return
4% draw
$27.5 billion
Moderate
6% return
4% draw
$27.5 billion
Ambitious
8% return
5% draw
$22 billion
Rule of Thumb:
Endowment needed = Annual Budget ÷ Draw Rate
So for $1.1 billion with a 4% draw: $1,100,000,000 ÷ 0.04 = $27.5 billion
🏛️ Comparisons to Similar Institutions
Institution
Endowment
Notes
Harvard University
$50.7B (2024)
Largest university endowment
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
$67B (2024)
Largest U.S. philanthropic fund
NPR
N/A
Does not have a large central endowment
Howard University
$1B (2024)
Largest HBCU endowment
🔄 Alternatives or Supplements
If not a full endowment, partial coverage models could include:
A $5B–$10B endowment paired with annual fundraising
Public-private consortiums involving universities, foundations, and philanthropists
💡 Final Recommendation
To fully replace the $1.1B annual CPB subsidy, a minimum $27.5 billion endowment would be needed under conservative investment assumptions. This figure ensures long-term sustainability without needing annual appropriations or political reauthorization.
Analysis: European Americans’ unemployment rate has remained steady for four straight months with virtually no change in unemployment rate. Asian Americans decreased 10 basis points and Latino Americans decreased 30 basis points from May, respectively. African America’s unemployment rate increased by 80 basis points from May.
AFRICAN AMERICAN EMPLOYMENT REVIEW
AFRICAN AMERICAN MEN:
Unemployment Rate – 6.9%
Participation Rate – 68.8%
Employed – 9,752,000
Unemployed – 721,000
African American Men (AAM) saw a increase in their unemployment rate by 170 basis points in June. The group had a mild rebound in their participation rate in June by 30 basis points. African American Men lost 117,000 jobs in June and saw their number of unemployed increase by 181,000.
AFRICAN AMERICAN WOMEN:
Unemployment Rate – 5.8%
Participation Rate – 60.9%
Employed – 10,248,000
Unemployed – 634,000
African American Women saw a decrease in their unemployment rate by 40 basis points in June. The group decreased their participation rate in June by 80 basis points. African American Women lost 84,000 jobs in June and saw their number of unemployed decrease by 50,000.
AFRICAN AMERICAN TEENAGERS:
Unemployment Rate – 19.2%
Participation Rate – 30.0%
Employed – 651,000
Unemployed – 155,000
African American Teenagers unemployment rate increased by 480 basis points. The group saw their participation rate increased by 210 basis points in June. African American Teenagers added 10,000 jobs in May and saw their number of unemployed also decrease 41,000.
African American Men-Women Job Gap: African American Women currently have 496,000 more jobs than African American Men in June. This is an increase from 463,000 in May.
CONCLUSION: The overall economy added 147,000 jobs in June while African America lost 193,000 jobs. From CNN, “It is becoming harder for Americans to find work: The average duration of unemployment rose from 21.8 weeks to 23 weeks, and the share of unemployed workers who have been out of a job for 27 weeks or longer rose to 23.3%, edging closer to a three-year high. Trump’s tariffs — and the dizzying back and forth on implementing them and pausing them — has caused many businesses to stall major decision-making or spending, including hiring.”
HBCU Money 