I'm One of the Filmmakers DOGE Targeted at the NEH. Here's Why We're In Trouble (Guest Column)
As you may have heard, President Donald Trump and DOGE recently cut the vast majority of staff and grants at the NEH. It's hit documentary filmmakers hard.
More from The Hollywood Reporter
Trump Names Fox News Host Jeanine Pirro Acting U.S. Attorney for Washington, D.C.
President Biden Continues to Say He Would've Beaten Trump, Says He Wasn't Surprised by 2024 Election Outcome: "They Went the Sexist Route"
Studio Chiefs Agree: California Needs a Better Plan to Keep Hollywood
With the NEH cuts, DOGE has targeted 89 documentary and related 'media' projects (this includes podcasts). Among them are a four-part Ken Burns docuseries exploring the history of our criminal justice system; Rita Coburn's film on W.E.B. Du Bois; and Matia Karrell and Hilary Prentice's documentary Coming Home: Fight for a Legacy, about America's overlooked female World War II aviators. Even documentaries on baseball and Nancy Drew saw their funding stopped. The future of some of these projects is now uncertain.
In many cases the films were stopped midstream — Karrell and Prentice were able to get 20 percent of their funds, for instance, but the remaining $480,000 are currently inaccessible. This sum — earned after a decade of research, filming and personal investment — is everything to the filmmakers, even as it's peanuts to the federal government. Between $10 million and $20 million in 'media funding' were cut. That may sound hefty, but it's only about 10 percent of the NEH's overall budget (many other grantees of course saw cuts too), which is 0.003 percent of the total federal budget. Hardly a deficit buster.
The mass termination of NEH awards is unprecedented in the agency's 60-year history, and doesn't just affect filmmakers. It also impacts the cultural lifeblood of our country. The NEH was established in 1965 by President Lyndon B. Johnson, and in the years since has awarded $6 billion in grants to humanities councils in 56 states and jurisdictions in support of projects that deepen understanding of our shared humanity. Many NEH-funded films have had major social impact, from Gordon Parks' 1984 made-for-public television film Solomon Northup's Odyssey, based on the Twelve Years a Slave author's odyssey to A Midwife's Tale, a docudrama based on the diary of an early American midwife that aired on PBS's American Experience in 1997. Or 2020's Crip Camp, an empowering look at the disability rights movement by James Lebrecht, one of its activists and founders. All that is now imperiled.
My own letter was a gut punch. I'd been working on a documentary, My Underground Mother, for over a decade. The film traces my search for my late mother's hidden Holocaust past, which included time at a Jewish women's forced labor camp that she and 60 other inmates wrote about in a secret diary (a band of resisters who I locate around the world in real time, combining written passages with new interviews). Their story highlights an untold aspect of the Holocaust and the evil consequences of antisemitism.
But the nonprofit sponsoring my work (all NEH films have one) received a letter last month from Michael McDonald, the NEH's acting chair, that stated my documentary 'no longer effectuates the agency's needs and priorities and conditions of the Grant Agreement,' based on a rarely used clause that gives federal agencies broad authority to stop funding projects that don't adhere to an administration's agenda. 'Your grant's immediate termination is necessary to safeguard the interests of the federal government, including its fiscal priorities,' it read.
Apparently my small independent film wasn't only deemed a waste of taxpayers' money by this administration — its very funding was imperiling the 'urgent' fiscal needs of our nation.
All of this seemed especially peculiar given how President Trump is currently at war with major universities for their alleged failures to combat antisemitism. The irony wasn't lost on Sen. Elizabeth Warren either — she singled out My Underground Mother as an especially egregious example of a bad cut decision. President Trump also stated that many of the terminated projects focused on DEI, but it's hard to see how that applies to movies about the likes of artist Frida Kahlo or Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel.
As the Academy Award-nominated director Immy Humes — a grantee who has been working on a film about the little-known indie-cinema figure Shirley Clarke and who has organized a group of filmmakers to fight the moves – notes, 'The cuts are too sweeping and undefined.' She adds, 'I was on cloud nine when I was notified about my NEH grant award. And then boom. This crazy termination with no warning.'
While DOGE's Elon Musk has characterized federal grants as handouts and grant recipients as freeloaders scamming the federal government, let me be the first to tell you, the NEH grant process isn't for those looking for easy payouts. Statistically, it's harder to win an NEH grant than to gain admission to Harvard, and it's often preceded by rejections. My first award, a film development grant of $75,000, was the culmination of nearly a decade of research, writing, filming, pitching and fundraising.
The vetting process here was nearly as thorough. One insider said that the only DOGE people who visited were two young men who only spent a few days at the office.
Needless to say, the impact of these cuts will be huge and resonate far beyond the documentary world. Defunding these grants means harming every library, historical society, museum and organization that produces, distributes and plays these films. This pipeline is further damaged by Trump's proposed gutting of the NEA and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
It's hard to know what the next steps could or should be. Instead of issuing clear guidelines on how to appeal, the administration issued a series of confusing directives, extending the 30-day appeal window by another 30 days but also stating: 'NEH is not offering a means of dispute resolution.'
It's up to the nonprofit organizations the NEH works with, not individual filmmakers, to seek legal redress for the grant terminations. But this makes for a scattershot approach, with many choosing to accept termination out of fear of losing overdue reimbursements. Others, like Prentice, whose production partner Women Make Movies is filing an appeal on behalf of her film, have decided to push back.
Some recent wins in court, most notably by journalists from the Voice of America, do give hope. (Though an appeals court just reversed the ruling.) V.O.A. was founded during World War II to broadcast fact-based journalism to troops and citizens abroad and counter Nazi propaganda. And if there's one thing I've learned from my film's deep dive into history, it's that there's no better way to counter hate than by humanizing the other. I've seen first hand how meeting a Holocaust survivor, whether in person or through a project, can dispel the most deep-seated antisemitic beliefs. But if the NEH, NEA and local humanities councils are defunded, the platforms that can bridge divides will be severely limited. And so, too, will our chances of stemming hate's rising ride.
'The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their history,' wrote George Orwell. As we celebrate the Allies win over hatred with the 80th anniversary of Victory in Europe Day on Thursday, we can hope, pray — and fight — to ensure that organizations like the NEH are here to stop that destruction.
Marisa Fox is a veteran journalist and television producer and the director of 'My Underground Mother.'
Best of The Hollywood Reporter
Hollywood's Most Notable Deaths of 2025
Most Anticipated Concert Tours of 2025: Beyoncé, Billie Eilish, Kendrick Lamar & SZA, Sabrina Carpenter and More
Hollywood's Highest-Profile Harris Endorsements: Taylor Swift, George Clooney, Bruce Springsteen and More
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
36 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Did the president drop an f-bomb? Yes, and Democrats are doing it too
Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who started in politics as a young legislative aide and is now the senior Democrat in Florida's congressional delegation, has for years calibrated her statements, carefully choosing her words to communicate exactly the message she intends. Recently, speaking at the Broward Democratic Party's annual fundraising dinner, she used blunt - shocking to some - language to convey the threat she said was emanating from President Donald Trump's policies. "F-," she said. More than once. Wasserman Schulz declared that Democrats would "fight to our last breath, and we'll go to the f-ing mat." There has been a clear coarsening of political language: Words that once were widely seen as off-limits, other than behind closed doors or in small groups, are now more common - an extra tool to convey anger and frustration. At another point in the Broward fundraising dinner, Wasserman Schultz decried what she said Trump and Republicans are doing. She asked the audience of 300, "Are we going to let them do that, Broward County?" "No," people in the audience responded. To which the congresswoman replied with an emphatic "f- no!" "This has been building up in me for a long time. So forgive me," she added. Wasserman Schultz later explained the word wasn't in her prepared remarks but said the gravity of the threat the nation is facing in 2025 warranted an expression that once would have been stunning in a public setting. Trump There's no more prominent public user of the f-word and others once widely seen as off-limits than the president. Most recently, on June 24 he was expressing his displeasure with Iran and Israel. "We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don't know what the f- they're doing. Do you understand that?" His use of the word in regard to Iran and Israel - speaking on the lawn of the White House - attracted massive attention, but he's no stranger to the public use of four-letter words. "More than any other president, Trump has been known to use coarse language in speeches and other public appearances. But even for him, this on-camera utterance of the f-word was new. American presidents have typically refrained from using it publicly, even when angry or frustrated," NPR reported. Just before last year's election, the New York Times reported that a computer search found he had used curses at least 140 times in public last year, not counting words such as "damn" and "hell" that are much tamer to many people. A review of Trump's speech at the 2024 Conservative Political Action Conference found he used epithets 44 times, the Times reported. Perhaps the most famous previous use of the f-word came from Joe Biden, then the vice president, who told President Barack Obama that his 2010 signing the Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare, into law was "a big f-ing deal." One big difference: Biden whispered it to Obama and meant it to be private, but it was picked up on an open mic. Critics at the time suggested it was an example of Biden's tendency toward gaffes; years later some supporters were more positive about what they called the BFD moment. Democrats join After 10 years of Trump dominating and altering the nation's political discourse, Democrats' language is now changing. "In some ways the Democrats have been slower, particularly in the Trump era, to adopt the attention-gaining messaging that Donald Trump has really leaned into," said Joshua Scacco, an association professor of communication at the University of South Florida. "It does seem like the Trump era is catching up to Democrats in terms of how they're responding, in terms of how they're adapting their own messaging." Scacco, who specializes in political communication and media content, is also founder and director of the university's Center for Sustainable Democracy. At a Florida Democratic Party dinner gala, which fell between Wasserman Schultz's and Trump's use of the f-word, U.S. Rep. Jared Moskowitz was delivering remarks to an audience of 800. The Broward-Palm Beach County congressman described what would happen when lawmakers returned to Washington to take up the measure the Republican majority passed on July 3, the legislation named "Big Beautiful Bill" at Trump's behest. "They're going to try to pass the big beautiful bulls- of a bill," Moskowitz said. Wasserman Schultz has regularly used the term "DOGEbags" to describe the people dispatched under the Trump presidency to fan out through federal agencies as part of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency effort formerly led by billionaire Elon Musk to eliminate programs and slash spending. On Monday, Kristi Noem, secretary of the Department of Homeland Security and former Republican governor of South Dakota, said she was looking forward to a visit with Trump the next day to the detention center for illegal immigrants pending deportation that Florida has established in the Everglades. In an official statement attributed to Noem and distributed by the agency, she said the detention center would allow the government to lock up "some of the worst scumbags" in the country. Divergent reactions The responses to use of one of the terms that still can't be printed or aired in most mainstream news outlets often depends on the affiliation of the person who uttered the word. After Trump used the word, his firmness and resolve was heralded by a host on Fox, the favored cable news outlet for Republicans. A "very frustrated" president used "salty language," she said. Minutes later, the same Fox host professed outrage at a Democrat's use of the term. She said she was "repulsed" by the user's "foul mouth." The contradictory reactions were so extreme that it prompted mockery online and a video of excerpts calling out Fox from a host at competitor CNN. On Wednesday, as the U.S. House of Representatives debated the big bill to cut taxes, cut social program spending, provide more money for immigration enforcement and the military, and increase the federal debt, Democrats professed outrage. U.S. Rep. Josh Riley, D-N.Y., ran through a litany of objections, before delivering his summary. "Don't tell me you give a s- about the middle class when all you're doing is s-ting on the middle class," he said on the floor of the U.S. House. That produced a tut-tut from U.S. Rep. Steve Womack, R-Ark., who was presiding over the House at the time. "Avoid vulgar speak. We do have families" present. U.S. Rep. Virginia Fox, R-N.C., chair of the House Rules Committee, echoed the reminder about "the language we should be using in this chamber." The admonishment prompted what was, in effect, a verbal eye roll from U.S. Rep. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts, top Democrat on the Rules Committee. "I hope that when the president comes here next, you'll admonish him for the language he uses." Driving the change Several factors are propelling the increasing use of coarse language by Democrats, Scacco said. It's more than simply imitating Trump, he said. The language in question "has a lot of anger in it, a lot of emotional appeal. Democratic messaging has often seemed bloodless in comparison, lacked feeling," he said. "Anger is a very effective emotion in mobilizing people and getting them to perk up a bit. That's what you see here is the use of emotion in sort of that strategic manner, being angry here, frustration," Scacco said. Scacco is co-author of the book "The Ubiquitous Presidency: Presidential Communication and Digital Democracy in Tumultuous Times." "I think that for their base that they're communicating. Their base wants to see that they are clued in to what's going on. And so swearing and that emotional language I think communicates to the base that their elected officials understand the gravity and the magnitude of what's happening," he said. Part of why it seems jarring is that the Democrats under Biden's presidency and for years under an older generation of party leaders in Congress generally stuck with "that sort of more civil, decorous politics" - before they were swept away by Trump and his political movement. Rick Hoye, chair of the Broward Democratic Party, said the kind of language that's used publicly today by some elected officials is different than what he heard when he first got involved in politics in 2009. Hoye said it is both a symptom of the gravity of how strongly Democrats feel and a response to the yearning by many in the party's base that leaders do something to convey how strongly they feel. "For our folks they're just tired. They're just expressing their frustration, the frustration that is felt on the ground," Hoye said. "Democrats like people that are aggressive and fight back." Hoye said Democratic elected officials are "expressing the frustrations of everyday Democrats." He said voters "probably appreciate the fact that their elected officials are fed up and they're speaking a language that everyone feels," adding that "the plain-spoken language lets constituents know that they're on the ground for them." "Our leaders have realized that if they don't fight like this, the average people will get discouraged and feel that they're not really in tune with their struggles and their sentiments. And the Democratic party doesn't want to risk losing contact with the people that we need to show up." That assessment was reflected in a reaction to one of Wasserman Schultz's strong comments at the Broward Democrats dinner. "Excuse my French," she said, prompting a shout from the audience: "Love it. We speak French." Larry Snowden, president of Club 47, the South Florida-based mega-sized club of Trump supporters, said the president is unique. "He's been using those words for a long time," he said, adding the Democrats seem to be attempting to emulate something that works for Trump. "They're in shambles. Why wouldn't you try to be like your opponent." Michele Merrell, the elected state Republican committeewoman from Broward County, said she doesn't think the language that works for Trump necessarily works for others in politics, and definitely not in her view the Democrats. "No one can out-Trump Trump," she said. "I see Democratic and Republican candidates try to emulate him," she said. 'I see various candidates try to copy his way of communicating, and it doesn't really come across. I don't think there's anyone who can replicate what he does." News coverage Such language was once much more hidden from the public. Two generations ago, one of the more shocking elements in the transcripts of then-President Richard Nixon's tapes was his frequent use of profanity. That's how the phrase "expletive deleted" came into common parlance for a time; it was the phrase inserted in brackets to replace Nixon's frequent use of vulgarities. Even the Richard Nixon Foundation, on its website, acknowledged "RN's unfortunate weakness for expletives." One big difference: Those were words he used in meetings and on the phone, not in widely seen public settings. And the actual words didn't get reported. Today, Scacco said, strong language is a tool that the party out of power - the Democrats - can use to "gain attention in an environment where people are not focused on them." By using earthy language, he said, "you attract the attention of journalists who are doing the story, and also people." How to report such language is tricky for the news media. Traditionally such words haven't been published or aired in mainstream outlets that sought to uphold what once was seen as a standard of decorum. But when they're uttered by major political figures, are all over social media, and when livesteams go out online and on cable television, the calculation about preserving the public's innocence isn't as clear. "Mainstream outlets generally don't include profanity in their news reports," wrote the Poynter Institute for Media Studies, a nonprofit based in St. Petersburg. Poynter found a range of usage decisions about Trump's use of the word. Some news organizations avoided the word in text, but used it in video. Others used the word. Some didn't use it in either video or print. Many used hyphens or asterisks to replace some of the word's letters. The Associated Press Stylebook cautions against using such terms in articles unless there is a compelling reason. The AP used "f" and asterisks in text and bleeped the word on video. In an article published in June before Trump used the word, the New York Times explained its policy that publishing such terms "should be rare. We maintain a steep threshold for vulgar words. There are times, however, when publishing an offensive expression is necessary for a reader's understanding of what is being reported" which may include "reporting vulgarities uttered by powerful public figures and wielded in a public setting." When published, the Times wrote "we typically confine it to a single reference, and avoid using it in headlines, news alerts or social media posts." The complexity of the question was laid out in the headline of a Poynter analysis: "What do you do when the president drops an f-bomb?" _____ Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
USA Today
39 minutes ago
- USA Today
PFL exec offers Donald Trump a White House card with Francis Ngannou prior to UFC event
The idea of hosting fights at the White House has the entire MMA world going crazy, and PFL wants in on the action. During a recent speech, president Donald Trump revealed the idea of hosting a UFC event at the executive residence as a part of the country's 250th anniversary. Trump wants to go big and host 25,000 spectators, similar to a typical UFC pay-per-view event on Independence Day in 2026. Even though there were no additional details, Trump's press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the president was "dead serious" about the event. Now, PFL wants to be part of the festivities, creating an all-day MMA extravaganza. PFL chairman and founder Donn Davis tagged Trump in a message on X (formerly Twitter), offering a stacked lineup of seven fights that would take place prior to UFC event. The proposed fight card includes the biggest names in the promotion including Francis Ngannou, Cris Cyborg, Dakota Ditcheva and Usman Nurmagomedov. "MMA at White House great idea @realDonaldTrump for July 4, 2026," Davis wrote. "PFL has WOW fight card for MMA fans to celebrate USA 250 anniversary! @PFLMMA afternoon @ufc evening" The full fight card proposed by Davis includes: While the president may be serious about hosting an MMA event on the White House grounds, there are significant logistical hurdles. The White House is not a sports event venue, and does not have an indoor area large enough to host an event at the scale Trump wants. Therefore, the event would have to take place outdoors, which major promotions typically avoid due to weather. The UFC has always maintained a firm stance against hosting fights outdoors due to conditions that could affect the fighting surface, potentially causing problems for the fighters. However, considering the relationship between Trump and UFC CEO Dana White, the promotion may make an exception to pull off the event. If it goes forward, PFL hopes to be a part of the action too.
Yahoo
43 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Olympic champion dons Trump costume for straw race
Olympic champion Alistair Brownlee took part in his first Oxenhope Straw Race, dressed as US President Donald Trump. The former triathlete, from Dewsbury, was among 600 participants in fancy dress who raced each other between six pubs whilst carrying a bale of straw on Sunday. This year marked the 50th anniversary of the event, which dates back to the 1970s when a friendly wager between two farmers over who could haul a bale of straw between pubs the fastest sparked what would become the 2.5-mile (4km) race. Organiser Robin Wright said: "The origins of this extraordinary race are just as captivating as the event itself." According to the rules, participants must stop at five pubs along the route - The Waggon and Horses, The Bay Horse, the former "Idiot Hut" social club, The Lamb, and the former Shoulder of Mutton - downing a pint at each before making the final uphill push to the finish at the Dog and Gun. Competitors vie for more than just quick times, with prizes handed out for both the fastest teams and the most creative costumes. Brownlee, who donned a Donald Trump costume, told the BBC: "I've had a long career in professional sport but also been brought up in this area doing fell races. "This has always been something that I've seen and never been able to do and now I've got the opportunity to do it, so it's great to be here at the very famous Oxenhope Straw Race." According to organisers, the event has raised more than £500,000 for charity to date. Listen to highlights from West Yorkshire on BBC Sounds, catch up with the latest episode of Look North. Pints and perspiration at annual straw bale race Oxenhope Straw Race
