The DEI Strategy Conversation Isn’t Over. It’s Changing.

A lot of organizations have gone quiet on diversity, equity, and inclusion over the past year. Not because the work stopped mattering, but because the environment around it changed.

This didn’t happen because people stopped believing in the work. It happened because the political environment changed, and many organizations didn’t know how to respond without creating new risk.

The pressure was not abstract. It came through legislation, lawsuits, executive action, and public campaigns that made DEI language a target. In many leadership rooms, DEI stopped being discussed as a long-term commitment and started being treated as a risk to manage.

The part that people can feel in their bones is what came next. Not a thoughtful evolution. A purge.

What Changed and What Didn’t

The language around DEI became politicized, intentionally and aggressively. Words like “equity” and “systemic” were reframed as liabilities. Some organizations responded by going quiet. Others started stripping references out of training, websites, and public-facing material.

That is where this got ugly.

Because the rollback did not stay inside HR policies. It spilled into history, culture, and public memory.

What did not change were expectations.

Employees still care about fairness and access. Customers still factor values into who they trust. Communities still feel the consequences of who is included and who is erased.

The conversation didn’t disappear. It moved into a sharper, more policed phase.

When Rollbacks Turned Into Erasure

There were moments in 2025 that would have sounded unbelievable a few years ago.

The Associated Press reported that federal agencies began removing DEI guidance and resources from government websites, shutting down DEI offices, and canceling related work to comply with an executive order targeting DEI. AP News

Then it got worse.

Politico reported that the Pentagon’s campaign to remove DEI-connected content swept up tributes and historic material, including references to Jackie Robinson, the Tuskegee Airmen, the Navajo Code Talkers, Medgar Evers, and even an iconic Iwo Jima photo because it was tied to Ira Hayes, a Native American Marine. Politico

The Associated Press also reported the Air Force removed training courses that included videos about the Tuskegee Airmen as part of DEI course content, before public outcry forced a quick response. AP News+1

If you are reading this and thinking, that’s not a “messaging adjustment,” you’re right. That is a cultural and historical consequence.

And it wasn’t limited to the military.

The Washington Post and multiple arts outlets reported that the National Gallery of Art closed its office of belonging and inclusion and removed related language from its website after an executive order. The Washington Post+2ArtNews+2

The Atlantic reported on the removal of the Black Lives Matter mural in Washington, D.C., a public symbol that had become part of the country’s civic landscape. theatlantic.com

The Associated Press reported the Interior Department directed national park gift shops to purge merchandise considered to promote DEI, and noted related controversy around changes involving Martin Luther King Jr. Day and Juneteenth. AP News

So yes, some rollbacks were about language. Some were about programs. Some were about money.

But some were about what gets remembered, and what gets quietly removed

Corporate America Made Choices and the Public Responded

This period was not only about government. Corporate America also made visible moves.

Target’s DEI decisions became a national storyline, tracked in detail by retail industry coverage, and debated publicly in a way most brands were not prepared for. Retail Brew+1

Costco became a different kind of story. Reuters reported that Costco shareholders overwhelmingly rejected a proposal demanding a report on the “risks” of maintaining diversity and inclusion initiatives. That vote was a public signal, not just a private governance moment. Reuters

This is the landscape heading into 2026.

Not “DEI is over.” More like, “DEI became a political third rail, and some leaders panicked.”

Silence Was Not Neutral

A lot of organizations assumed saying less would draw less attention. That logic failed.

When organizations that once spoke clearly about inclusion went quiet, people filled in the blanks themselves. Pressure appeared to work. Commitments looked conditional. Trust became shakier.

Silence does not read as strategy to most audiences. It reads as retreat.

What Leaders Need to Do Now

The path forward is not a return to 2020-style statements. People have grown past that. It also cannot be a full retreat into silence, because the public has learned what silence often means.

The work now is more disciplined.

Clear language that holds up under scrutiny.Actions that match stated values.Leadership alignment, so the message does not change every time the news cycle spikes.Cultural relevance treated as awareness and competence, not performance.

This moment does not reward noise. It rewards clarity.

And clarity remains the foundation of trust.

What to Do This Week

If you’re leading an organization right now, you don’t need a new statement. You need clarity. Here’s where to start, immediately.

1. Audit what disappeared quietly.Pull up your website, training materials, public-facing language, and internal docs. Identify what was removed, renamed, or softened in the past 12–18 months. Ask why. If the answer is “we didn’t want attention,” that’s a signal worth examining.

2. Decide what you will still stand behind.Not everything needs to be public-facing. But everything should be intentional. Get clear on which values, commitments, and practices are non-negotiable inside your organization, regardless of political pressure.

3. Align leadership before you communicate anything.Mixed messages create more risk than clear ones. Make sure your executive team, board, and communications leads agree on what can be said, what should be shown through action, and what requires restraint.

4. Replace slogans with proof points.If you aren’t comfortable using DEI language publicly, focus on what you are doing instead. Hiring practices. Pay equity reviews. Vendor choices. Community partnerships. These speak louder than branded language ever did.

5. Prepare for questions instead of avoiding them.Staff, partners, and stakeholders are already asking themselves what your silence means. Decide now how you will answer when those questions surface. Silence forces others to guess. Preparedness builds trust.

6. Choose consistency over comfort.You don’t need to respond to every headline. You do need to be steady. Organizations lose credibility when their position shifts every time the pressure changes.

This week isn’t about fixing everything.It’s about stopping drift.

And drift is where trust erodes fastest.

A resource for leaders navigating this now

Over the past year, I’ve heard the same question from nonprofit leaders, founders, and communications teams across sectors: how do we stay clear about our values without creating new risk? How do we move forward without placing a target on our organization's backs?

That question is what led me to document a practical framework for navigating DEI rollbacks without losing trust or visibility. The DEI Rollbacks PR Blueprint outlines how to communicate with intention, maintain credibility, and align leadership and messaging in a politically charged environment.

Pamela Berry is the founder of Yellow Rabbit PR & Marketing and works with mission-driven organizations navigating visibility, trust, and cultural relevance during periods of political and social change.