This article explores the May 2003 Washington Post investigative stories concerning The Nature Conservancy (TNC) for their implications for understanding the dynamics of accountability for nonprofit organizations. The authors argue that the series framed the conservancy's activities in accord with a metanarrative or story that may be reduced to the fable of The Prince and the Pauper. Because The Post depicted TNC's actions in this light in its front-page stories, the conservation organization had little strategic choice but to accept that characterization and to plead that it would do better in the future. Reality, however, was much more complex than this reductionist accounting suggested. The authors explore the social and political impact of The Post articles and their assumptions concerning organizational and democratic accountability as well as their implications for the potential for organizational learning and for public policy agenda-setting dynamics.
Baumgartner, F. & Jones, B. (1993). Agendas and instability in American politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2.
Baumgartner, F., & Jones, B. (Eds.). (2002). Policy dynamics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
3.
Birchard, B. (2005). Nature's keepers: The remarkable story of how The Nature Conservancy became the largest environmental organization in the world. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
4.
Birkland, T. (1997). After disaster: Agenda setting, public policy, and focusing events. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
5.
Boyce, M. (1995). Collective centering and collective sense-making in the stories and storytelling of one organization. Organization Studies, 16(1), 107-137.
6.
Brooks, D. (2004). A polarized America. The Hedgehog Review: Critical Reflections on Contemporary Culture, 6(3), 14-23.
7.
Cartee, K. (2004). News narratives and news framing: Constituting political reality. New York: Rowman & Littlefield.
8.
Cobb, R., & Elder, C. (1983). Participation in American politics: The dynamics of agenda-building (2nd ed.). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
9.
Derthick, M. (1990). Agency under stress: The social security administration in American governmentWashington, DC: Brookings Institution.
10.
Dym, B., & Hutson, H. (2005). Leadership in nonprofit organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
11.
Edelman, M. (1998). Constructing the political spectacle. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
12.
Gitlin, T. (2003). Media unlimited: How the torrent of images overwhelms our lives. New York: Henry Holt.
13.
Gitlin, T. (2004). Deliberation in democracy. The Hedgehog Review: Critical Reflections on Contemporary Culture, 6(3), 5-13.
14.
Governance Advisory Panel, The Nature Conservancy. (2004, March 19). Report of the Governance Advisory Panel to the Executive Committee and the Board of Governors of The Nature Conservancy. Arlington, VA: Author.
15.
Grassley, C. (2004). Statement (U.S. Senate Finance Committee). Retrieved from http://finance.senate.gov
16.
Gring-Pemble, L. (2003). Grim fairy tales: The rhetorical construction of American welfare policy. Westport, CT: Praeger.
17.
Hershberg, C., & Dominis, J. (1993, October). Our nature: Saving the last great places campaign by The Nature Conservancy. Life, 16(11), 33-39.
18.
Howard, A., & Magretta, J. (1995). Surviving success: Interview with Nature Conservancy CEO John Sawhill. The McKinsey Quarterly, 14, 156-168.
19.
Internal Revenue Service. (2004, October 22). IRS initiative will scrutinize EO compensation practices. Retrieved from http://www.irs.gov/charities/article/o,,id=128328,00.html
20.
Johnston, D. C. (2002, July 18). Grand jury is investigating United Way in Washington. The New York Times, p. A17-A17.
21.
Jones, A. (2005, February). With charity for all?Corporate Counsel Magazine, 12, 2, 74-74.
22.
Mapes, L., & Welch, C. (2003, May 7). State chapter defends record of group. Seattle Times, p. A12-A12.
23.
McCormick, S. (2003, May 13). Balancing the Nature Conservancy story. The Washington Post, p. A19-A19.
24.
Murphy, J. (1987, February 9). Conservation's best kept secret; protecting land the businesslike way—by buying it. Time, 129, 54-55.
25.
Ottoway, D. & Stephens, J. (2003a, December 21). Land-trust boom a boon for habitat. The Washington Post, p. A20-A20.
26.
Ottoway, D., & Stephens, J. (2003b, May 4). Nonprofit land bank amasses billions. The Washington Post, p. A1-A1.
27.
Ottoway, D., & Stephens, J. (2003c, May 5). On Eastern Shore, for-profit ‘flagship’ hits shoals. The Washington Post, p. A11-A11.
28.
PR Newswire Association, Inc. (2003, July 17). EPA investigating Nature Conservancy at landmark's request. PR Newswire.
29.
Roe, E. (1994). Narrative policy analysisDurham, NC: Duke University Press.
30.
Rozell, M. (Ed.). (2003). Media power, media politicsChampaign-Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
31.
Schattschneider, E. E. (1960). The semi-sovereign people. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
32.
Stephens, J. (2003, May 10). Charity's land deals to be scrutinized: Senators send letter to Conservancy. The Washington Post, p. A2-A2.
33.
Stephens, J. & Ottoway, D. (2003a, May 16). Charity hiring lawyers to prevent probe. The Washington Post, p. A27-A27.
34.
Stephens, J., & Ottoway, D. (2003b, December 21). Developers find payoff in preservation. The Washington Post, p. A1-A1.
35.
Stephens, J., & Ottoway, D. (2003c, May 13). Nature Conservancy suspends land sales. The Washington Post, p. A3-A3.
36.
Walker, W. (2001, October 29). Storm brews over Sept. 11 funds. The Toronto Star,p. A18-A18.
