Editors at major LGBTQ+ publications are welcoming Jay Katari's resignation from equalpride, after reports about his MAGA links prompted urgent questions over independence, credibility and the direction of the company behind The Advocate, Out and Them.

Essential Takeaways

  • Board departure: Jay Katari has resigned from equalpride, which owns several prominent LGBTQ+ publications.
  • Staff concerns: Queer and transgender editorial teams demanded clarity after reports about his social media activity and political associations.
  • No editorial role: Management said Katari wouldn't influence journalism, while staff stressed that he hadn't shaped their reporting.
  • Governance change: Equalpride's lead investor group has handed the chief executive authority to appoint future directors.
  • A credibility test: The episode shows how quickly ownership decisions can affect trust in specialist newsrooms.

Why Katari's resignation became unavoidable

The immediate issue was a clash between corporate governance and editorial credibility. Jay Katari had joined the board of equalpride, the parent company behind The Advocate, Out, Them and other LGBTQ+ titles, but reports about his apparent support for Donald Trump and the MAGA movement quickly unsettled staff.

According to The Advocate, independent journalist Kevin Ortega-Rojas documented social media activity including a photograph of Katari wearing a red MAGA hat, alongside pro-Trump material and follows linked to the former president's political circle. The reporting didn't identify a public statement in which Katari directly attacked LGBTQ+ people, but it raised questions that the newsroom couldn't simply brush aside.

That tension was especially sharp because these publications regularly cover policies affecting queer and transgender people. For journalists reporting on threats to LGBTQ+ rights, an owner's political associations aren't a minor footnote. They're part of the environment in which readers judge whether coverage is independent.

Staff demanded answers, not reassurance

Editorial employees from The Advocate, Out, Them, Pride.com, Out Traveler and Plus publicly asked management to explain Katari's expanded involvement. Earlier efforts to arrange meetings between staff and the new board member reportedly intensified the unease, rather than calming it.

Reports from The Pink Times and Out described a newsroom concerned that the company's leadership structure could undermine the publications' standing with readers. The staff response was notably direct: the editorial teams said Katari had not influenced their work, while also making clear that his presence on the parent company's board had become difficult to defend.

That distinction matters. Editorial independence isn't only about whether a board member edits a headline or assigns a story. It also depends on whether journalists and readers believe the organisation's leadership understands, or respects, the communities it serves.

Equalpride changes how directors are appointed

Equalpride CEO Mark Berryhill told employees that Katari had joined through an investment agreement allowing the lead investor group to appoint two directors without approval from management. That arrangement explains how the appointment happened, but it didn't resolve the concern over whether the company had adequate checks around board membership.

Following Katari's departure, the investor group gave Berryhill authority to appoint future directors. It's a practical governance change, although it also places greater responsibility on the chief executive to vet candidates carefully and communicate decisions clearly.

The episode is a reminder that media companies need more than editorial guidelines. They also need transparent ownership structures, credible safeguards and leadership willing to explain uncomfortable decisions before staff are forced to ask publicly.

Why political associations carry extra weight here

For a mainstream company, a director's political imagery might be treated as a reputational headache. In LGBTQ+ media, the stakes feel more personal. The Trump administration has pursued measures affecting gender recognition, transgender military service, passports, gender-affirming care and protections for LGBTQ+ pupils, all areas covered by these newsrooms.

Global Rainbow News reported that the controversy exposed a wider question about who gets to shape the institutions providing LGBTQ+ news. Readers aren't only buying information; they're deciding whether a publication understands the risks facing its audience.

That makes trust unusually tactile. A newsroom can produce accurate work and still lose confidence if its corporate leadership appears disconnected from the community. As any editor knows, credibility takes years to build and only one awkward board appointment to rattle.

The newsroom says its journalism will continue independently

After the resignation, editorial leads at The Advocate, Out and Them welcomed the decision and reaffirmed their commitment to reporting without fear or favour. They said their focus remained accurate, timely journalism for LGBTQ+ readers.

The response is important because it separates the publications' journalism from the dispute around their parent company. Staff weren't claiming that Katari had directed coverage; they were arguing that his presence created a conflict with the mission and public identity of the brands.

For readers, the next test will be consistency. The publications will need to keep showing their independence through transparent reporting, careful sourcing and a willingness to scrutinise power, including the power within their own corporate structure.

The story also offers a broader lesson for media owners: community trust isn't a soft extra. It's part of the product, and protecting it starts long before a crisis reaches the newsroom.

A board change can't erase the controversy, but it can show readers that accountability still matters.

Source Reference Map

Story idea inspired by: [1]

Sources by paragraph: