Editors at several LGBTQ+ publications have demanded answers after reports about Jay Katari's social media activity and growing role at equalpride, the company behind major queer news brands. His resignation has eased the immediate pressure, but questions about ownership, editorial independence and board governance are still hanging in the air.

Essential Takeaways

  • Jay Katari has resigned: The equalpride board member stepped down after public concern about reported MAGA-linked social media activity.
  • Editors sought reassurance: Leaders at several LGBTQ+ outlets said Katari's position hadn't influenced their journalism.
  • His role had expanded: Equalpride listed him as a board member and strategic adviser focused on growth and innovation.
  • Governance is changing: CEO Mark Berryhill said he now has authority to appoint future board members.
  • The debate goes beyond one person: The episode has revived scrutiny of who controls LGBTQ+ media and how editorial trust is protected.

The resignation came after a public backlash

The immediate flashpoint was a report examining Katari's social media presence, including an image showing him wearing a MAGA hat. Reports also highlighted an Instagram bio that appeared to mock or dismiss trans identity, although no public statement directly attacking LGBTQ+ people was identified.

That distinction matters, but so does perception. For readers of queer publications, ownership and leadership aren't distant corporate details. They shape whether a newsroom feels safe, credible and genuinely aligned with the community it serves. LGBTQ Nation and The Advocate reported that Katari resigned as criticism spread among staff and editors.

Equalpride CEO Mark Berryhill announced the departure in an internal email, after which Katari's profile disappeared from the company's website. In a statement, Katari said he had intended to offer his time and experience in support of equalpride's work. The wording was restrained, but the timing made the message difficult to separate from the growing controversy.

Editors wanted a clear line between boardroom and newsroom

Editors at The Advocate, Out, Them, Pride.com, Out Traveler and Plus issued a joint statement saying they had become aware of concerns about Katari's views. They also stressed that his position hadn't influenced their reporting, an important reassurance at a moment when audiences were likely to question every headline.

That concern had a practical basis. Equalpride had listed Katari not only as a board member but also as a strategic adviser for growth and innovation. According to reporting by The Washington Blade and the Los Angeles Blade, staff were encouraged to meet him so he could learn more about their work, although those conversations were later stopped after employees raised concerns about the meetings.

Newsrooms depend on trust, and trust is especially fragile when a media company serves a community that has often had to fight to be heard. A reader may not know the details of an investment agreement, but they'll notice if the people at the top appear out of step with the publication's purpose.

Why equalpride's ownership structure matters

Berryhill said Katari had joined through an investor group's right to appoint two directors without approval from the CEO or management. That explanation offers useful context, but it also highlights the tension between financial governance and editorial culture.

Equalpride owns several established LGBTQ+ brands and acquired Them in February 2026. The company has also faced scrutiny over job cuts at The Advocate, Out and Pride.com before that acquisition, as well as reductions affecting Them staff during the transition, according to coverage from The Advocate and Them.

For readers, the issue isn't simply whether an investor or director writes stories. It's whether their priorities can influence staffing, strategy, budgets or the atmosphere in which journalism is produced. Editorial independence doesn't end at the edge of a published article. It also depends on who has power behind the scenes.

What the governance changes could mean

Berryhill said the investor group has now authorised him to appoint future board members. That could give equalpride's management more control over who joins the board, potentially reducing the chance of another appointment becoming a surprise to staff.

It doesn't, however, settle broader questions about accountability. A more transparent process could include clear expectations for directors, published governance principles and a straightforward explanation of how editorial independence is protected. Those steps might sound dry, but they can make a real difference when a company owns trusted community publications.

The episode also shows how quickly social media can turn a corporate appointment into a newsroom crisis. A single image or joke may not tell the whole story, but it can prompt reasonable questions about judgement, values and fit, particularly when the role involves a publication group serving marginalised readers.

The wider lesson for LGBTQ+ media

The resignation may close one chapter, but it won't end the conversation about who owns queer media. LGBTQ+ journalism is both a public service and a business, and the two sides don't always pull in the same direction.

The challenge for equalpride now is to rebuild confidence without treating the controversy as a one-day communications problem. Staff need clarity, readers need evidence that editorial decisions remain independent, and future board appointments will likely face closer scrutiny. That's not unreasonable; it's part of being accountable to a community whose trust has been earned the hard way.

For readers, the simplest takeaway is also the most useful: pay attention to ownership, funding and governance as well as the stories themselves. A strong newsroom needs all three to line up.

A board resignation may calm the immediate storm, but lasting trust will depend on what equalpride does next.

Source Reference Map

Story idea inspired by: [1]

Sources by paragraph: