In my last article, I wrote about the changing landscape of trust. How we earn it has changed over the years. If you haven't already, I recommend taking a moment to read it, because I will be building on a lot of what I said there.

The rise of New Power has left virtually no entity unscathed. We are living through the rise of populist sentiments and mass mobilizations, where decentralization and peer-to-peer networks have transformed power from something controlled by the few into a dynamic force that moves freely across platforms, networks, and communities. Through tools as simple as Wikipedia, useful as Airbnb, and disruptive as cryptocurrency, people have the ability to wield and channel power in unprecedented ways.

Many consumer-facing brands have responded with great speed and agility to social and cultural changes (they have no other choice). But nonprofits, government organizations, and other institutions, insulated from market forces and cultural pressure, have been slower to adapt.

But more and more, these organizations are starting to see the writing on the wall. Even before Trump launched his open assault on the civil sector, donations had been falling. Critiques from all directions are landing harder and becoming more difficult to defend against. The vast permission they once enjoyed to do their work without little interference is over.

There is one legacy institution that has responded quickly and competently to the growing pressures of New Power: the New York Times. Heading into the 2016 presidential campaign, it was facing down a trifecta of challenges—a high-stakes transition to digital subscriptions, record-low public trust in media, and a political landscape fueled by social media-driven discontent. Its dual identity as both a profit-driven business and as the free press itself makes it an especially valuable case study.

Nonprofits and philanthropic organizations are under heightened scrutiny today. They can take a valuable lesson from the news organization that faced Trump’s wrath: rather than relying on its legacy or waiting out the storm, it took control of its brand narrative, proactively adapting to meet the evolving expectations of its audience and the cultural moment.

New York Times: The Old Power Way

In the time before Trump and digital subscriptions, the Times enjoyed a level of comfort and confidence that was afforded to few newspapers—the go-to source for in-depth, serious reporting. Across the 1980s and 90s, the Times’ marketing emphasized its product—highlighting in-depth coverage and editorial excellence. Their proposition was encapsulated in their slogans: “It Adds To Your Life” and “Expect the World”. For decades, the NYT operated under a simple assumption: authority builds trust. Their branding reflected this, focusing on expertise and credibility rather than engagement or transparency. Even when controversies arose, they stuck to the formula: apologize, make internal changes, and carry on. 

But the rules of trust were changing.

Enter Donald Trump. Frustrated by critical coverage, he lashed out, belittling the paper as “the failing New York Times”. Disparaging the press was not a novel tactic. In fact, John Adams signed the Sedition Act into law in 1798, making it illegal to publish “false, scandalous, and malicious writing" against the government, partly because he was furious that opposition papers had called him “querulous and toothless”. The law expired a few years later and history books remember it as an anti-free speech blunder. But this act kicked off a long history of journalism’s combative relationship with the public and those in power. One could argue that a contentious media relationship is not a bug, but a feature of democracy.

Trump showed up in the midst of a growing cultural discontent towards the media. In 2016, Gallup reported that trust in the media was the lowest it had ever been since it first started administering its survey in 1972. Trump didn’t invent media skepticism, he merely amplified it.

So, the New York Times, facing growing pressure to build revenue through digital subscription, was caught off guard when a rising political figure made the paper the target of his attacks. The Times could no longer rely on its legacy credibility at a time of unprecedented pressure. It had to take control of its own story.

New York Times: The New Power Playbook 

Reveal your values
Its first big move was to launch a major ad campaign, its first since 2010. The maiden spot aired during the 2016 Oscars, an arresting and stirring articulation of its mission: to chase down and report on the truth, no matter what. 

This was a turning point. No longer just selling a product, they were positioning themselves as an essential force for good, the load-bearers of democracy. The truth itself was at stake and the Times was on the front lines of defending it. The campaign succeeded in driving an enormous surge in digital subscriptions.

Take audiences behind the scenes
As the campaign progressed, additional spots took audiences behind the scenes of journalistic work. It revealed the painstaking work of following leads, finding sources, and fact-checking.

By explaining the process and editorial choices, the New York Times demonstrated a new level of transparency. A classic "show-don't-tell" approach, this was a smart move to build trust in an era where media skepticism was at an all-time high and the public was demanding greater levels of transparency.

Humanize the brand
The NYTimes also started humanizing its brand by elevating its journalists as recognizable figures.  NY Times journalists, like Adam Liptak on the supreme court beat and Astead Herndon on the national politics beat, are the primary storytellers on The Daily. Others frequently appear in short explainer videos across the paper’s homepage and social platforms. Even their lifestyle contributors, like game designers and recipe developers, have built loyal followings through their work. People trust people. And trust built through individuals strengthens institutional credibility. 

Encourage participation
The cumulative effect of all these changes is that the NYT has succeeded in building an experience that feels overall more accessible, authentic, and participatory. The podcasts invite listeners into expert debriefs on major issues of the day. Bringing their journalist-experts front and center allowed audiences to build connections with the brand in more personal ways. The expansion into live events and conferences, such as the NYT's annual DealBook Summit and TimesTalks series, gives readers a chance to participate in the Times in a 360-degree experience. CMO David Rubin summed it up perfectly when he said, “We know that when people buy any product there is an emotional connection and a functional connection, and I think in news, we have been overly reliant on that functional benefit.”. These shifts represent a move away from the "temple on a hill" model of Old Power institutions and toward a more interactive form of journalism that feels human, participatory, and experiential—hallmarks of New Power culture.

But you’re probably still wondering: did all these moves win over skeptics? Expecting a single campaign to restore trust is unrealistic. Brand story-telling doesn’t guarantee trust, but it makes trust more possible. More importantly, telling your own story ensures you shape how you are perceived, rather than letting others define it for you.

What Nonprofits Can Learn from This Shift

There's a lot that nonprofits can learn from this case study of the NY Times. 

Don't mistake silence for neutrality. Trust is built by clearly articulating your values, your worldview, and your purpose. And no, a vague mission like 'making the world a better place' isn't enough. You need to demonstrate why your work is essential—especially in a time when key values are being challenged, politicized, or dismissed. The Times positioned itself as a guardian of democracy. What essential role can your organization claim?  

Take your audiences behind the scenes. Your impact is not a magic trick; it is the result of research, advising, organizing, negotiating, and building alliances. Audiences are eager to understand how the work gets done.

Your staff are your greatest untapped asset. Highlighting their expertise and passion can make your mission more relatable and credible. When audiences connect with real people, they naturally extend that trust to the institutions they are associated with.

The New York Times recognized the shifting landscape and adapted. Nonprofits and mission-driven organizations must do the same before they lose control of their own narrative.