logo
    • Magazine
    • Membership
    • Donate
  • Racial Justice
  • Economic Justice
    • Collections
  • Climate Justice
  • Health Justice
  • Leadership
  • CONTENT TYPES
  • Subscribe
  • Webinars
    • Upcoming Webinars
    • Complimentary Webinars
    • Premium On-Demand Webinars
  • Membership
  • Submissions

Tainted Donors: San Francisco Mulls Stripping a Hospital of Zuckerberg Name

Ruth McCambridge
November 29, 2018
Share
Tweet
Share
Email
Print
“Zuckerberg General Hospital,” Travis Wise.

November 28, 2018; Guardian

The Guardian reports that some grantees of the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative (CZI) and other recipients of Zuckerberg’s philanthropy are beginning to worry about the taint. In fact, at Tuesday’s board of supervisors meeting in San Francisco, supervisor Aaron Peskin announced that he had requested for the city attorney to draft legislation aimed at removing Zuckerberg’s name from what is now called the Priscilla Chan and Mark Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center. (Chan trained as a pediatrician there, and the couple donated $75 million to the facility.) When “the General” was renamed, the measure was controversial, but was eventually approved.

“Given the continued scandals that Facebook has been involved in, including the most recent horrendous corporate behavior around engaging in an anti-Semitic fashion with George Soros, it is unbecoming to have Mark Zuckerberg’s name on the hospital,” Peskin said to the Guardian in a phone interview, adding that giving away naming rights to public institutions should be prohibited. NPQ has written about this issue in the past.

“It cannot be normal for this city to put a price tag on the branding of institutions and spaces that fundamentally belong to the citizens of this city,” he said Tuesday, noting that Zuckerberg’s contribution to the renovation of the public hospital was less than 10 percent of the contribution from the people of the city, who voted to approve a nearly $900 million bond measure to fund the project in 2008.

Zuckerberg’s name won’t be removed from the building anytime soon: Peskin’s announcement is only the first step in a very uncertain process. The city attorney’s office declined to comment on what would be required to make the change, citing attorney-client privilege, but Peskin’s staff said that some of the issues they are asking the attorney to answer are whether the city would have to return Zuckerberg’s gift, or whether the naming rights could be revoked based on “some betrayal of the public trust.”

Sign up for our free newsletters

Subscribe to NPQ's newsletters to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

By signing up, you agree to our privacy policy and terms of use, and to receive messages from NPQ and our partners.

Others have protested the Chan Zuckerberg moniker on the 46-year-old trauma center at the 103-year-old public hospital. San Francisco General nurse Sasha Cuttler has protested the name association based on Facebook’s widely criticized mood study of users without obtaining “informed consent.”

“It’s really the most vulnerable people who we care for at San Francisco General, and to have the hospital named for someone that absolutely doesn’t care for ethics in research has always been a monstrosity,” Cuttler says. “Mark Zuckerberg has continued to move fast and break things, but we’re starting to repair the damage, and this will be a good start to that.”

Recent investigative coverage by the New York Times revealed that Facebook employed a conservative public relations firm to attack its critics, many of which are nonprofits like Color of Change, by linking them to the Open Society Foundations (OSF) and George Soros in what some have characterized as an anti-Semitic attack built on old tropes about Jewish conspiracies. These attacks on OSF and Soros have become common weapons of right-wing political actors over the last decade, and many were shocked to see that a public relations firm used by some of these actors was paid by Facebook to plant false stories in the media and on websites to tamp down criticism of the social media giant in the wake of the Cambridge Analytica scandal.

One employee of a nonprofit that gets funding from both OSF and CZI says the group is recently taking more heat for its Chan-Zuckerberg support.

“There’s this perception that if you have funding from Facebook, suddenly there are a lot of concerns about that,” said the employee, who spoke on condition of anonymity. “It sort of comes with this sense of distrust in our work because we’re taking money from them…I don’t think CZI itself is seen as a problem, but it’s the Facebook money connection is where people trip up.”—Ruth McCambridge

Share
Tweet
Share
Email
Print
About the author
Ruth McCambridge

Ruth is Editor Emerita of the Nonprofit Quarterly. Her background includes forty-five years of experience in nonprofits, primarily in organizations that mix grassroots community work with policy change. Beginning in the mid-1980s, Ruth spent a decade at the Boston Foundation, developing and implementing capacity building programs and advocating for grantmaking attention to constituent involvement.

More about: Difficult donorsManagement and Leadershipnaming rightsNonprofit News

Become a member

Support independent journalism and knowledge creation for civil society. Become a member of Nonprofit Quarterly.

Members receive unlimited access to our archived and upcoming digital content. NPQ is the leading journal in the nonprofit sector written by social change experts. Gain access to our exclusive library of online courses led by thought leaders and educators providing contextualized information to help nonprofit practitioners make sense of changing conditions and improve infra-structure in their organizations.

Join Today
logo logo logo logo logo
See comments

Spring-2023-sidebar-subscribe
You might also like
Hierarchy and Justice
Cyndi Suarez
Salvadoran Foreign Agent Law Threatens Human Rights Movements
Devon Kearney
Charitable Tax Reform: Why Half Measures Won’t Curb Plutocracy
Alan Davis
Healing-Centered Leadership: A Path to Transformation
Shawn A. Ginwright
Into the Fire: Lessons from Movement Conflicts
Ingrid Benedict, Weyam Ghadbian and Jovida Ross
How Nonprofits Can Truly Advance Change
Hildy Gottlieb

NPQ Webinars

April 27th, 2 pm ET

Liberatory Decision-Making

How to Facilitate and Engage in Healthy Decision-making Processes

Register Now
You might also like
Hierarchy and Justice
Cyndi Suarez
Salvadoran Foreign Agent Law Threatens Human Rights...
Devon Kearney
Charitable Tax Reform: Why Half Measures Won’t Curb...
Alan Davis

Like what you see?

Subscribe to the NPQ newsletter to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

See our newsletters

By signing up, you agree to our privacy policy and terms of use, and to receive messages from NPQ and our partners.

NPQ-Spring-2023-cover

Independent & in your mailbox.

Subscribe today and get a full year of NPQ for just $59.

subscribe
  • About
  • Contact
  • Advertise
  • Copyright
  • Careers

We are using cookies to give you the best experience on our website.

 

Non Profit News | Nonprofit Quarterly
Powered by  GDPR Cookie Compliance
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.

Strictly Necessary Cookies

Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.

If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.