Executive director fired—it might be due to complaints from groups on the ground or from a financial company targeted in a divestment campaign. Competing rationales pit the New York Times against the Boston Globe.
Who to believe?
- The New York Times (Stephanie Strom and Lydia Polgreen) reported on the firing of David Rubenstein, executive director of the Save Darfur Coalition (EIN 30-0335420, too new for a Form 990). The story pursued the theory (unconfirmed by Save Darfur) that conflicts with groups that have aid workers on the ground in Darfur, like the International Rescue Committee (EIN 13-5660870 Form 990), may have led to the ouster.
- But less than a month ago, the Boston Globe (Joan Vennochi) reported on strenuous efforts by Fidelity Investments, the huge mutual funds firm, to kill ads by Save Darfur that targeted Fidelity for its investment in PetroChinaCo Ltd., a company that is partnering with the government of Sudan. The story reported that both the Boston Globe and its parent company, the New York Times, had rejected the Save Darfur ads because Fidelity was just one of many companies investing in PetroChinaCo. (There were also billboards and a television spot that Fidelity persuaded CNN not to run.)
What's odd to me is that the Times article on the firing at the Save Darfur Coalition didn't even mention the conflict with Fidelity Investments that was reported just a few weeks ago.