# What happened Jay Katari, a board member and strategic advisor at equalpride, resigned after reporting showed he had shared pro‑MAGA imagery, posted photos wearing a "Make America Great Again" hat, mocked President Joe Biden, and followed members of the Trump family and senior Trump staffers. The reporting that surfaced on September 14 prompted concern among editorial staff across equalpride's publications.
# Who is equalpride and why it matters
# How the appointment happened
# Staff reaction and public reporting After journalist Kevin Ortega‑Rojas published details about Katari's social media, editorial staff across equalpride titles raised concerns about credibility and trust. The editorial teams of The Advocate, Out, Them, Pride.com, Out Traveler and Plus released a joint statement on social media saying they were aware of reports that Katari "may have espoused beliefs that are antithetical to the mission of our brands," while also asserting that his position had not influenced their reporting.
# Resignation and company response
# Governance questions that remain Berryhill said the investor group's appointment power has been changed so he now has authority over future board appointments. Reporting and commentary noted unresolved governance questions: whether future board picks will align with the company's stated mission, whether Katari had any ownership, and how equalpride will restore trust after internal layoffs of queer and trans journalists and editors earlier in the year.
# Concrete implications for readers and staff
- The episode illustrates tensions between investor control, board appointments, and newsroom trust in a media company serving a specific community.
- equalpride's revised appointment process gives management more control over board composition, but staff and readers continue to seek clarity about oversight and values.
# Short timeline
- Late August 2026: Katari appointed by lead investor group.
- August 31, 2026: CEO Berryhill emails staff expressing confidence in Katari.
# Bottom line A board appointment by investors sparked internal and public pushback after reporting about the appointee's political activity. The company moved quickly to remove him and change appointment authority, but staff and readers continue to press for clear governance that aligns with the publications' missions.