I attended a timely and thought-provoking session at this year’s AASLH Annual Meeting called Bridging Divides: Navigating Challenging Histories Through Community Engagement on September 13. It gathered five panelists—Angela O’Neal, Columbus Metropolitan Library, Columbus, OH; Rebecca Asmo, Ohio Humanities, Columbus, OH; Jason Crabill, Decorative Arts Center of Ohio, Lancaster, OH; Kaitlyn Donaldson, Lorain Historical Society, Lorain, OH; Doreen Uhas-Sauer, Rickenbacker Woods Foundation, Columbus, OH—who shared practical advice for how museums and historic sites can continue doing meaningful work in an era of heightened scrutiny, political pressure, and declining trust. I want to share my notes here, not as a verbatim report, but as highlights of ideas that struck me as especially useful for our field.

Protecting Institutions While Advancing Mission

The panel emphasized that today’s environment did not emerge overnight, so institutions can look to history and the humanities for guidance. Two watchwords were don’t obey in advance and don’t over-comply. When regulations restrict action—such as a requirement to remove feminine hygiene products from restrooms—organizations can comply while still serving their audiences by relocating them to staffed areas. Institutions should avoid inviting unnecessary trouble, ensuring content is evidence-based, factual, and defensible. Even the naming of grants matters: choose descriptive, straightforward titles rather than attention-grabbing language that might provoke critics.

Building Credibility Through Storytelling and Relationships

Telling concrete, factual stories is essential. Because American history is often taught as headlines rather than complex narratives, museums must provide depth while remaining accessible. Community review of working drafts helps ensure relevance and reduces backlash. Listening for common ground creates ownership and fosters support. In some cases, reframing exhibits as art rather than history opens doors to difficult conversations. Festivals, events, and everyday relationship-building are as important as the exhibits themselves.

Navigating Politics and Language

The speakers cautioned against overusing professional jargon. Ninety percent of the time, they argued, it’s best to avoid terms like diversity, inclusion, and equity when speaking with general audiences. Complexity and abstraction can alienate; plain language about people, places, and stories is far more effective. When objections arise, the advice was to include the community in shaping the response rather than resisting outright. Sometimes the project at hand may not be the “first best project”—it may be necessary to build trust with smaller or different initiatives first.

Community Engagement in Practice

Practical strategies included:

• Question assumptions about what communities will support; don’t presume interest or opposition.
• Go to safe spaces where people already feel comfortable, rather than expecting them to come to the museum.
• Discover needs before proposing solutions.
• Balance compliance and mission by protecting the institution while still doing meaningful work.

Libraries and museums were also reminded to understand their legal context. For example, public library program attendance may be subject to public records laws, while student work is generally protected under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and other federal privacy regulations.

What I appreciated about this session was its balance of pragmatism and encouragement, emphasizing discussion than case studies. The panelists acknowledged the real risks that museums and libraries face today, but they also reminded us that careful listening, evidence-based storytelling, and community trust-building are powerful tools. Community engagement isn’t just a strategy—it’s a safeguard, ensuring that when challenges come, institutions are not standing alone.