6.9% of staff identify as having a disability. Within that number, 1.3% of staff have not been formally diagnosed. It’s important to note that more respondents identify as having a specific kind of disability than those who identify as disabled, which is reflective of the disabled population in the U.S. more broadly — estimated to be about 25% of adults. This can stem from a number of factors, including social stigma and internalized ableism. The ‘Prince’ as a whole should think about how it can become a more accessible and accommodating space for students with various disabilities and be more transparent about how those disabilities can impact their involvement with the organization.

The ‘Prince’ is one of the largest student organizations on Princeton’s campus. It boasts a staff of nearly 400 students, with nearly 250 students responding to this survey. Roughly a quarter of respondents had an editorial position (i.e. a leadership position) (27.1%), and there is a relatively even distribution of staff across sections. News is by far the largest section, representing 26.2% of respondents, while respondents from the Business and Tech teams (which tend to be a lot smaller compared to the editorial team) equal 2.6% of respondents. On the editorial side, the ‘Prince’ should definitely look to recruit more Cartoon staff. Under the 147th Board, Cartoon is a part of the Graphics section. The ‘Prince’ is also an accessible organization in terms of experience, with nearly half of the staff reporting having never done journalism before joining.

The 146th Board of the ‘Prince’ inaugurated an Audience section that manages the social media and data analytics of the ‘Prince’ in 2022. That section is not represented in this survey. Some audience members may have identified themselves as Design staff, as Instagram design, which was housed under the Design section under the 145th Board, is now housed within the Audience section.

Important to note is that the survey was overwhelmingly completed by staff who had just joined, making up 45.5% of respondents, and these respondents are most likely to be first-year students. As a result, their views on the ‘Prince’ and the University more broadly may be based on their rudimentary impression and experience at the University, which will have an influence on the data in this report.

19.4% of staff identify as first-generation students, or students whose parents did not complete a four-year degree. This is in stark contrast to the nearly 68.8% of staff who reported having parents with postgraduate degrees. While these statistics reflect the larger student body in both the Frosh and Senior Surveys, the ‘Prince’ should be more attuned to its staff whose parents do not hold advanced degrees, as well as increase coverage of first-generation students more broadly. When it comes to recruiting more first-generation staff, the ‘Prince’ should look to the Data and Design sections, which have the highest percentage of first-generation students on their staff at 40%. More than double the number of first-generation students responded that they disagreed with the statement that the ‘Prince’ covers first-generation and low-income students comprehensively, compared to students who don’t identify as first-generation. 86% of respondents graduated from public schools, may they be selective, non-selective, or charter.

The inaugural ‘Prince’ DEIB report did not include any data on sexual orientation or gender identity. As such, this section of the report will not include comparisons to past data.

Just over 61% of the ‘Prince’ identifies as heterosexual or straight, while those identifying as bisexual comprise just over 20%. Around 10% each identify as questioning and queer, and those identifying as gay, lesbian, pansexual, or asexual each make up less than 10% of the organization. When we asked staff how they identified, we allowed them to choose as many options as they wanted, so these figures do add up to 100%, as there is a lot of overlap.

The University does not report statistics on student sexual orientation, but according to the ‘Prince’s’ 2022 Senior Survey and Class of 2026 Frosh Survey, the most common sexual orientations are also heterosexual and bisexual, in that order. Going off of these surveys, the ‘Prince’ has a much higher percentage of students that do not identify as straight: around 68% of the Class of 2022 identified as straight, while 75% of the Class of 2026 did.

Nationally, a 2021 Gallup poll estimates that around 1 in 6, or around 16%, of the national population born between 1997 and 2002, identifies as LGBTQ+.

About 51% of the ‘Prince’ identify as female, about 27% identify as male, 16% chose not to specify, and only 5% identify as gender non-conforming. Gender non-conforming staff include those who identify as genderqueer and gender non-binary; five staff members identify as transgender.

The University reports an even 48-48 split between male and female undergraduate students, as well as 2% of transgender and gender non-conforming students in the 2021-22 academic year. Of the graduating Class of 2022, 2.6% identified as either non-binary or genderqueer, while 3.4% of the Class of 2026 identified as nonbinary or genderqueer.

Across all sexual orientations, our coverage of the LGBTQ+ community is generally viewed as comprehensive and sensitive, and is the only area of coverage that was asked on the DEIB survey — compared to coverage of race and ethnicity, disability, FGLI students, and international students — that had no respondent who “strongly disagreed” with the statement.

The vast majority of ‘Prince’ staff come from the United States, with only 12.2% of students identifying as international. Out of those international students, most of them reported being from Asia, followed by North America. Only 45.8% of international students reported that they somewhat or strongly agree that the ‘Prince’ covers international students comprehensively, signaling that the ‘Prince’ could increase its coverage in this area.

Unsurprisingly, out of the domestic student population, most hail from New Jersey, with New York right behind. There’s also a good number of students from California and Florida.

Approximately 20% of staffers come from families with a household income less than $50k/year. More than 20% of the ‘Prince’s’ staff comes from households with earnings in the top 5% of incomes in the United States (more than $273,000 annually). Although our paper is representative of the students on this campus, there is still room for improvement in making sure that the ‘Prince’ is a place where low and middle-income students feel that they can belong.

Approximately 39% of ‘Prince’ members indicated that they receive no financial aid from the University, representing the top 20% of incomes in the United States. The 23% of students receiving full aid roughly represent the bottom 80% of U.S. incomes.

28.8% of ‘Prince’ editors identify as low income, as do 24.5% of staffers.

BREAKING IT DOWN: Low Income Status by Section

• No members of the Business and Cartoon team identified themselves as low-income.
• A majority of Podcast staffers identify as low income (52.6%), the only section where this is the case. We need to examine the strategies used by Podcast for recruitment, training, and community-building to ensure that we are creating a welcoming and supportive environment for low-income students across the ‘Prince.’
• Less than 30% of News staffers identified as low-income. News is of particular focus for improvement because of the section’s vital role in covering financial aid and campus community.
• Opinion and The Prospect should also focus on prioritizing the needs of low-income staffers in recruitment to ensure that they encourage these students to share their thoughts with our campus community.

About 67% of students responded that their first language was English. Out of those who reported not having English as a first language, the most common first language spoken was Mandarin Chinese, followed by Spanish and Korean.

83.6% of respondents identified as left-wing. A significantly greater percentage of editors identify as left-wing at 93.4%, compared to 80.3 % of staffers who identify as left-wing.

68% of respondents are from the Classes of 2025 and 2026. Many upperclassmen step back from their extracurriculars as they begin to focus on their independent work, so the underclassmen majority is consistent with Princeton at large. Only 0.4% of staff reported being on a gap year, which is a significant decrease from the number of gap year staff during lock down. 88% of respondents are pursuing an A.B. degree, with most majoring in Humanities and Social Science disciplines. 4.2% of staff are varsity athletes, and 17.4% are engineers, which is significant as the ‘Prince’ can pose a significant time commitment, especially for students with busy schedules.

Because there are diverse roles within the organization, students studying different academic disciplines tend to gravitate towards sections that reflect their studies. For example, the Data section mostly consists of Social Science and Engineering majors, while The Prospect (arts and culture) is overwhelmingly Humanities.

COS was listed only under BSE on this survey.

The ‘Prince’ is majority white (39.3%) and Asian (36.8%), which is consistent with past reports on its racial demographics. The ‘Prince’ overall has much better POC representation than the University at large, which reported that 56% of undergraduates in the 2021-22 academic year were white. But Black and Latinx students are still underrepresented, representing only 5.9% and 7.9% of staff respectively. Students who put down more than one racial category were reclassified as “multiracial,” which represents 11.3% of respondents.

The ‘Prince,’ like the University more broadly, is greatly lacking in Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander students (only 0.4% of respondents) and Native American and Indigenous students (only one staffer who responded to the survey identified as Indigenous). Targeted outreach to Black, Latine, Indigenous, and Pacific Islander groups will be crucial in the next recruitment cycle, as well as having candid conversation with leaders of these affinity spaces on how the ‘Prince’ can better build relationships with them.

The ‘Prince’ should work toward improving its POC retention. While only 35.8% of staff who just joined the ‘Prince’ identify as white, that number jumps to 57.1% when looking at staff who have been involved for 3 years or more. The Class of 2026 is the University’s largest, most racially diverse class to date, so within the next few years, the ‘Prince’ should dedicate itself to reflect this growth.

Design, Podcast, and Opinion should be modeled after for recruitment and retention strategies, as they are the ‘Prince’s’ most racially diverse sections.

The ‘Prince’ can also improve POC representation in its staff-to-editor pipeline. While only about 38% of staffers identify as white, almost half the number of editors on the 145th Board (49.2%) identified as white.

With regards to coverage, the ‘Prince’ should be intentional about engaging with its Black community, as 25% of Black staffers strongly disagree that the ‘Prince’ covers race comprehensively and sensitively. No Black staff strongly agree with the statement. The only other ethnic group that strongly disagreed with the statement were 5.9% of Latine students, so they should be engaged with, as well.

31.5% of respondents reported following some form of Christianity, while 49.4% of staff reported being agnostic or atheist. 13.2% of students reported being Jewish, and 4.7% reported being Muslim. The ‘Prince’ only asked one question about religion in this survey, but with the recent rise in antisemitism and past histories of Islamophobia, in future surveys, the ‘Prince’ should ask more questions about and uplift the voices of its religious minorities.