Cision - 1792 Exchange

Rating Overview

Cision is Medium Risk.

Cision is Medium Risk. The company often yields to political activism in shaping corporate governance, potentially alienating consumers, dividing employees, and harming shareholders. The company elevates merit, excellence, and integrity ahead of race and identity-based policies. Cision occasionally embraces corporate initiatives that redirect its central focus from business goals to partisan policies and divisive issues at times. This approach fails to safeguard free exercise, free speech, and free enterprise.

Rating Criteria

Corporate Weaponization Risk Levels
Criteria	Risk Level
Cancellations	Lower Risk
Discriminatory Philanthropy	No Data
Employment Protection	High Risk

Corporate Weaponization ⓘ

Corporate Governance and Public Policy Risk Levels
Criteria	Risk Level
Advocacy Bias	High Risk
Funding	Medium Risk
Political Actions	No Data

Corporate Governance and Public Policy ⓘ

Rating Criteria Detail

Criteria Risk Level Rationale

Corporate Weaponization

Criteria:

Has canceled customers, suppliers, or vendors due to their political views or religious beliefs OR corporately boycotts, divests, or sanctions regions, people groups, or industries.

Risk Level:

Lower

Rationale:

Cision has not publicly canceled customers, suppliers, or vendors based on political views or religious beliefs (1).

Criteria:

Charitable giving (including employee matching programs) policies or practices discriminate against charitable organizations based on views or religious beliefs.

Risk Level:

N/A

Rationale:

Cision does not publish charitable giving guidelines (1).

Criteria:

Employment policies fail to protect against viewpoint or other discrimination and/or are ideological in nature.

Risk Level:

High

Rationale:

Cision’s HRC 2025 CEI rating indicates the company provides a specific benefits guide with a comprehensive explanation of transgender services funded by the company (1)(2). The company implemented a new required “Diversity & Inclusion: Unconscious bias” training course for its employees (3). Cision does not provide viewpoint protections for its employees (4)(5).

Corporate Governance and Public Policy

Criteria:

Uses corporate reputation to support causes, organizations, or policies hostile to freedom of expression.

Risk Level:

High

Rationale:

Cision offers its media management services to organizations all across the political spectrum, from Fox News to the American Civil Liberties Union (1)(2)(3). The company canceled a previously queued statement by Elizabeth Heng, CEO of the New Internet, that brought light to GoFundMe’s decision to cancel her fundraiser after the issue was “deemed too hot of a topic” (4). Cision supports DEI within its business practices. From its DEI Report, “Cision shares this report to set a baseline to grow on, practice the transparency that is valued in the culture, and provide an example for customers and stakeholders who share our commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion” (5). The company’s former CEO, Abel Clark, signed the CEO Action for Diversity & Inclusion pledge, which includes a commitment to promote DEI through bias education training in the workplace, strategize on DEI programs/initiatives with other signatories, and engage boards of directors when developing and evaluating DEI strategies (6)(7). Cision scored a 50 out of 100 on the 2025 Corporate Equality Index (CEI) from the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), a political stakeholder group (8)(9).

Criteria:

Uses corporate funds to advance ideological causes, organizations, or policies hostile to freedom of expression.

Risk Level:

Medium

Rationale:

Cision’s HRC 2025 CEI rating indicates the company provides a benefits package for employees which includes some transgender medical benefits for covered employees and dependents, including children. This may include paid short-term leave, puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, chest surgeries, genital surgeries, medical visits and lab monitoring, travel and lodging. By allowing a political stakeholder group to dictate operations, the company increases health care costs and risks dividing employees, alienating customers and harming shareholders (1)(2). Otherwise, there are no publicly known cases of Cision using corporate funds to advance ideological causes, organizations, or policies (3).