Sustainability is infiltrating our national consciousness. These days, the marketing strategy of nearly every iconic American brand – promoting companies like Ford, Marriott, Microsoft and Walmart – seems to include some reference to it. Fortunately, photo-ops with employees dressed in Earth Day T-shirts as they build a garden don’t quite cut it anymore. Rather, sustainability agendas, corporate responsibility reports, corporate sponsorships, green initiatives, sustainability assessments and memberships in a variety of public-private multi-stakeholder initiatives are becoming the norm.

A proposed citywide “soda tax” failed to win enough votes in Richmond, Calif. in 2012, but that hasn’t stopped other U.S. cities, and even foreign nations, from taking notice of the concept. Last month, elected officials in Mexico announced their intent to become the first nation in the Americas to impose a tax on sugar-sweetened beverages – and they are looking to Richmond for help.

I don't know whether anyone on the NAHJ board or staff pointed out the parallels between the generous Philip Morris and PepsiCo gifts. Or whether there was even any debate about accepting the money. These are tough times, especially for the journalism industry. Yet, just like taking money from tobacco, accepting funding from the soda industry can put organizations like NAHJ on a slippery slope, with the potential to risk their values, integrity and public trust.

A swift exodus of corporate support from the little-known, but powerful American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) has shined light on the group’s efforts to spread conservative and corporate-backed legislation to state and local governments. Last week, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation became the latest backer to withdraw financial support for ALEC.