Chicago, Ill. — At first, it felt like watching a slow-motion car crash.

I wasn’t actually in the room when Donald Trump brought his toxic rhetoric to the National Association of Black Journalists national convention Wednesday. But I was nearly there, sitting in a taxicab headed from the airport to the conference at the Hilton Chicago downtown, watching a livestream video as the former president insulted a roomful of Black journalists after ABC’s Rachel Scott opened with a tough question.

Scott asked about several instances where Trump said racist things, from falsely insisting Barack Obama wasn’t born in America to calling Black journalists losers and racist. Trump’s response was a torrent of barely-connected ideas, including a complaint that NABJ brought him to Chicago under “false pretenses” because they didn’t work out details to get Vice President Kamala Harris to make a similar, in-person appearance at the convention.

“I have been the best president for the Black population since Abraham Lincoln,” Trump said, drawing scoffs from the crowd. “That is my answer.”

In a flash, it felt like all the predictions critics made of inviting Trump to address Black journalists came true. He was offering his usual torrent of accusations, assertions and insults – some outrageous, most inflated – creating word salad that moderators struggled to fact-check in the moment, raising fears that he owned the organization at its own conference.

As a 34-year member of NABJ, I had my own qualms. Not about inviting Trump – the group has invited the major party candidates for president to its national conferences for many years, to platform questions on issues involving people of color. But, among other things, I objected to seeing an anchor from the right-leaning cable channel Fox News among the three people questioning Trump. (Though I have volunteered for decades as chair of the NABJ’s Media Monitoring Committee, I had nothing to do with organizing Trump’s appearance).

And I worried about the optics of a Black journalists’ group offering a prime panel spot to a politician who had attacked Black journalists, while the Black and Asian woman also running for president would not appear.

But, after some reflection and talking with other members at the conference, I think the actual impact of Trump’s appearance is more nuanced. Here’s my five takeaways from what happened.

Trump’s appearance pushed NABJ to face tension between its status as a journalism organization and an advocate for fair treatment of Black journalists and, by extension, Black people.

This is an idea I heard from a friend and fellow journalist/NABJ member, and it rings true. As journalists, we jump at the chance to ask direct questions of a former president who has often stoked racial fears, from birtherism attacks against Obama and Harris to false claims about undocumented immigrants.

But our website also notes that NABJ “advocates on behalf of Black journalists and media professionals,” honoring those who provide “balanced coverage of the Black community and society at large.” I’ve always felt that if the media industry can give Black journalists a fair shot, we can help provide more accurate, less prejudiced coverage of everything – particularly issues involving marginalized groups.

That’s why some NABJ members chafed at platforming Trump, with his long history of racist statements, at a conference aimed at reducing the prejudice Black journalists face every day. But I think part of reaching NABJ’s goals involves Black journalists learning how to confront racist ideas; trying to get Trump to explain himself in front of a group of Black media professionals seems pretty in line with that mission.

NABJ president Ken Lemon asserted during the conference’s opening ceremonies later that day that the group is, at its core, a journalism organization. On this day, at least, it’s obvious the journalism side took precedence.

If the goal was to get Trump to reveal his terrible takes on race to the world – mission accomplished.

Lots of media outlets focused on his awful comments on how Harris “suddenly” became Black in his eyes. Trump tried the classic maneuver of turning an opponent’s advantage against them, acting as if the embrace of Harris as a history-making Black and Asian woman in politics was the result of some cynical marketing spin.

“I did not know she was Black until a couple of years ago when she happened to turn Black,” he said. “And now she wants to be known as Black. Is she Indian, or is she Black?”

True enough, the questioners struggled to pin Trump down on exactly why he talks about race the way he does. Or how he can believe such ideas aren’t racist.

Still, what Trump did say mostly made him look old-fashioned and prejudiced. Will it appeal to his base? Perhaps – but the moment didn’t feel like a strong, confident leader puncturing racial hypocrisy.

It seemed more like the wandering statements of someone who just doesn’t understand America’s modern melting pot of ethnicities.

Sometimes, with Trump, there is value in having an interviewer on hand who he trusts.

Much as I disliked seeing an anchor from a news organization that has won the NABJ’s Thumbs Down Award twice on the panel, Fox News’ Harris Faulkner did get Trump to open up a bit with less-pointed but telling questions.

In particular, when Trump said he thought the vice presidential candidates had “virtually no impact” on election results, he seemed to put into perspective his relationship with JD Vance while belittling the guy he is supposed to spend months alongside in a tight campaign.

There are other journalists from less partisan news outlets who likely could have achieved the same moment. But there is value in having one journalist in the mix who doesn’t immediately raise Trump’s defenses and might provoke more telling responses.

Trump is a chaos agent who divides people and divides NABJ

In the end, I was less concerned about how NABJ looked to the world in the wake of Trump’s visit than how it deals with itself.

As news of the panel spread, many journalists spoke out passionately against having him at the conference, reasoning that any appearance would likely benefit him more than the group, platforming his terrible rhetoric about racial issues. Well-known figures like Roland Martin and April Ryan – who Trump criticized when he was president – spoke out; Washington Post columnist Karen Attiah quit her post as convention co-chair amid the controversy.

There are also tough questions about why the group couldn’t work out an arrangement to have Harris appear at the convention virtually, given that she was flying to Houston for the funeral of friend and sorority sister Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee.

Considering the intense emotions at hand over the coming election and widespread skepticism about coverage decisions by journalists, there’s lots of criticism and bruising assumptions about what happened here.

This is the kind of division that can hobble NABJ in the future as people cancel memberships, decline to volunteer, hold back donations and continue to criticize the group’s direction. I expect the group’s membership meeting, scheduled for Saturday morning, will draw lots of pointed feedback from those who still question the wisdom of welcoming the former president here.

As someone who can attribute almost every major job I’ve gotten to connections made at an NABJ convention, this heightened squabbling is what I fear most – a distraction at a time when job losses and cutbacks in media have made times even more challenging for journalists of color.

In a way, NABJ played Trump’s game – and may have had some success

Another friend noted that Trump – who commands loyalty from GOP voters — has always valued dominating the news cycle, regardless of whether the stories are complimentary. His NABJ appearance ensured everything from the network evening news programs to The Daily Show focused on his comments here rather than Harris’ increasingly energized campaign.

As I saw criticism build over Trump’s visit, I wondered if NABJ wasn’t like a scrappy dog who finally caught a passing car – after years of GOP candidates declining invitations, finally one of the most divisive Republicans in modern politics was accepted. And the consequences of hosting him – particularly when Harris would not appear at the convention – loomed large.

But in the end, NABJ also landed at the top of the news cycle at a time when – as announced by the group during its opening ceremony – the convention drew the largest number of attendees in its history, over 4,000.

Yes, many supporters felt, as I did initially, that the appearance was a train wreck. But NABJ also showed the world three Black female journalists questioning Trump on some of his most provocative statements on race, with telling answers.

In a world where any publicity can be good publicity, that just might be enough.