Minority sports reporters

Sportshack,

Your first mistake is you are comparing professional athletics to journalism, which is apples and oranges. Second, you make that comparison completely ignoring an important racial complexity in our society. Minorities, particularly blacks, are routinely pushed into entertainment and athletics because through mass media, community, etc., they are consciously and subconsciously sent the message that they aren't smart enough to do anything else.

So, for a white male to complain there were too many minorities in pro sports is ludicrous. Only a small percentage can become pro athletes. Most people have a much better shot at becoming a lawyer, doctor and yes, even a journalist. Besides, all the athletes are black, but all the owners, coaches and power brokers are definitely white. Think about it: which of those groups would you rather be in?

We need to acknowledge institutional racism is at play in newspapers, as it is in most of America's power structure. That doesn't mean somebody is burning crosses and secretly plotting the destruction of minorities. All it means is that when it comes to choosing assistant editors, managing editors and sports editors, the powers that be tend to hire people who look like them and make them comfortable. Most times, this is a subconscious choice. And all diversity seeks to accomplish is getting people to open their eyes, change their thinking and become more inclusive.

Let's look at how most sports editors are hired. I'll give a recent example. Randy Harvey became the SE of L.A. Now, I am in no way implying Mr. Harvey didn't deserve this job. From what I hear, he's got an excellent reputation. But everybody knew that he was getting that job. There was no hiring process. It is unlikely L.A. looked at anyone else. Then the guy from Indy goes to Baltimore. Again, doubtful if there was ever a search. Not saying that person was undeserving, either. But in both cases, those papers locked in on who they wanted to hire and no one else ever entered the picture. And I think at most papers, we already know who will get the job if so-and-so leaves.

Unfortunately, the by-product of doing things this way is that you will continue to have mostly all-white, all-male sports editor. If you're a minority or woman, you look at how the system works and wonder if you'll ever have any shot at these kind of jobs because ultimately newspapers hire who they know for key positions.

It's not quite as bad with reporting positions, which is why you see slightly more diversity. And yes, I'm aware that every journalist has to work against the who-you-know dynamic in their careers. But it's a stronger adversary for minorities and women because at the end of the day, you will be separated by the fact you don't look like the person hiring or aren't their gender.

In my opinion, the only way the overly-white newspaper culture will change is if newspapers continue to develop pipelines at the grass roots level -- from middle school to college. We must impress upon our communities that newspapers are inclusive and commited to diversity. If pipelines are developed at the grass roots level, then that will help increase the talent pool and so forth.

 

With what athletes make nowadays, it'd be tempting to not want the hassle after the career is over. What you ask is not a rhetorical question. And the situation is improving, power broker/coach/owner-wise.

It's called succession planning, and it's a good way to groom talent, let talent know that promotion can come from within. That wasn't the case at my last stop, much to my dismay. That's where minorities need to be brought into the process more, and hopefully that will happen. Your last paragraph will be the way that can happen.

 

Hey, I don't know all the dynamics behind this, and I'm no expert in the hiring process or who's coming out of J-school or whatever. I'm just looking at numbers and trying to figure out how they all fit together.

But if about 80 percent of reporters and assistant sports editors are white males, it shouldn't be a surprise that 90 percent of SEs are also white males. After all, where do SEs come from? To me, the question goes to minorities entering the field. How large is that pool, and are they being turned away from jobs or discouraged from getting into the business? If that isn't the case (and as has been pointed out by others on this thread, the smallest papers are having trouble finding minority applicants because many minority candidates can get better jobs at bigger papers), then as Chickwriter said, the answer isn't so much in the business as in the schools. The pool from which to hire has to get bigger from the bottom up in order to generate more people with the experience and chops to get the management positions.

 

Chick,

You make a lot of great points. I appreciate your thorough response to my original question.

I don't agree its apples and oranges just because there is a finite amount of opportunities in athletics vs. other career fields, and that minorities are pushed into entertainment and athletics. If someone wants to push me into a job as a professional athlete, I'm all for it.

What I'm not for is saying, 90 percent of a particular demographic is OK in job A, but in job B it means we are lacking diversity. You're lacking in both.

Let me pose it this way. Let's say Lapchick and the others who worked with him on this study were to grade each of the professional sports on their diversity on the court or the playing field, using the same percentages and criteria they're using for sportswriters.

Wouldn't the NBA have to get an F for the low numbers of whites, Hispanics and Asians? And since the journalism study is broken down by positions, going back to my original question, how about the grade for cornerbacks in the NFL? I don't believe there are any non-black corners — doesn't that mean an F as far as diversity?

Please understand, I'm not saying what's happening on the playing fields needs to change. Likewise, I'm not sure all the newsrooms across America necessarily need to either. Like Birdscribe said in an earlier post, there's an overwhelming number of white men in management and all levels of a sports department because they are the ones flooding the applicant pool — just like the black cornerbacks, running backs, power forwards, take your pick. That doesn't mean newsrooms are racist or have an agenda to keep minorities out, and it doesn't mean they need to be singled out as everything that's wrong when it comes to diversity in the workplace.

 

CW1975,

Your arguments are dangerous because they are eloquent but manipulative. Randy Harvey's ascension to the LA Times SE job

You say newspapers must begin a grassroots effort in the middle schools of black America to develop minority talent for the future. I mean, that's a nice consideration, but the problems gnawing at black America are larger than whether enough of them are becoming journalists. We can take every statistic about newspaper staffing and turn the percentages on its head - when we talk about crime. That's a serious problem.

Now, why is that? The answer is a complex one, and it involves more than just pointing a finger in the vague direction of the great  beast called subconscious racism, where the prophecies of one race are fulfilled without any participation of the person living those lives. The great sins committed at the outset of American settlement can never be fully erased, we know this. There will never be a generation of black Americans, no matter how far removed from it, who won't know the tragic mistreatment suffered through the centuries until the end of Jim Crow. And yet it is no longer the responsibility of white America to pay a guilt tax for these egregious errors; unlike man's inheritance to Adam, whose fall put a pox on man for history with only singular redemption (or so I believe), the modern generation of white America does not inherit the slavery, or abuse, or the kind of blatant discrimination of their ancestors. It simply doesn't. It's not white Americans job to look out for black Americans anymore than any other race, nor is there a penance white America still needs to pay. The responsibility, on a very high level, is merely (and hugely at the same time) to each other, without respect to any identifying physical charateristics. You think whites are hard on blacks? Well everybody's hard on the mentally depressed. And there's not much written by or for those people.

Is that making the answer bigger than the question? Maybe, but I think the eloquence and seeming persuasiveness of your arguments has to be put in the right context. I mean, consider:

On one hand you insist institutional racism and cronyism.

But on the second, you suggest the racists and cronies be responsible for diversifying the newsroom.

If you sincerely believe that journalism has turned a blind eye to the cause of minorities, your assertion that it restore vision to its own cataract  would be a semi-miracle. If it's subconscious and all, then why the admonishment to build grassroots organizations, etc. At the end of the day, can't you build all the pipelines you want and still have them fail because, in that interview room, the white editor just isn't feeling that kinship? How are you going to change that dynamic? Have white people read "Blacks For Dummies?" Your assertion all along is not that they weren't minorities worth hiring, but that white people weren't hiring them. Are newspapers going into the middle schools so they know what minorities and girls look like, or what?

Such is the futility of this strategy for solving racism. Malcom X had a audacious strategy of isolationism and community-building that promoted the kind of strict black unity that forced white America to deal with black America as a successful, formidable minority group. Bill Cosby travels the country telling black parents, more or less, to assimilate better, to make their kids speak proper English, go to school and quit being distracted by the hip-hop culture. I'm not saying I agree with either, but they are (were) viable strategies for black America in its relationship with white America. But this strategy where minorities insist the white mean lends some of the cool of his ice while secretly charging he hoards all the ice for himself is a wormhole - it merely folds in on itself.

If you need any more evidence, consider the last time white America was given the paternal role of taking care of a minority: Indian Reservations. Those worked out real well.  

 

The most annoying thing about these surveys is that they always assume the reader has some sort of demographic understanding about America. That's a pretty reckless assumption in a country notorious for the poor training it gives its students in geography/demography.

"Oh no, 88 percent of reporters are white!" Yes, well, 77 percent of the country is white.

Regardless, I don't buy that it's hard for a white male to get a job. A field largely populated by white males can't be that hard on white males. Similarly, there are plenty of shops out there that like to have a diverse staff to cater to all facets of their communities.

 

SportsHack: Your response also was well-thought out, but I still completely disagree. You say that you wouldn't "mind" being pushed into being a pro athlete. The problem with that somewhat simplistic viewpoint is that the number of people who actually become pro athletes is so miniscule. Minority children are sadly given the overwhelming message to pursue athletic careers at the expense of education. Certainly college isn't for everyone, but the chances of making a life for yourself as a college graduate are a lot better than you trying to be the next Michael Vick.

I do agree with your your point about the NBA in terms of other underrepresented minorites (Asians, Latinos). As the NBA becomes more of a worldwide game, that should be an emphasis. However, let's be honest. It's sort of a weak argument to say whites are being shut out of the NBA and compare that to minorities being "shut out" -- and that's for lack of a better term -- out of a field such as journalism.

Although numbers are improving, whites overwhelmingly dominant the decision-making positions in ALL of pro sports. The NBA has a white commissioner, mostly white owners and coaches. For you to try convince anyone an injustice is taking place there seems a bit unreal.

Hey, look at this way: If blacks, other minorities and women comprised most of the publishers, editors, managing editors, I doubt they would bitch about not holding more reporting positions. It's the people who make the decisions that have the real power.

And Alma, I'll concede to your overall point, which is that minorities must correct their own problems from in house. Of course. That goes without saying.

But here is where you and I will disagree -- and I know this is sending this conversation in another direction.

You're basically saying white America should no longer have to pay for past mistakes. I understand some parts of the argument because it isn't like 2006 white people would elect to have slaves. At least, I don't think so.

But even still, most white people in this country have indirectly benefited from slavery, Jim Crow, and the prolonged effort not to give full civil rights to people of color. I know many people hate this argument, but it's true. Babe Ruth was a great baseball player, but did he benefit from not having to play against someone like Josh Gibson? Sure he did. Gibson is appreciated, but he would have been better appreciated had he been given a chance to compete with someone like Babe or Ty Cobb.

That might not have been the best example, but I'm merely pointing out the indirect benefits and privileges that can be derived when the playing field isn't level.

While I certainly agree with your point about Indian reservations, the truth is that institutional racism can't erode without the help of white America. It can be no other way. So yes, I don't think it's too much to ask that newspapers do more at the lower level to increase the talent pool. Many newspapers have high school journalism programs and I think that is a good way to develop more minorities for our industry.

Besides, it just makes good business sense. Look, I know ultimately the diversity issue is a piece-of-the-pie argument. Meaning, everyone wants a slice, but there are only so many. If I were a white male, I'd probably feel like many of you -- threatened. Now maybe I'm being too Kumbaya here, but I've got to believe there's room for everybody, or enough pie to go around.

 

chick - i deleted every bit of your post except for the opening paragraph because the premise to your response is not valid. using your logic, blacks nor whites or anyone else should be "pushed into being" a sports editor, either. hell you use pro sports as a profession to validate your point when you should have used sports journalism to begin with.

in reality, there almost as many major league baseball players in america than daily sports editors. i believe there are something like 750 daily newspapers in the united states. if you cut that mark of daily newspapers with circulations of say (out of a hat) 30,000, about how many papers you down to now ... probably less then half? now, let's go for the major players, papers with daily circulations of more than 100,000 and what we'll call the most desired jobs in the biz. how many of those would you guess there are? maybe 90 big leaguers out there?

count the number of professional athletes getting paid well in baseball, football and basketball, throw in a non-sport such as hockey, and then remember those 90 big league sports editors.

 

Who is this John Cherwa clown? "We are bad ... we are bad."

Brainwashed fool.

 

since it's obvious you've yet to master the all-elusive quote button and are making obscure references, could you inform us who the hell you talking to? the goal here, much like our jobs, is to communicate.

 

Ok I will chime in now on this subject. I will begin by saying I am in a rush, so excuse if I don't have a perfectly written argument.

when i posted the numbers, i expected people here to twist the numbers and paint a different picture than just straight up accepting the numbers for what they are -- Bad.

i am an editor for a major sports section. i have worked in every aspect of a sports section and understand the dynamic of sports sections and editors in our industry.
for people to say the pipeline is not good for minority journalists is bad is a terrible answer. the pipeline is good. but here is why the numbers stay at the level it has been for years.
for every 500 minorities who enter the industry with their first jobs another 550 leave the business because of frustration and lack of opportunities or just tired of the disrespect. Minorities especially blacks don't take stuff from me people, they just leave - go into public relations...I need to do a count of black sports journalists who left the business to become public relations directors in the last ten years.

i will leave you will two thoughts --
A) there is a talented black man who was an assistant sports editor for a number of years. This person was excellent and accountable. When I get my first sports editing job (that will be in a couple of years so watch out), I may hire him. This assistant took a year off because of health reasons. When he wanted back in the field, the only offers he received was for layout and agate and copy editing gigs that won't lead to positions of responsibility.
B) the most telling number from the study was the highest proportion of the minorities in sports departments come from the clerk positions. I will take it to this level. Minorities, especially blacks are good enough to be the HELP. But not good enough to be given a real chance to succeed in this business.
I was an agate clerk and had a great person, who so happens to be white, who gave me a chance and helped me get to the place that I am today. Not many get the chance that I got.
Peace out

 

How obscure is this thread? Read the AP article on "diversity" with this Cherwa clown's self-flagellation.

Better yet, read this. Same difference.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2236871,00.html