Plain Dealer lawsuit

I am in no way suggesting that women cover women's sports or vice versa.

However, if no one is campaigning for women's basketball or lacrosse or auto racing or horse racing and they end up uncovered, the paper may suffer for it.

The stronger your mix of interests/expertise on the staff, the better -- however that is accomplished.

 

This isn't the issue...no one can reasonably argue that men have to cover baseball and women have to cover the LPGA.

The issue is that for decades, sportswriting has been largely populated by white men. Not only is that no longer legally and socially acceptable, it's also bad business. So future hiring has to reflect some 'catching up.' It may not be 'fair' but it's a reflection of necessary change.

I feel silly writing this....it seems so basic.

 

Oh boy. Here we go with the "if a woman or minority was hired over you, it's gotta be because they're a woman or minority" sentiments again.

marty, if all these women and minorities are being "forced" hired, where are they?

I live in a fairly diverse metro area, and the press boxes I go to, regardless of preps, colleges or pros, are white as snow and male as a locker room.

 

And the stats back you up, sportswriter. ( !!! )

That report that came out a few months ago said sports departments are still overwhelmingly white and male.

Marty, I'm happy for you about this latest turn because you seem like a nice fella...

But could it be that your problem was simply too narrow a wish list for your dream job?

Most people who want to work in this industry are willing to go almost anywhere.

 

No one is preventing females from applying for sportswriting positions. The reason you're not finding many in press boxes, Sportswriter, Not a Junky, is that there AREN'T A HIGH PERCENTAGE APPLYING! Is that so difficult to understand?

If 10 percent of all sportswriting applicants are female, it stands to reason that 10 percent of all sportswriters are female. (I think it's probably closer to 5 percent). If 10 percent of all applicants are African-American, than 10 percent of all sportswriters should be.

If you strive to hire any group of people to fill quotas or create more of a balanced mix, you are watering down your talent, weakening your staff and leaving others with more talent on the outside looking in. Is that fair to those with more ability, whatever the race or gender?

 

I am divorced. I have two daughters ages 8 and 12 who live here in Cleveland. I am not only legally bound to stay here, but I had and have no desire to move away from them.

 

So again, this comes down to your ego and the fact that you think you're far better than . ... Who at The Plain Dealer? Mary Kay Cabot? Mary Schmitt Boyer? Jodie Valade? Branson Wright?

Or someone from the past? Maybe, just maybe, at the time you were passed over, you weren't as good, either overall or for what The Plain Dealer was looking for, as what they found.

Is that a possibility in your mind? or no?

 

The last post just doesn't get it.

In my view, the PD was only looking for females and African-American males during that time. They weren't considering me or any other white males for those positions.

It has nothing to do with whether I feel I'm a stronger writer than those people. My contention - and what are the odds when you hire 10 non-white male full-time sportswriters consecutively in a pool of about 85 percent white male sportswriters? - is that they weren't considering white males for those jobs.

Is that so hard to understand, fmrsped???

 

Define past. The last 25 years? Maybe. Before Billie Jean, I don't really know how many women even considered it. You can blame that on a patriarchal society, pigs, the 50s, whatever, but pre-1980 I'm not sure there were many women to hire for sports.

After that...well, you're talking about an industry that didn't go fully color until 1990s.

At any rate, I think it's important to create a distinction between columnists and reporters. Gitlin's case has some reasonable merit because it was a preps job, in Cleveland, and he had, in theory, the experience, interest and local knowledge to better qualify for the job than several consecutive female and minority candidates in a row from somewhere else, with less preps experience.

Of course, so much of this problem would be resolved if major metros didn't look at preps jobs as the outhouse for 22-year-olds. I've argued this many times: It is better to give that beat to someone who wants it and will keep it than to use it as a training ground. Use a college beat for that.

 

My George Bush quote is good enough to be complimented by someone sure he's good enough to work for the Plain Dealer.

 

If it's basic to say it's bad business, why on the previous page did you ask if hiring more women will result in more female readers? I am assuming you don't think it would automatically translate into more male readers, so is it perhaps a case of bad P.R., bad form, bad social consciousness, but not necessarily bad business? Not arguing, as you say, just asking -- since you raised the question of whether there's a readership payoff for hiring more women.

 

maybe newspaper should put a little race or gender identifier next to all bylines so that readers know the race or gender of the writer. an exception can be made in obvious situations (with obvious female names). that ought to sell a few more papers. can't you see someone in the hood who has never bought a paper in his life getting all excited because the new hometown team beat writer is a black guy? next thing you know, he'll buy a subscription!

/sarcasm, of course...