Someone's Take on diversity in the newsroom...

Irrationally?

She gives a concrete example of four interns, which mimics what I have seen over my career.

The NFL has no white starting corners or running backs. Is there a paucity of talent there... or do you think that NFL teams aren't looking hard enough to diversify those positions?

 

Sure.

 

I've never had those hires I have been "told" to make based on proximity of candidate.

 

I don't think that's what her column is saying at all. Instead, it's just talking about frustration from not being allowed to hire a good candidate purely because of he's not a minority. Every place I've worked at has always made it a point to look at potential minority candidates first when filling a position. While I fully support making a reasonable effort to recruit minorities (myself being one), I'm also against dragging out the hiring process for significant periods of time or investing huge amount of time and money just to hire a minority IF you already have strong candidates who aren't minorities.

One paper that is near the paper I worked for has a very diverse sports staff. Not surprisingly, basically all the people who had been there a while (more than 10-15 years) are white males. Of the people who were hired within the last 10 years, virtually every one was a minority, and that paper's hiring policy is well-known among journalists in the area. While many of those hires are good, solid writers, there are also others whose work continually drew snickers from their colleagues in the biz, and it's doubtful that they were the best candidates for a job at a paper with that size and reputation. A couple years ago, a writing job opened up there, and a guy I worked with was interested. He was a near-perfect fit for the position, given his talent (one of the best writers I've worked with), knowledge (grew up in the area and has covered the same teams that the person in the job would cover), and cost (he's relatively young and local -- i.e.: affordable). When I asked him about the job, he said he got word through the grapevine that this was a "no white males need apply" job. And there were several instances in a span of five or six years when something like that happened at that paper. As much as I support diversity, I support having the best staff that you can more, and a lot of papers are not doing that.

 

The fact that you, at your age and with your lack of supervisory experience, would be included on a hiring committee speaks volumes in itself.

Would you even be sitting in that room if you were not a) a minority; and/or b) female?

The sword swings both ways. And it's why I have trouble hearing about lack of opportunities from you.

 

I believe this.

At our place, every typist and newsroom aide we hire is smokin' hot, and usually the interns are cute if not gorgeous. I find it hard to believe that's the only type of applicant we get for those jobs.

 

sometimes it's smart to save money. sometimes it's stupid. if you diversify your hiring pool, instead of limiting it to a small area of people who all think the same, have similar backgrounds, etc., you give yourself the opportunity to find more talent to bring in new ideas. you have a better product and make more money in the long run.

or you could have all of your newsroom come from the same 80% white university where everyone had the same experience and you stagnate.

it's true in everything. which high schools are typically the most successful in sports? the ones with bigger enrollments. the small schools that are good are so because they recruit. the same is true for colleges who can recruit nationally versus only regionally.

nevermind the fact that ethnic diversity is important in this business (unlike most others) because we control the information. we decide which stories are written, which are published, what the headlines read, and how they are presented.

if there aren't any white cornerbacks, then what? who cares? if there aren't any latino editors and your paper is writing an in-depth story on the local latino community, you could alienate a huge chunk of readership if it comes across as offesnive.

i'm not saying only asian reporters can cover 'asian' issues and so forth, but the best way to avoid any potentially harmful story presentations is through fostering diversity. look at the numbers. especially in sports. we need more minority editors. the only way to get them is to hire more minority reporters.

and pretending that it's too costly to recruit good minority employees so we can keep some good ol' boy network in place is more expensive when it's all said and done.

 

Shot, excuse me for trying to have an intelligent discussion about a prominent issue in our business. As a member of it, I happen to care about its general health and not just about myself. I've been fortunate to be blessed with some opportunities and I'm not going to apologize for them. Since there were several people that helped me, I feel an obligation to assist those coming behind me.

And as far as your point about the hiring committees...that's not exactly strange and it's fairly routine at many newspapers. The whole point of the committee is to strive for diversity -- meaning gender, thought, age, and yes, race. As has been said during this thread, if you have enough diverse voices in the room, good things typically happen.

I'm told one of the things that was discussed at APSE was giving APSE editors access to minority databases within AAHJ, AWSM, NABJ, NAHJ, etc. I'm sure that would be a huge help, and I consider that a "reasonable" recruiting effort. What I don't consider reasonable is hiring the first minority that walks through the door because that does a disservice to that person, the newspaper, and other minorites/women who have worked hard to be reputable. Not having enough money to recruit a minority isn't an excuse. And considering the market this editor is in, again I wonder if she reached out to the local NABJ chapter or whoever else if she was having a problem finding quality interns.

Pushes for diversity inevitably mean someone will be left out. Increased competition does that. The perception that someone got their job *strictly* because of race or gender has been there forever, but it is troublesome to see such a stereotype purported by managers. I do know of managers who have told white candidates that they have to hire a minority. I find that practice abhorrent. And usually, it's not the full truth. I know of a manager who told someone that. But of course, they neglected to mention to the candidate that because they created a management position for a buddy that didn't previously exist, they were told their next hire had to represent more diversity. And I also know of managers who have given white candidates the minority sob story...but then turned around and hired a white person to fill the job.

 

great, great points.

i had an editor once tell me after inquiring about a job through e-mail that he couldn't hire me because they were looking for a minority candidate (when there was no way for him to tell my race by the e-mail). i told him that he was talking to a good minority candidate, but he should probably keep looking anyway.

 

I don't think anybody will argue that newspapers need to improve their diversity efforts across the board, that said they're not going to be able to attract strong candidates when they can make more money somewhere else. I've been lucky enough to work in newsrooms where diversity was valued and top candidates were excellent journalists AND brought a unique voice to the newsroom.

 

The only question remaining, and I hope you can be honest about this ...

Those people behind you whom you plan to assist -- are they:

a) A minority

b) Female

c) The best person for the job, race-blind and gender-blind

 

Shotty, I am white and male and younger than Jemele, and I've been included on several "hiring committees" (such as they were) myself.

In my experience, it was a way to get input from the people who the prospective employee would be working with most directly; to make sure they understood what they'd be getting into, i.e. the workload, their attitude; what assets they could bring to the department, and if they'd be a good fit. I've interviewed people and been included in group interviews along with the SEs and MEs. I've sorted through resumes and helped narrow down searches.

So I don't find anything suspect about Jemele's claim, on the surface. That's often part of the process at many papers, big and small. And, I think, a very valuable part.