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

Well, the "candidate of diversity" is better off being put in a position to fail than not being in any position at all.

And since most departments now are critically understaffed, better to have a marginally-less-qualified "candidate of diversity" than a superbly-qualified TMAWMSW, whom the bean-counters won't allow you to hire.

Of course, many of our leading beacons of journalistic brilliance won't hire ANYONE, regardless of whether they're a middle-aged white male or a one-eyed transgendered lesbian Indonesian Judeo-Muslim triple-amputee emigre from the planet Remulac. All they care about is hacking that payroll.

 

Much, MUCH easier said than done.

Talent is often a secondary issue. So much depends on timing, right place right time, and of course, having a friend or mentor in a position to help make hiring decisions. Birdscribe was not too far off in his points either.

If you start in Podunk . . . . good luck. Those who advance quickly from there, are the exceptions, not the rule.

 

Of course.

And talent may often be secondary, but it's not THAT secondary. You put yourself in a much better position to succeed if your skills stand out. That's one thing you can control; you can't always control the timing or the opportunities.

 

Preaching to the choir here.

But it's important to be aware that it takes more than talent.