• Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Even The Wolf likely can't clean up Harvey Weinstein's pending troubles

Status
Not open for further replies.
Point remains. ESPN hires white men *above* the rate they appear in the demographics. White men are everywhere in other places in the industry.

Instead of thinking "Hmm, maybe I'm lucky to be a white man, that got me a leg up," you accused ESPN of discriminating against white men and shat on women in the industry. You're not a bad person, but that's not a good look.
 
Point remains. ESPN hires white men *above* the rate they appear in the demographics. White men are everywhere in other places in the industry.

Instead of thinking "Hmm, maybe I'm lucky to be a white man, that got me a leg up," you accused ESPN of discriminating against white men and shat on women in the industry. You're not a bad person, but that's not a good look.

He didn't accuse ESPN of discriminating against white men.

He basically said that because they value diversity, and because there are only so many jobs total to be had, there are more white men competing per available job than there are black men, white women, or black women.

And, that's either true or not true.
 
He didn't accuse ESPN of discriminating against white men.

He basically said that because they value diversity, and because there are only so many jobs total to be had, there are more white men competing per available job than there are black men, white women, or black women.

And, that's either true or not true.

It's absolutely true across the TV industry.

I'm not even suggesting it's a bad thing. It's undeniably true, though.
 
It's absolutely true across the TV industry.

I'm not even suggesting it's a bad thing. It's undeniably true, though.

I'm not sure why we should expect all industries and professions to be racially and gender diverse in perfect perportion to society at large.

Different people and groups have different interests, and different jobs require a level of education that alters the racial and gender makeup of the applicant pool.

And, I don't think @exmediahack or @Alma are wrong or insensitive to point out that if you have one job, from which your applicant pool is 200 white men, with an average age of 33 and 10 years of reporting and on camera experience, that they might be better at their job than the person hired from an applicant pool of 30 (beautiful) women, with an average age of 25, and less than 3 years of experience.
 
The difference in, say, anchoring sports compared to most other jobs is that the skill level of the person doing it should be apparent to anyone watching it, whether an expert or a casual viewer.

There is a skill set to it.

I haven't done sports on a full-time basis in a dozen years. Even now, I see people on ESPN with subpar writing skills. Subpar ad libbing skills. Subpar overall command of the ability to express the story, highlights of the situation.

You could drop me in Briatol with two days of computer system training and, by the third day, I could probably give you a solid SportsCenter. Mastery of the subject. Few on-air stumbles. Ad-libbing with a flow.

But I know they'd have no interest in hiring me, even though I'm also in shape and have anchor hair.

And I knew this going in.

Just as people who get to a national network by 25 should know they probably got there from either their background or nepotism. If that's the case, don't always expect roses and sonnets from the 38 year old who got there after wasting three years of shooting high school volleyball features in Rapid City or St. Joseph.
 
The difference in, say, anchoring sports compared to most other jobs is that the skill level of the person doing it should be apparent to anyone watching it, whether an expert or a casual viewer.

There is a skill set to it.

I haven't done sports on a full-time basis in a dozen years. Even now, I see people on ESPN with subpar writing skills. Subpar ad libbing skills. Subpar overall command of the ability to express the story, highlights of the situation.

You could drop me in Briatol with two days of computer system training and, by the third day, I could probably give you a solid SportsCenter. Mastery of the subject. Few on-air stumbles. Ad-libbing with a flow.

But I know they'd have no interest in hiring me, even though I'm also in shape and have anchor hair.

And I knew this going in.

Just as people who get to a national network by 25 should know they probably got there from either their background or nepotism. If that's the case, don't always expect roses and sonnets from the 38 year old who got there after wasting three years of shooting high school volleyball features in Rapid City or St. Joseph.

This just reeks of coulda-been-a-contenderism. Everyone could run a baseball team, fix newspapers and open a restaurant too, if given the chance.
 
You're now a lazy misogynist.

So sayeth Captain Righteous.

This is going to be one of those concepts that is hopelessly beyond you, but I'll say it for the audience. I don't call people misogynists. I called an idea misogynistic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top