diversity?!?

We'll agree to disagree, then.

 

Good thing about a right-wing think tank is that you don't have to think or anything.

Just parrot the party line, joke about dems, protect stem cells and claim that the earth is 6,000 years old and your grandad killed the last dinosaur. Oh, and if things get dicey, go with less government and lower taxes.

 

I haven't run a single Paris Hilton story in the time I've run my shop. I have no intentions of ever starting to.

I haven't been flooded with phone calls or e-mails complaining about a lack of stories on that skank. If anything, I've overheard far more complaints that we're overdoing stories on her and other celebutantes.

To be blunt, I think a lot of us are woefully out of touch with the reading public.

 

not only that, but even if what 2up is saying were true, it's still the industry's job to recruit minorities at whatever level possible.

like i said before, just cause it's hard, it doesn't mean you shrug it off and move on.

 

It's the "industry's job" to recruit minorities?

Uh, first I think it's the industry job to survive.
Second, it's the industry's job to serve its existing customers.
Third, it's the industry's job to cultivate new customers -- and to track the results of any attempts, whether that means offering up new diverse voices (as in different, not just racial minority) or not. Not enough just to recruit, hire, deploy and then presume that it has accomplished something.

 

If you want to look at growth in journalism, check out the growing number of Spanish-language news organizations and broadcasters. I think you can argue that the traditional industry has missed the boat on serving non-English speakers, which has seen significant growth in the last 15 years.

 

I don't know the ethnic breakdown of j-students, but I do know that the ASNE is not going to meet its goal of having newsrooms reflect the ethnic diversity of its audience. There are many papers in this country that serve a majority non-white circulation but have an all-white staff.
Would you expect MTV to not have anyone under 30 on their staff? Vogue to be all-male or Modern Maturity to be staffed by a bunch of Gen-Xers? And expect them to succeed?
I can honestly say I've worked with more flaky white staffers than non-white staffers, who have to enter newsrooms with realization that most of their co-workers will see them as a "diversity-hire," regardless of their abilities.
I also think, with regard to newspapers, it is harder and harder to recruit from an age-group (regardless of race) that doesn't read newspapers, doesn't value newspapers, and won't put up with the crappy pay from an industry that isn't "cool."

 

That's a historically inaccurate statement.
I see this false conclusion frequently used in argument. It's simply a nonparallel.
The Italian immigrations, especially of the late 1880s and early 1900s, received severe anti-Catholic sentiments causing generations to become insulated and remain in Italian neighborhoods and speaking only Italian.
As for the rest of the immigrants -- especially and mostly Protestant -- they already spoke English. The English, the Irish and the Germans (many of whom spoke some English) are unfair to compare. Their rooted language allowed immediate assimilation, if wanted.
And, of course, we'll ignore the forced assimilation of this country's African American and black populations.

 

I look at it this way: Language is a currency, which allows the commerce of communication. That is especially true in business terms, but also in cultural and social.

So just as I cannot go to to the local convenience store and pay with pesos or Euros or yen, I really should not expect -- in the U.S. -- to transact business using a language other than the generally accepted one, in most widespread use, in that country.

No value judgment involved. No pro- or con- any given culture, heritage, whatever. Communication is a transaction, just like commerce, and it should be expedited by the currency of that transaction. Period.

Keep one's native tongue, and dress and culture and history, for personal identity. But in a society, we've got to work with common tools. Language is a tool, same as money.

Hell, I don't even like that we have to accommodate both regular and Phillips screw heads. One wasn't good enough?

 

It's a wonderful point.
I saw an article -- out of California -- citing the Census, that English is the second language in homes of around 40% of Californians.
That doesn't take into account educational and income levels. No wonder no one can sell a newspaper in the state.

 

fish, I believe you. No doubt parts of Texas and in south Florida, too.

Gotta laugh, though, when I go to an ATM in Kansas and the first screen shows: "PRESS 1 for English, 2 for Espanol."

(Sorry, don't know how to get the tilda thing above the "n". Y'know, this: ~. See, another damn problem!)

 

yes, it's the media's responsibility to be diverse. that shouldn't be up for debate by you or anyone else.

and i'm not naive. i know that priority no. 1 is survival. it's near impossible to recruit in any way when you're in a hiring freeze or layoffs. that goes without saying.

but fostering diversity in the media is important, not just at the entry level but at the decision-making level. and the way to do that is to recruit minorities at the bottom and more will work their way up to the positions that really matter.

you can't just pooh-pooh this idea because it's difficult.

is the idea of diverstily more idealistic than it is a real money-maker? perhaps. but we treaure many ideals about our business. otherwise, why are there topics that go five pages on whether to use "said smith" or "smith said"?