diversity?!?

No one should be surprised or disappointed, though, if large numbers of people have a problem when they see enacted a policy of "Sorry, I won't hire you because of your color" and "Sorry, I won't promote you because of your color."

That's as wrong to do today -- for moral and business reasons -- as it was to do 25, 50 or 100 years ago. Just "doing it back" to even the score isn't going to persuade a lot of folks (especially when it was someone else perpetuating the old system, not those paying the price today). And if you can't show evidence that it actually carries a business payoff, then it gets in the way of higher priorities and is inconsistent with today's overriding messages of survival and (cough) "doing more with less".

And as I've said, show me the first boss who says, "The person who holds my position should be a diversity hire -- that would be good for the profession -- so I'm resigning." Go tell your managing editor to step aside for a diversity hire and see how that goes.

 

terrier touched on my favorite point in this discussion, but think it needs to be restated on its own:

The business we've chosen is the world's worst-paying profession, when practiced at median levels.

You can cash in -- and big -- but it's not likely.

Accordingly, minorities in good intellectual and social position to score big in their economic lives are not likely to look at journalism, first. If equipped to reach for the stars in better-paying professions, many are simply not going to settle for an eventual plateau in the medium/high five figures. Not happening.

 

What a baseless summation.
What about those of good intellectual and low-to-moderate "social standing?"
When one's focus is so finite, they often can't see.
And, what's more troubling? Trying to quantify not just one group aspirations, but the aspirations of many groups.

 

I mean no offense (and I'm not blue-lettering, here!) when I gently point out that you may be missing my primary point.

Minorities who may be "qualified" (I sincerely trust that's broad enough for you) to make a comfortable living in multiple professions may be turned off by the fact that AT MEDIAN LEVELS, journalism is the least-rewarding, financially. And when you've only got one shot
at this life, many folks in a position to choose are likely to go in another direction.
And that's journalism's loss.

 

I get your point. I understand.
You can , I suppose, make that statement about anyone, any class. (And, I'm still not certain of its validity).
What does being a minority have to do with it?
White people "in good intellectual and social position to score big in their economic lives are not likely to look at journalism," too?

 

Yes, but by definition there are fewer minorities to begin with. So if the same percentage of the majority and minority abandon ship, we're left with far more of the majority, no?

 

Yeah, who the hell is this Phillips clown, anyway?

 

The minority relevance is related to thread theme . . .

 

Name 15.

 

My newspaper's new diversity committee has held its first meeting.

I discovered that there was a higher percentage of non-Whites in the coverage area than I ever believed possible. However, they seem to be squashed into three particular towns. (I suspect that in one of those, being non-Hispanic's the minority!)

My next responsibility is to come up with story ideas and other things the sports department can do to highlight the non-Whites. A monthly mug-and-quote "person on the street" element was suggested, basically a local reaction to some question that we pose. I was also asked how many of our coaches and ADs are minorities -- almost none, just thinking off the top of my head -- and whether a story can be teased out of those statistics.

Women don't count as minorities, nor do special-needs kids, both of which I've written plenty of features about (and have planned for the future). As a result, I'd appreciate any story suggestions that won't come off as patronizing.

I expect to be the one actually implementing anything that's dreamed up. I can see the awards now... :

 

I may sit on the other side of the political aisle from Joe, but this is the best post I've seen on this subject anywhere: pragmatic, intelligent and distilled to its essential truths.

And what Ben Hecht said is equally as dead-on. Frankly, nobody should settle, but talented minorities aren't going to settle for mid-five figures after 10 years when there's more money to be made in other professions that don't make their acolytes swear a vow of poverty.

 

Why does every newspaper have to fit the demographics of the country or community? Shouldn't it reflect the demographics of it's likely or targeted consumer?

Are newspapers really the lowest common denominator information supplier?