Where is the diversity among sports editors?

DC, I understand what you're saying. I would argue, however, that every person, regardless of race or creed, brings different experiences and perspectives to the newsroom. Or, at least, they should, because they are all individuals.

I would also argue that any reporter, or, at least, any good reporter, should be able to report on, or else learn about and report on, almost anything. In my opinion, a tendency toward open, broad-minded thinking and a feel for the subtle and the esoteric -- i.e. things that might go unseen or un-thought of by someone else, is one of the key hallmarks of a good reporter...again, regardless of race or creed.

It is a reporter's (and editor's) job to "get" things, or, at least, to want to "get" things. If they don't, or seem unwilling or unable to grasp or even to consider them, well, then I'd contend that they might not be really good reporters. There is a degree of innateness to this talent -- an intuitiveness.

Just because someone has never been exposed to something, or experienced something, does not mean that they can't, ever, relate to or understand, or else, learn about, and then relate to, or understand, or empathize with, that circumstance or situation.

A good reporter is a good reporter. I'd argue that any difference is seen more from the other side, the source side...in which case is a good reporter's job to change that belief or idea that nobody but a same-race person can be trusted and capable of doing a story.

 

Do you have numbers on this? I'd love to know if this is accurate. I'd also be interested in the breakdown of male/female "middle managers" as opposed to male/female top editors.

 

I don't know that anybody has definitively proven that diversity will raise the quality of a newspaper or a sports department. Sorry, but I don't buy the argument that white guys just aren't going to understand this or that. WriteThinking already nailed it. Good reporters are going to understand the subject no matter what their background, skin color or gender. It's what we do. If we don't understand a subject, we learn and we process that information for our readers.

But that doesn't mean there is no value in diversity.

Perception matters. If the communities and athletes we cover do not see themselves represented in our newsrooms, that may hurt our ability to do our jobs. We have to connect with the people we cover and our readers, so their perception of us matters.

There is also a matter of fairness. Everyone who wants a fair shot in this business should get it. Do minorities run into roadblocks in the pursuit of a career as a sports writer or editor? I guess so. If anything, I have seen the opposite, but I'm sure it still happens.

Do women run into obstacles? Damn right they do. That I have seen quite a bit. I have seen them treated with disrespect by athletes, coaches and editors.

This is why I have said before that if all things are equal, or even close to equal, I understand giving a job to a woman or a minority. My only issue is with situations where white males were removed from the process entirely, and yes, that has happened.

 

All I'll say is that anyone who in their heart believes that Rhoden is a model of "getting things"
needs to be quietly put out to pasture.

 

This isn't about Bill Rhoden. While I consider Rhoden a colleague and friend, there are things that he writes about that I don't agree with.
DC's point about perspective can't be overlooked. it's one of many reasons why business has taken such a major hit.

 

That's laughable. Diversity, perspective, whatever you want to call it, has absolutely zero to do with the bottom line. Zero. If the 1970s were the bad old days for diversity, go take a look at circulation and revenue numbers from then and now.

Whether there's some social obligation on the part of newspapers, and whether being inclusive is part of that "mission," is a fine topic for academics and Poynter to debate. To say it has an impact on business success insults everyone's intelligence.

 

Let's use an area such as San Antonio for example. Because of its large Mexican population, the Express-News, in order to survive, needs news that will appeal to that segment.
For other places, say Atlanta for example, it benefits having a minority voice and perspective.
Those figures factor in the beloved bottom line.

 

I know people say that. It's a nice theory that has never once been shown to be true.

 

It's inarguable that a talented, diverse staff would be more valuable than a talented, white-only staff. People of different backgrounds obviously bring different perspectives that should help you reach your audience.

HOWEVER, the problem is when management is so hell-bent on diversity that it hires (or over-promotes) people solely in the name of diversity. Then you might have part of the staff carrying the less-experienced part of the staff.

One of the favorite subjects of disdain on this message board --- and rightfully so --- is a minority journalist who accumulated a lot of power and responsibility at several good newspapers, and dragged down all of them. Or, simply did very little work and let others do the work for him.

Of course, plenty of middle-aged white guys have done the same thing for years ...

 

I totally get this. The appearance of editors making just diversity hires could be a disservice to the candidates. However, many editors are also trying to make up for the fact that there were no diversity in the past and had an overwhelmingly white, male staff. Also lets consider that sports departments have very little movement by the nature of our industry.

But what disturbs me most about diversity hiring is when people snicker when sports editors hire two or three minorities at one time and think that the department is being overrun by minorities or they are just that diversity hires. Even after the two or three hires, white males may still account for the majority of the department. It's amazing. I have experienced that in my 18 years in the biz.

 

This sooooo on point. But its funny when i read this board sometimes how minorities get the most disproportionate amount of criticism over their white male counterparts.

There are good and bad editors of all races, creeds and genders.

 

Question for anybody on this board with hiring authority: How many people did you hire in the past three years?