Diversity takes another hit in journalism

[Drip]

This is something that should be discussed. Are newspapers going backward in terms of diversity?
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003974500

 

[Mizzougrad96]

I mean, at this point where people are losing their jobs every day, does anybody give a **** about this?

 

[Drip]

I mean, at this point where people are losing their jobs every day, does anybody give a **** about this?

I see your point Mizzou but it still shouldn't be ignored. The numbers are staggering.

 

[fishwrapper]

I mean, at this point where people are losing their jobs every day, does anybody give a **** about this?

Idealogically, yes. Pragmatically, no.

 

[jfs1000]

I gotta agree with Mizzougrad.

Diversity, investigative journalism, all that noble garbage they feed you is secondary to profits. The dollar rules. Ethics, diversity, and journalistic purpose and calling are garbage they feed you to convince you that you should get paid like a 7-11 clerk.

We have all been had.

 

[fishwrapper]

Another point that stood out.
The Diversity Chairman -- in a time when diversity is taking a hit in newsroom firings -- had her job eliminated. That's called something, I'm not sure what.

 

[Drip]

Another point that stood out.
The Diversity Chairman -- in a time when diversity is taking a hit in newsroom firings -- had her job eliminated. That's call something, I'm not sure what.

It's a bad sign fish.

 

[DanOregon]

Had to laugh when I got a look at Gannett's executive committee. For a corporation that talks so much about diversity, their top executive ranks are pretty damn white and male.

This stuff is important - and if you see the increase of publications targeting specific demographics in the last 10 years- it seems apparent most newspapers missed the boat completely in responding to demographic shifts.

 

[Billy Pritchard]

This stuff is important - and if you see the increase of publications targeting specific demographics in the last 10 years- it seems apparent most newspapers missed the boat completely in responding to demographic shifts.

I don't know, Dan. I find it hard to believe newspapers could miss the boat on something this big. Next you'll say they've been slow to respond to the internet or something equally preposterous.

 

[heyabbott]

Another point that stood out.
The Diversity Chairman -- in a time when diversity is taking a hit in newsroom firings -- had her job eliminated. That's called something, I'm not sure what.

progress

 

[Mizzougrad96]

Newspapers are dying and people are worried about this ****?

C'mon people.

 

[playthrough]

I mean, at this point where people are losing their jobs every day, does anybody give a **** about this?

I see your point Mizzou but it still shouldn't be ignored. The numbers are staggering.

So what? You only rectify it by hiring, or by firing the people whose departure would put the numbers back in order. To the first point: HAHAHAHAHAHA! To the second point: no one has the time or inclination to be that selective. And I imagine a company would leave themselves vulnerable to a lawsuit if they tried.

 

[Batman]

Gotta agree with Mizzou. Minorities aren't the only ones taking a hit these days.

And this stood out to me:

This year's census found that overall newsroom employment fell 11.3%, with the number of white journalists, who comprise 86.59% of newsroom employment, falling by about the same number, 11.4%.

But the number of black journalists, who now comprise 5.17% of newsroom employees, fell by 13.55%, and the number of Asian Americans, who make up 3.14% of newsrooms, fell by 13.36%, according to an analysis of the figures by Unity: Journalists of Color Inc. Hispanic journalists, now 4.47% of newsrooms, fell by slightly less than the overall total at 11.0%, while Native American journalists, who comprise just 0.6% of newsrooms, increased their numbers by 3.17%.

So say the Podunk Press has 10 reporters — four white, two black, two asians, two hispanics.
Four of the six — let's say one from each group — is laid off. Guess what? The percentages for the minorities is going to be higher, simply because there's fewer to begin with. That's unfortunate. But at the end of the day you still have four unemployed journalists. And that's depressing. It feels like counting how many fish you've caught when the boat is filling with water.

 

[2muchcoffeeman]

I mean, at this point where people are losing their jobs every day, does anybody give a **** about this?

I see your point Mizzou but it still shouldn't be ignored. The numbers are staggering.

yadayadayadayada...

Shall we ensure that journalists are shipped out to the firing line in proportion to their racial balance in the population at large? Would that make you happy? ::)

Jesus H. Tapdancing Christ ... you're pissing in a ****ing monsoon here.

 

[buckweaver]

Newspapers are dying and people are worried about this ****?

C'mon people.

It's still important.

Doesn't mean it should be on the front burner, considering the state of the industry. But it IS important to the industry that anyone who isn't white and male (and often middle-aged) likely doesn't feel very represented by their community's newspaper. I know mine isn't.

 

[playthrough]

Gotta agree with Mizzou. Minorities aren't the only ones taking a hit these days.

And this stood out to me:

This year's census found that overall newsroom employment fell 11.3%, with the number of white journalists, who comprise 86.59% of newsroom employment, falling by about the same number, 11.4%.

But the number of black journalists, who now comprise 5.17% of newsroom employees, fell by 13.55%, and the number of Asian Americans, who make up 3.14% of newsrooms, fell by 13.36%, according to an analysis of the figures by Unity: Journalists of Color Inc. Hispanic journalists, now 4.47% of newsrooms, fell by slightly less than the overall total at 11.0%, while Native American journalists, who comprise just 0.6% of newsrooms, increased their numbers by 3.17%.

So say the Podunk Press has 10 reporters — four white, two black, two asians, two hispanics.
Four of the six — let's say one from each group — is laid off. Guess what? The percentages for the minorities is going to be higher, simply because there's fewer to begin with. That's unfortunate. But at the end of the day you still have four unemployed journalists. And that's depressing. It feels like counting how many fish you've caught when the boat is filling with water.

That is incredibly simple math that someone should have picked up on.

 

[Frank_Ridgeway]

To dismiss this because times are tough would be to argue that diversity is something done to be "nice" when it is convenient to be nice -- that it has not been an obligation, that it has not been for the good of the business and the greater good of society, that it has been only for show. That would certainly be the case on some newspapers but not on all of them.

And, diversity issues aside, does anyone really want to argue that the current systems of staff reduction are based on merit?

I see no reason why an easy out of any kind ought to be granted to those who are ultimately responsible for the decisions currently being made. Most of these decisions have been shortsighted, and the people making them should be accountable for those decisions -- all of them. And no less on this issue. If it is too tough for them, perhaps they should step down.

 

[J-School Blue]

During my tenure at The Former Paper, the newsroom eliminated the only beat that was required to have a bilingual reporter staffing it (the name of the beat was 'south county', but it was responsible for basically all the immigration and Border Patrol coverage). Various reasons were given. The fact that his spot generally commanded a higher salary was not really brought up.

There was one reporter in features who spoke Spanish due to her family background and she was pretty much forced to cover anything that involved talking to people who did not speak English. Border Patrol coverage was folded into the cops beat and some of our more interesting stories disappeared because the poor ******* on cops didn't have time to focus on anything that wasn't breaking. The paper ran a Spanish-language weekly that was supposed to pick up our coverage, but it had already been pulling the bulk of its hard news border copy from the daily, so most of our "south county" coverage just evaporated.

This was in a border, Hispanic-majority town.

This went way beyond a "diversity" problem. We were fundamentally ignoring and ****ing up covering a major part of our community. And I do think the slowness of newspapers to recognize the importance of the Hispanic population shift is one of the bigger factors in their downfall. Not the biggest, but if there was a top-ten list it'd be on it.

 

[Starman]

The logical explanation for this would be "last hired, first fired," but at many papers, the older, higher-paid staffers have been the ones whacked first.

 

[Joe Williams]

I have seen great equality in the demographic makeup of the potential customer base that is not subscribing to or buying ads in their local newspapers.

It cuts across color lines, age lines, gender lines.

There's yer diversity for ya.