So we spend so much time in this forum on debating the merits of diversity in a newsroom, do we ever come up with solutions in an attempt to reflect the sports we cover? Are there any initiatives out there that can help sports departments with its diversity struggles?
Minority Solutions
- Thread starter dcdream
- Start date
HejiraHenry
Well-Known Member
Ace said:
My turn to spit on the screen.
Jeffrey_Martin
Member
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2002
- Messages
- 488
Fascinating how the other thread has 21 pages and this topic has four replies.
HejiraHenry
Well-Known Member
Jeffrey_Martin said:
The board -- all complaints, few solutions -- in a microcosm.
Cosmo
Well-Known Member
So Jeffrey, what's your solution? Honestly. Not trying to be rude, but I'm white, so I don't know what the answer is. I don't know how good the J-schools are at HBCUs. I don't know how hard those schools are pushing to try to get kids into the journalism workforce. I don't know how many or few minorities dismiss journalism by the time they're done with high school. I just don't know.
Riddick
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2002
- Messages
- 2,688
In my limited experience, employers try to hire whoever will cause them the least headaches. That's how I approach it.
Now, I'm a black male and have had a couple of interviews where my skin color was brought up, repeatedly. In those situations, **** em. I've done more and achieved more than I ever expected, and that's likely because some racist didn't want to hire me and waste both of our time.
However, I haven't made any great efforts in seeking minority applicants for my paper. i want the best person qualified, period. And I know someone is going to jump down my throat for this, but look at the percentage of good white writers. Let's be generous and say 50 percent. Take that percentage and apply it to the limited number of minority and female applicants.So, out of the one or two that graduates from a j-school, only half are worth giving serious consideration.
Diversity is important, but not at the risk of ruining the integrity of your paper. Some people are good, others aren't good enough. Just do the best you can with the applicants you receive.
Now, I'm a black male and have had a couple of interviews where my skin color was brought up, repeatedly. In those situations, **** em. I've done more and achieved more than I ever expected, and that's likely because some racist didn't want to hire me and waste both of our time.
However, I haven't made any great efforts in seeking minority applicants for my paper. i want the best person qualified, period. And I know someone is going to jump down my throat for this, but look at the percentage of good white writers. Let's be generous and say 50 percent. Take that percentage and apply it to the limited number of minority and female applicants.So, out of the one or two that graduates from a j-school, only half are worth giving serious consideration.
Diversity is important, but not at the risk of ruining the integrity of your paper. Some people are good, others aren't good enough. Just do the best you can with the applicants you receive.
Jeffrey_Martin
Member
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2002
- Messages
- 488
I agree with Grizz, and yes, I'm black, too. I don't think I've ever been a diversity hire, but I do know I've interviewed in places where I've had to wonder. That type of stuff doesn't do anyone any good. The best people should get the jobs. But try to be creative in finding the best people. Don't just ask your sports editor buddy who looks like you. That's what I'm tired of - the lack of creativity in hires. It's time to get inspired in making a hire. Hey, I think the kids coming out of Syracuse, Northwestern and Mizzou are talented, too. But they don't have the market cornered on talent. Raiding those schools is easy. ... and tired. Most of those kids are white. If you're looking for talent - truly committed to the task - you look EVERYWHERE, not just a couple of acclaimed universities. That, to me, is the biggest problem. It's easy to round up the usual suspects. Try something different, and maybe those numbers will look different.
Breakyoself
Member
I agree with last two posts. Best person for the job, but look around more before making hire. Kind of like what the NFL says to do, am i right? Expand the search, and go with the best regardless of color or sex. But make a ****ing concerted effort. And don't hire a minority for the sake of doing it. Agree that helps no one.
Jeffrey_Martin
Member
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2002
- Messages
- 488
Other thread has gone to 22 pages...
Riddick
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2002
- Messages
- 2,688
I remember reading or hearing that in American, it's the norm to find the source of the problem and ***** about it. where in japan, they find the source, and fix the problem. just something that popped into my head as i notice the lack of possible solutions on this thread, and all the people bitching on the other thread.
Don't know if this has been raised, but one of the big reasons there aren't as many minorities at the smaller papers is that the bigger papers pretty much monopolize the minority talent.
If you are a minority, or a woman, and you have a little bit of talent, and you are young, then you've got yourself a job at a respectable paper. That's just how it is.
I don't think its necesarily fair to the minorities or women, beacuse, like JM said, everyone ends up assuming that they are strictly a minority hire.
But by the time the big papers attract all of the talent, there isn't much left for the smaller papers.
The issue, it seems, is at a much more fundamental level: getting more minorities and women interested in journalism as a career.
If you are a minority, or a woman, and you have a little bit of talent, and you are young, then you've got yourself a job at a respectable paper. That's just how it is.
I don't think its necesarily fair to the minorities or women, beacuse, like JM said, everyone ends up assuming that they are strictly a minority hire.
But by the time the big papers attract all of the talent, there isn't much left for the smaller papers.
The issue, it seems, is at a much more fundamental level: getting more minorities and women interested in journalism as a career.
Jeffrey_Martin
Member
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2002
- Messages
- 488
What is the definition of best? Is it strictly writing ability? Or are other factors, such as personality, in play? Do you want someone who might not be the strongest writer but is pleasant, easy to deal with and respectful? Or do you want someone who wins awards but is a pain in the ass - not just to sources but to his/her colleagues and superiors?
P
PeteyPirate
Guest
I've stayed out of this fray until now, but I just have to address the "best person for the job" comments.
I'm in MBA school, and one of the things we study in Organizational Behavior, obviously, is diversity. I think that most people, and I probably did to some degree before recently, believe that diversity is some sort of rule to be complied with, and that you do so at the risk of losing quality among your employees. But what has been proven time and time again by scientific research is that diversity has an inherent value for an organization. It allows a company or work group or newspaper to solve problems better and in more innovative ways. It fosters creativity. It leads to greater job satisfaction for everybody. This is science talking, not liberal feel-good doctrine.
So it follows that sometimes the "best person for the job" can't simply be chosen based on a narrow set of qualifications for the particular job in question. Sometimes you have to take into account the big picture, or the long view, and have faith in your managers to get their employees to crank out good work. Yes, this does mean taking into account race, gender, sexual orientation, age, religion, you name it.
The problem that arises is that organizations have to value diversity, not just in their words, but in their deeds. These values have to come from the top, and people have to buy into them and believe in them at every level. Clearly some of the posters on these "minority reporters" threads do not value diversity, which is unfortunate. If everybody did, we would all be better off.
I'm in MBA school, and one of the things we study in Organizational Behavior, obviously, is diversity. I think that most people, and I probably did to some degree before recently, believe that diversity is some sort of rule to be complied with, and that you do so at the risk of losing quality among your employees. But what has been proven time and time again by scientific research is that diversity has an inherent value for an organization. It allows a company or work group or newspaper to solve problems better and in more innovative ways. It fosters creativity. It leads to greater job satisfaction for everybody. This is science talking, not liberal feel-good doctrine.
So it follows that sometimes the "best person for the job" can't simply be chosen based on a narrow set of qualifications for the particular job in question. Sometimes you have to take into account the big picture, or the long view, and have faith in your managers to get their employees to crank out good work. Yes, this does mean taking into account race, gender, sexual orientation, age, religion, you name it.
The problem that arises is that organizations have to value diversity, not just in their words, but in their deeds. These values have to come from the top, and people have to buy into them and believe in them at every level. Clearly some of the posters on these "minority reporters" threads do not value diversity, which is unfortunate. If everybody did, we would all be better off.
Similar threads
