First Draft by Tim Porter

What is Diversity in Journalism?

Are attempts to diversify America's newsrooms, where the average age, in newspapers, is 41, being scuttled because news managers don't know how to develop young journalists, especially minority ones, into anything else other than carbon copies of themselves? Is being youthful more of a handicap even than race?

That's an idea is suggested by a reader of Jay Rosen's Pressthink, which continues to explore the issues raised at the Unity convention (and the reaction to them) through a series of thoughtful posts and responses from readers, including an assertive essay from Ernest Sotomayor, the Newsday editor who is president of Unity. Sotomayor makes the case for being an "activist":

"We advocate for fair, representative, accurate journalism, by changing the complexion of newsrooms, not just racially and ethnically, but through the natural diversity of thought that occurs when you bring in people with different backgrounds," says Sotomayor.

In partial response, Terry Heaton, a former TV news director who blogs here, argues that, at least in broadcast newsrooms, minority journalists have had little affect on the nature of news coverage, in part because they don't want to be "typecast" as minorities. Heaton writes:

"The drumbeat for bringing diverse thoughts and stories to the newsroom, where they'll influence the overall editorial judgment of the station, is barely audible. In theory, it makes sense: bring under-represented groups in, and they will represent. In practice, I've found, it's just another occasion for divisiveness in the newsroom."

This is a familiar complaint among news managers that has some validity, but does the fault lie in the minority journalists or the managers (presumably non-minority) running the newsrooms? Heaton deserves some credit for raising an controversial issue, but he too easily dismisses in statements like this one the concerns minority reporters have with being typecast : "Stories are commonplace in the industry about black reporters who actually refuse to go into the black community."

Inherent in that thinking is the belief that, in this instance, being black is a skill, like speaking Spanish or understanding financial statements, and therefore better prepares a black reporter for talking with other black citizens. It fails to account for the diversity among blacks themselves. What makes a Columbia or Missouri or Berkeley educated, middle-class African American reporter more equipped to communicate with a member of the black under-class than his white counterpart other than his skin color?

Not all minorities want to cover race or, as Heaton puts it, "their stories." Not all whites want to to be political reporters or sports reporters or whatever. Here, Heaton's argument, no matter how heartfelt, collapses.

He also claims to pinpoint a contradiction in the diversity argument, which he frames this way: "In theory, it makes sense: bring under-represented groups in, and they will represent. In practice, I've found, it's just another occasion for divisiveness in the newsroom. I've actually turned to minority reporters during discussion of an issue pertaining to their race, only to be told, "Why are you looking at me?"

Heaton's experience may be true for him, but mine is quite different. I found that most of the minority reporters and editors I worked with -- in predominantly white newsrooms -- were not shy about "representing" nor were they afraid to confront managers, including myself, when they thought poor decisions were being made or viewpoints not being included.

Race is an uncomfortable subject and at times I, as a editor and as a person, felt discomfort being reminded of my own limited perceptions, but it challenged me and forced my way of thinking, that of my peers and that of those minority journalists to undergo scrutiny and debate. From that consideration came better decisions and, at times, better journalism.

To return to the original question (which I buried up there in the lede), one reader of Heaton's essay suggested in the comments that some of the tension between minorities and managers is based on the age. This is an intriguing idea and on the mark:

"Inside the newsroom (minority or not) ... young people and the ideas they can bring are stifled. This is extremely harmful to someone's creative powers. ... People want to be hired because they are capable talented individuals, not because if they are young, black or whatever else, then they are able to cover that group. The minorities who are being hired are also usually young. ... It is also the idea of novelty and change that scares newsrooms. Minorities and young people represent that.

Now we're talking about something that really makes news managers, especially in the defensive culture of newspapers, nervous: Change.

Young people are treated like incoming cattle to the slaughterhouse at most newspapers. They receive no training, are given little feedback, have no career path and are taught that the best way to get ahead is do things the way the boss did them back in the day. Is it any surprise that "lack of professional challenge and limited opportunities for advancement" are the top reasons minority journalists are leaving newspapers almost as fast as they can be hired. [Read: ASNE's Diversity Study: Looking for Answers ]

Newspapers need more minorities. Period. End of argument. But the concept of "minority" needs to be redefined: Color is a minority, but so is youth, creativity, political viewpoint, bilingualism and, much too often these days, idiosyncrasy.

I sympathize with Heaton's experiences, but I fear he is criticizing a sympton and not the condition.

Posted by Tim Porter at August 11, 2004 05:02 PM