Job Satisfaction of Minority Journalists at U.S. Daily Newspapers
By Edward C. Pease (©1991)
Doctoral Dissertation
E.W Scripps School of Journalism
Ohio University • Athens, Ohio
CHAPTER 7—Getting Ahead: Factors and Obstacles in Newsroom Advancement
Q: “What do you think is the single most important factor in advancement at your company?”
A: “It sure beats the hell out of me!”
– White male business reporter, late 30s
250,000+ metro daily
250,000+ metro daily
Perceptions are tricky. Ask anyone. ASNE’s Changing Face of the Newsroom study found some evidence of how perceptions can torpedo even the best of intentions. “Of particular concern to editors should be the disparity of opinion between newsroom managers and their staffs over the effectiveness of management and the quality of the newspaper,” writes ASNE’s Stinnett in an opening summary. “Editors don’t think feedback is a problem, but their underlings do. Managers think newsroom morale is higher than apparently it is.”1
In this study, newsroom managers also take considerable heat from respondents. In response to the question, “What do you think is the single most important factor in advancement at your company?” some wrote: “Who knows?” “I wish to hell I knew!!!” “Self-promotion.” and “Incompetence helps.” Such confusion and frustration over what it takes to get ahead should be a signal to newsroom managers that, however clear they think the criteria for advancement are, the message isn’t getting through. “It’s really hard to figure,” wrote one respondent; said another, “I truly cannot tell.” Unclear standards breed the kind of resentment and even contempt from the troops that prompted these kinds of responses to questions about what it takes to get ahead: “Servility, dishonesty and sycophancy,” a reporter in his early 40s wrote; “Willingness to subvert your journalistic ideals,” said another.
The previous section examined journalists’ desire for advancement and professional growth and their respective levels of ambition. Part of their assessment in deciding what jobs they might want and how likely it is that they’ll get them must be an understanding of what factors are most important in getting ahead. From the input of the ASNE study and comments of respondents to this survey, there seems to be not only confusion over what it takes to get ahead, but differences of opinion over what tends to hold journalists back in the ranks.
The ASNE study asked its respondents which of four factors was most important in advancement: merit, convenience, politics and seniority. Merit – which probably should be the answer but too seldom is – was the response of 39 percent of whites; 32 percent of whites said politics. Minorities were less trusting: 24 percent selected merit, but 58 percent of all minorities and 64 percent of blacks said politics was the overriding factor in getting ahead in American newsrooms.2
In this study, most white respondents – 41.9 percent – say they think advancement is based on individual merit/talent/skill and 31 percent answer personal politics, both results mirroring the ASNE responses four years before, as Table 45 shows. Again, minority respondents are less trusting – one said “naive”– than whites; 31 percent said advancement decisions were made on the basis of merit, but more – 43 percent – said it was newsroom politics. As in ASNE’s 1987 results, this is bad news for managers; much of the rank-and-file think personnel decisions are made capriciously; combine two related categories, and you have half of all respondents saying managers arrive at promotion, assignment and advancement decisions on the basis of newsroom politics or whatever’s most convenient.
________________________________________________________________________
TABLE 45: Factors in newsroom advancement, by race, in percentages
Q. What do you think is the single most important factor in advancement at your company?
1991 1987a
W M All W M All
Merit/talent/skills 41.9 30.8 38.1 39.0 24.0 39.0
Seniority 4.2 4.8 4.4 7.0 4.0 8.0
Race 1.3 4.8 2.4 -- -- --
Politics 31.0 43.3 35.1 32.0 58.0 33.0
Mgt convenience 16.4 13.7 15.5 21.0 15.0 21.0
Other* 5.3 2.7 4.4 -- -- --
1991 data: N=1311; X2=42.773; d.f.=5; p<.0001; Missing = 17 * Other = combination of factors ; others wrote, “Who knows?” and “I truly wish I knew.” a = 1987 data from 1987 ASNE Changing Face of the Newsroom study. That study did not include “Race” and “Other” options ________________________________________________________________________ Not surprisingly, since the newsroom repeatedly is referred to as an old boys’ club, women are even more critical of managers and the weight they apparently place on personal politics in newsroom advancement. Women overall see merit as much less a factor in advancement than do men, 28.1 percent to 40 percent (see Table 46). One Hispanic reporter from Texas said she checked merit, “but I may be naive!” Another, a copy editor for one of the nation’s largest dailies, noted, “This question troubled me very much – I so wanted to check ‘merit’ and couldn’t convince myself. Politics has played such a large role here in the past, but that may be changing.” She’s not alone in that sentiment; more than 47 percent of women say politics are the overriding factor in advancement at their newspapers, compared to 36 percent of men. In another swipe at newsroom managers, 11 percent of all female respondents and 14 percent of males say most advancement decisions are made on the basis of whatever suits management’s convenience. And as noted in the results reported in Table 46, journalists of color tend to be more critical than whites of the importance of newsroom politics; thus, race in conjunction with gender yields some of the sharpest criticisms for the processes newsroom managers employ in making promotion decisions. TABLE 46 here Interestingly, few respondents see race as a dominant factor in newsroom advancement, although several said gender is an issue. A female copy editor from a Southern paper wrote that the dominant factor in the newsroom is “race and sex: white men advance under this management dictatorship.” Two other women, both from the East Coast, also assailed the good old boy school of newspaper management. One, a white reporter in her 40s, wrote that the most important factor in getting ahead was “Being a man, preferably the scion of a wealthy family.” The other, an African American metro desk reporter who said she was unlikely to be in the business in five years, echoed that point: “Whether one attends an Ivy League or other ‘ruling class’ school. And, of course, whether one is a white male.” More than half of black women and more than 60 percent of Hispanic women respondents said politics was at the heart of management decision-making. Several respondents pointed out that politics includes factors of race, gender and “management convenience, capriciousness and whimsy,” making that a potent and turbulent category indeed. Note that white men and women both ranked merit/talent/skill as most important, although sizeable percentages of both groups also cited politics. That newsroom politics may be more a function of gender than of race is illustrated by the responses of minority men to this question; although 40 percent or more of both black and Latino men cited politics as the leading factor in advancement, more than half of black and Latino women. Further, note the responses of Asian men and women; the attitudes of both of these subgroups closely resemble those of white respondents, suggesting that Asian American journalists may have an easier time than some other people of color in assimilating themselves into the newsroom political structure. Returning for a moment to the “haves v. have-nots” thesis, some support for the view of a newsroom caste system emerges from these findings. All newsroom journalists worry about the influence of newsroom politics in trying to assess what it takes to get ahead, but this factor is of greatest concern among members of “out” groups, people who are not white and not good old boys. Those who have newsroom power – whites and especially white men – are considerably less concerned about the political influence in advancement than those who do not – especially blacks and Hispanics. Along gender lines, the “haves” are men and the “have-nots” women, who are most likely to point to newsroom politics as the primary factor in advancement. In examining responses to this question by newspaper circulation in Table 47, an evolution in the workplace “education” of journalists of color is apparent. Minority journalists are largely in agreement with their white co-workers at smaller newspapers about the weight placed on performance – about 40 percent of both whites and nonwhites at 50,000- to 100,000-circulation size papers point to merit/talent/skill as the leading factor in advancement. In the largest circulation category, white respondents’ faith in meritocracy remains about constant, but many minorities have changed their minds; only 26.4 percent of journalists of color working for papers in the 500,000 and higher circulation range think merit is what it takes to get ahead in newspapers. TABLE 47 here Among both whites and nonwhites, the percentage of respondents saying politics was the leading factor also rises sharply with circulation, to nearly half of all nonwhite journalists and more than a third of whites at largest papers. Perception of management capriciousness – advancement for management convenience – as a leading factor declines as circulation increases among both whites and minorities, from about 20 percent at smaller papers to 12 percent to 13 percent at larger papers. The ASNE survey also asked respondents about their perceptions of obstacles to career advancement in the newsroom, as did the present study. In 1987, 56 percent of whites said competition from co-workers was the primary obstacle, but 36 percent of minorities said it was race; for blacks, that number was even higher, 46 percent.3 Responding to the same question, journalists in 1991 come down along somewhat similar lines (see Table 48). More than a quarter of white respondents say competition from co-workers is their biggest career obstacle, but nearly half of white respondents checked “other.” Most did not explain what “other” obstacle confronted them; many white respondents wrote that they had perceived no obstacles to advancement in their careers. Another 180 white journalists – 15.6 percent of all white respondents – listed various facets of newsroom or corporate politics. Other handwritten comments to explain “other” included a heavy dose of criticism, some very harsh, for “management bullshit” and “management caprices”; others suggested structural or geographic impediments to advancement; others said the block was a combination of the other factors. ________________________________________________________________________ TABLE 48: Obstacles to newsroom advancement, by race, in percentages
Q. What do you think is the biggest obstacle to your career advancement in newspapers?
1991 1987a
W M All W M All
Lack of experience 9.4 16.6 11.8 20.0 27.0 21.0
Lack training 4.9 5.0 4.9 13.0 7.0 13.0
Race 4.8 27.1 12.3 1.0 36.0 5.0
Gender 8.8 5.2 7.6 10.0 2.0 9.0
Competition 25.2 23.5 24.6 56.0 28.0 52.0
Other* 46.9 22.6 38.8 -- -- --
1991 data: N=1254; X2=173.322; d.f.=5; p<.0001; Missing = 74 * More than one-third of those who check “other” explained that they meant newsroom politics. Others – white respondents especially – said they had experienced no obstacles; the rest listed a combination of factors. a = Data from 1987 ASNE Changing Face of the Newsroom study. “Other” category not included. ________________________________________________________________________ Among minorities, race is seen as the biggest obstacle to advancement by 27 percent of respondents, lower than the ASNE study’s finding, as Table 48 shows. Another 23.5 percent of minorities say competition from co-workers limits their advancement, and 22.6 percent checked “other.” For about a third of these, “other” means office politics (7.8 percent of all minority journalists); like their white counterparts, many minority respondents who checked “other” say management was the problem; others say it’s a combination of factors. A combination of lack of experience and training is seen as the greatest obstacle to the career advancement of 14 percent of white respondents and almost 22 percent of minorities, down from about one-third in ASNE’s 1987 study. There also are gender differences in responses to this question, as Table 49 indicates. For both men and women overall, factors lumped under “other” – a combination of these five factors, plus complaints about management, newsroom politics and other issues – are seen by most respondents as blocking their careers: “It’s a combination of politics, competition and racism,” a Midwestern black male desk editor wrote. Beyond these other issues, however, most women see competition from co-workers as the biggest obstacle to advancement, followed by race and experience; 13 percent of women cited gender as the biggest problem. All males, influenced by almost half of black men, ranked race first after “other,” followed by experience and competition. Twenty-one men, including 15 white men, list gender as being a top obstacle to their advancement. These 15 men apparently are responding to corporate directives at some newspapers that favor female candidates for top positions. These policies, for the most part within the largest U.S. newspaper chains such as Gannett and Knight Ridder, have resulted in the hiring of women as upper-echelon managers and generated resentment among some mid-level male managers who might otherwise have been in line for those positions. “Males are being ignored for management positions,” a Southern white male sports reporter in his late 30s wrote. “Only women have been interviewed while in-house male employees are ignored.” TABLE 49 here For black journalists – men and women – race is seen as the dominant factor in the advancement process, more than for members of all other ethnic groups; 47.9 percent of African American men and 26.7 percent of African American women say race is the biggest obstacle they face in advancing their careers. Half of all Asian American men say their lack of experience and competition from co-workers are the primary factors slowing their rise through the ranks; two-thirds of Latino women point to race, competition and a combination of other issues. Predictably, the proportions of both white and nonwhite journalists who cite their own lack of experience or training drop as circulation rises, although minority journalists even that the largest papers are still more likely than white co-workers to say these are the roadblocks to their advancement. As Table 50 shows, minority journalists’ perceptions of the role of race in newsroom advancement increase by almost 50 percent from the smallest papers to the largest, while whites’ perception of race as a factor declines. Minority journalists appear to think competition from co-workers as an obstacle to thgeir advancement diminishes with circulation, while more whites at large papers than at smaller ones point to this factor. Identifying Roadblocks: Management, racism, reverse discrimination
Explanatory notes in the questionnaire margins point to newsroom politics, mismanagement, distant corporate control, and individual frustrations as major obstacles to their career progress, although white men wrote that they had risen as high as they want to go and either already occupied a top slot or had no interest in venturing into management. It’s instructive to look at these open-ended responses in some detail, since they provide both flavor and descriptive qualitative flesh to the survey’s quantitative bones.
TABLE 50 here
Although they’re a relatively small percentage of the total white male respondents, the 6 percent of white men who said race is a major obstacle to their advancement bear some examination. A sports reporter from the upper Midwest, checking the “race” choice, wrote: “I’m a white male.” Thirty-one other white males and seven white females also said race was a problem in their attempts to advance, indicators of perceptions of reverse discrimination. “Minorities have been promoted regardless of qualifications,” wrote a white male systems supervisor from the Midwest. Another agreed. “Managers seem to believe that minorities and women automatically are qualified for jobs, while white males must prove themselves,” a white male business reporter in his 40s with between 10 and 20 years’ experience wrote. “White males are frozen in place because better jobs are given to women and minorities. The paper should have the guts to reward merit without regard to race, gender.” Ironically, this is in reverse exactly what women and minorities have been saying for years.
Other written comments from respondents offer glimpses into the pressures at work in the newsroom trenches. As the 1987 ASNE report concluded, what we have here is a failure to communicate. From these open-ended responses – 133 of which said simply “politics,” or some variation – it is clear that there is great anger and frustration in the newsroom. Much of that anger is directed at local management and corporate directives. Structural problems – what one white male called “ossified existing hierarchy” – including mismanagement and corporatization, are killing the newspaper business, many rank-and-file journalists say.
Some respondents said they were their own greatest obstacle advancement: “I want out,” said one. Others cited family considerations, geography and outside interests. Still others said their own personality traits worked against their advancement: “Personal complacency,” said one; “My own aggressive style,” said one man, although another cited his “lack of aggression.” Others wrote: “lack ambition” and “sexual orientation.” A West Coast Asian American copy editor in her 40s pointed to “the glass ceiling current management has installed.” Another cited her newspaper’s financial straits. A white male metro desk editor in his late 40s said he’d hit a plateau: “Too many fairly young people above me,” he wrote.
Still, most of those who felt moved to write comments cited politics and attacked management and managers. “It’s a long-established management position here – Don’t rock the boat,” said a white male at a 250,000-circulation metro.
In the East, “the obsession with Ivy League education, when I went to a state school” is a roadblock to a black female metro reporter in her late 20s. But a white male copy editor in his 50s said the Midwest is no better, citing “the fair-haired, good old Yaley boy network.” And even in Texas, where good old boy usually means something entirely different than it does in most American newsrooms, a black male photographer wrote, “I didn’t go to the right school and I don’t go drinking with the boys!!”
Many are “reluctant to play the game.” An Asian woman reporter, for instance, says she’s “not good at the old boys network.” A Latino photographer in his early 30s cited what he called the “bigotry of good old boy networking,” and many just scrawled “cronyism” across the questionnaire. “I’m just not a skilled brown-noser,” wrote a white male desk editor from the Midwest. “I’m not a company man,” wrote another. Many others were even less circumspect; this male Latino local news editor from the Southwest is representative: “I have a low bullshit tolerance and I refuse to kiss management’s ass.”
Among those commenting on how their race or ethnicity affect relationships within the newsroom was this African American copy desk supervisor in his late 30s, who said, “Politics is a problem, including race.” A Latino feature writer from California agreed, saying race is a limiting factor in everything she does: “I’ve been told I’m ‘not dark enough’ or ‘we already have a Mexican, need a black.’”
A Hispanic metro reporter from Texas wrote about the confusing signals he gets from his editors. “Cultural differences and writing style, I think,” he said. “Despite my 10 years in the business, some editors consider me a lightweight, mainly because of my foreign accent and the way I write. They never complain about my writing, but when editing a story they are always asking, ‘How about if we say it like this instead?’”
And an African American metro reporter in her late 40s discussion thoughtfully how the newsroom culture and those who run it are so set in exclusionary ruts that few who are not white males can break through. The barriers are tradition, structure, race and gender in a confusing variety of doses. She wrote:
I think the biggest obstacle is a combination of race, gender and other factors. In one area, it has to do with how people socialize. I am not invited to the same parties and social functions as those attended by people who are in a position to hire or promote employees. Those events and situations usually are the province of whites, with white males as the dominant figures. I, as a black woman, am not privy to those encounters, where reporters’ careers and prospects are discussed. For example, my paper once conducted an internal survey on its hiring and promotions policies. One comment that stuck in my mind came from a national news editor who said the main way he learned of promising young local reporters was when his friends discussed their work at cocktail parties. This was a major factor in his hiring and promoting decisions, he said. He didn’t see what was wrong with his remark. Additionally, there is an urge for editors to want to assign black reporters to cover “black” news. I feel my career has suffered because I refused to be pigeon-holed that way. I have covered a variety of areas well, as my evaluations show. But I was never singled out as a “star” reporter because I did not want to cover shootings and the black underclass. The black reporters who do these stories about pathetic black life seem to be the ones who get ahead. White editors at my paper seem more comfortable with having blacks in these roles than with having minorities covering other serious issues.
• • •
NOTES: CHAPTER 7 – Factors and Obstacles in Newsroom Advancement
1. American Society of Newspaper Editors, The Changing Face of the Newsroom. (Reston, VA: American Society of Newspaper Editors, 1987), p. 13.
2. Ibid., p. 114.
3. Ibid., p. 115.
• Chapter 8.
No comments:
Post a Comment