Message me
Chicago Tonight anchor Phil Ponce and a panel of distinguished journalists will examine the future of newspapers at this event. But why are there no women or people of color on the panel?
Future of News to be Decided by White Men... Again
headlineclub.org - 11 weeks ago - 1213 views
55 Comments Have your say. Vote up the best responses. ↓
Reactions on the web
Latest tweets linking to this story (Share url: http://windycitizen.com/wdM5)
Latest tweets linking to this story (Share url: http://windycitizen.com/wdM5)
Invite your friendsExplore this story
People: Phil Ponce
Top Media Stories This Week
2
Comments
All of these panels seem to go to one extreme or the other. I'm not so concerned about their gender or their ethnic makeup as that they're either made up of people at the top of the heap of traditional media or the leading young Turks of new media.
I submit that sometimes these people have trouble seeing problems and solutions that are clearer to the troops slogging in the ditches. Here are some women -- Beth Burmahl, Kathy Catrambone, Kim Okabe, Sue Ontiveros -- and a couple of white guys -- Leigh Hanlon and Ernie Schweit -- whom I think would be worth hearing from.
Windy City Media Group publishes Windy City Times; I am a white female (also lesbian for some added diversity), and co-founded Windy City Times in 1985--I have been an editor and reporter in Chicago for 25 years now, but it's no surprise that alternative media folks rarely get asked our opinions. We may be small, but we are not in bankruptcy like some of the big guns. Our managing editor is Andrew Davis, African American gay man. Our Nightspots publication is also edited by an African-American gay man, Kirk Williamson. Our Queercast Producer is Amy Matheny, a white lesbian. Our QueerTVNetwork.com primary host is Emmanuel Garcia, a Latino gay man. There are of course many other great and diverse voices in Chicago media, including from N'Digo, Defender, etc. I am not saying that any one of us has any solutions, but I am also not surprised that few of us are asked to provide any.
Too many talented people chasing too few old media jobs?
When I graduated from the SIU-Carbondale Radio & Television Program in 1980, the number of graduates nationwide equaled the total number of broadcast industry jobs. Not every Chicago native broadcast journalism graduate was going to work for one of the Chicago broadcast stations.
So, it's understandable that many pursued alternative media careers or leveraged these skill sets in to related employment, including public relations, sales or marketing.
One explanation for this Windy Citizen share headline is that many of those who continue to defy market demand by enrolling in journalism schools insist on blaming paucity of employment on such gender bias.
Promotion of women & minorities in to positions of responsibilty in the broadcasting industry speaks for itself as with the Windy City Media testimonial offered above.
You may still find employment related to your academic studies, but such jobs may take you to secondary or tertiary markets around the State & nation, hours away from Chicago's creature comforts & enlightened comraderie.
Otherwise, you may find that the new media may create pro bono opportunities which lead to portfolio or full-time employment.
Instead of railing, may I suggest thoughtful informational interviews & taking a chance on honing your craft in a smaller markets where your skills will be appreciated & better compensated.
UPDATE: Phil Ponce has been reached (not by myself) and he said he'd love to include a woman on the panel. Apparently the one woman that was asked had a scheduling conflict. He'll be getting some suggestions for who to ask shortly and hopefully one of them will accept.
After reading this thread, seems like the headline and subsequent question have been debunked and answered, respectively.
It is unfortunate the panel lacks diversity, but, as OurManInChicago stresses, this particular panel was about availability or lack thereof. I have class at DePaul that night, otherwise I'd definitely plan on being there.
That said, I really hope there will be audio/video set up so those who aren't there can follow up and discuss it here.
I helped organize the CMFC and Scott is reflecting what happened when we looked for more women to be panelists. Some of this frustration is because systems that exist (or existed) and kept women and others out of the top boss jobs are self-perpetuating. We can't find women in jobs like Patrick Spain, for example, because women his (and my age) were excluded from some career paths and jobs.
The selection reflects another thing I've lived through before, and that is recessions. "LI-FO" isn't a martian dog, it is the way corporations do business. As big businesses retrench because of economic shifts, and the recession, the last ones standing, are usually men.
Understanding that, doesn't mean I think we should just say that a panel like this that lacks diversity is "okay." In my J classes, most of my students are now women. But imagine if I took my class to see this event. Humans learn by modeling and "do as I say, not as I do," just doesn't work with people. I admire all the panelists and the moderator, it is just a shame it turned out this way.
Oh, but if there's a Rhodes/Zorn smack-down, I'll come without my class...
SIU-C RTV was about 50/50. My classes were held in a building which included journalism, radio-telvision, cinematography & dramatic arts. Needless to say, it was a totally pleasurable exprience.
(You may always master the quantitative discipline in graduate school.)
Thanks, Tracy.
It's like everything: Define your terms. Define knowledge of "Future of News." Do you know more because you are a blogger; on staff of a newspaper; have been a journalist for 30 years; or are aged over 40 with power or under 30 without?
I say look for the ideas. Look for the spark plugs. Look for the people who are advocates with a vision. And look for the people whose voices have not been heard in the main stream, but are being heard now.
Because that is where the future of news is being written.
Well, Chicago probably could have used that Open Space / Bar Camp that I and colleagues including Steve Rhodes proposed to some funders. Community Media Workshop is doing something but it doest really look "open" as it has some folks "leading" session and it costs $95...
I'd suggested you too, Sally, but they went with "someone in the trenches".
Thanks for that, Karen. I think they made a great choice. This is really just too big a subject to cram into a four person panel — it is after all the Future of Journalism and News! Look at all those journalists out there looking for a place in the sun!
true, anna. perhaps some energy will develop soon in a new direction.
Oh , I see. Susy Schultz, managing editor of the Kankakee Daily Journal. Excellent choice.
do we know who?
For a musical interlude from the Gang of Four:
The past lives in the books at home
No weak men in the books at home
History lives in the books at home
The books at home
It's not made by great men
It's not made by great men
It's not made by great men
It's not made by great men
A woman has been added to the panel
Well, the day of your conference I had a blinding headache and was going to try to sit quietly, but Patrick Spain provoked me, so who knows . . .
By the way, it's the same thing on the other side of the journalism coin: public relations. In my brief experience in the PR profession, I found the same appalling disconnect between the number of women in the field and the bigwigs on panels being all men, all the time.
A good point. Also, you know who else never gets asked for their opinions at these types of discussions? Advertisers and news consumers. I don't know about you all, but I would LOVE to hear from these folks sometime.
Did I miss something? No one on this comment thread has been complaining about not being able to find a job. This was strictly about diversity at conferences, on panels, etc. Please stay on topic or comments will be deleted. Thanks.
Why do you guys need funding?
Indeed. The topic is huge and no one really seems to have much of an answer so these discussions seem to end up being largely academic.
It's the same at Medill. There are 8 women for every man in the MSJ program...which was, in truth, wonderful.
Thanks Tracy and Sally,
Good points.
Tracy called it a few years ago at an AWJ annual meeting during her speech which was titled something like "Alternative is the New Mainstream". Some knew this then, some get it now and some aren't quite there yet.
Not sure what exactly she said on the topic, but I see a lot of truth in that phrase. Mainstream has become meaningless. I was just reading a piece on Time.com about Jay Leno's new show that points out that the big networks still have massive audiences, but they're not so much larger than the major cable channels. Everyone's got a niche, so either you're able to work in a niche industry, or you're not able to work.
You know, Brad. You're right. We don't. :-)
At this point the discussions will almost by definition have to be academic. Without a valid case study to refer to - positive or negative outcome - there's just no precedent to draw from yet.
Same thing at Kansas. A left brain/right brain thing, apparently: http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2009/aug/18/women-dominate-j-school-enrollm...
I don't think that's true actually. I think that probably both negative and positive case studies exist. I think the problem is that they're not talked about often enough. And of course when it comes to projects of large media orgs, they might be unwilling to sacrifice their competitive advantage by getting into the details of how their ventures are progressing. For instance, does anyone know how Chicago Now is doing (other than the traffic stats)? What about the Trib's new teen site: The Mash? Furthermore, how is it exactly that certain sites/publications are being successful? What are their business plans or where are they getting their funding? No one is keen to discuss this stuff out in the open.
Predictions have come true. Broadcasting has yielded to narrowcasting. Questions remain about how some alternative media channels will become financially successful.
excellent points, Anna.
Those are interesting ventures, but I don't think you have a large enough window of operation for examination yet.
The digital-only movement for some recently closed or downscaled papers has been less than a rousing success, to be sure.
I'll add journos who used to be looking for a place in the sun like Susy has....but the new sunny places might not be with legacy organizations but instead with the emerging landscape of news. I hope Susy will talk about how the Daily Journal's experience with the pay wall has been working.
Because these forums are often being put on by the short-sighted, oblivious white men who are the reason the current stage of journalism has screwed up so much?
Wrong, Cshess87. This was organized by the Chicago Headline Club whose president is a woman and whose board is largely made up of women:
http://www.headlineclub.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id...
This isn't about organizers not looking for diversity. For example, when I was co-organizing the CMFC in June, we went out of our way to find women and persons of color for the panel. In fact, we made such a concerted effort to do so that we didn't ask certain white men even though their position in the local industry would have meant that they would have had a lot to contribute (and I know we pissed off at least one person who felt slighted in not being asked to contribute in the way he would have liked). As it turned out, we had more white men that I would have liked (2/3 of the panelists/moderators), but that was only because the women and persons of color we tried to get for the panels had conflicts and couldn't make it. (It's also worth noting we had Ebony/Jet's Eric Easter scheduled to appear but due to last-minute travel problems, he was unable to attend.)
Sometimes, no matter how hard you try, these things are just a matter of who says yes for the date. And sometimes they're just a matter of the available voices in the industry. I doubt that the CHC - again, an organization whose board is made up almost exclusively of women - was ignorant to the need to put women and persons of color on the panel. The real question you ought to be asking is why more women and persons of color aren't in similar positions in the industry, not why one group didn't get enough of them for a panel.
Also, can anyone really say that any of these four guys won't make for a solid panel? (The back and forth between Zorn and Rhodes alone will make this event worth attending.)
I will allow for the fact that we don't know why this particular panel ended up the way it did. Maybe attempts were made to have women and other minorities on there. I've e-mailed the program director; perhaps he'll respond.
And yes, I fully admit that I'm hoping for an animated exchange between Rhodes and Zorn. But it still doesn't change my diappointment in the make-up of this group.
Who should they have brought in?
Some who should have been asked" Sally Duros - http://www.awj-chicago.org/sallyduros .
Jane Hirt or Joycelyn Winnecke from the Tribune.
Betsy Brenner, publisher of Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
Tracy Baim, editor and publisher of Windy City Times.
Academics (but maybe drawing from outside Loyola won't have been appropriate for Loyola) include: Loyola's Beth Konrad, DePaul's Laura Washington, NU's Michele Weldon, Columbia's Barb Iverson, Suzanne McBride or Nancy Day, to name a few.
That's a terrific list. Thanks for sharing that, Karen.
Thanks Karen! Thanks also for first bringing this panel to my attention (and the attention of many others) on the AWJ-Chicago e-mail list. You're a great president :-)
Agreed, that's a great list Karen!
"In fact, we made such a concerted effort to do so that we didn't ask certain white men even though their position in the local industry would have meant that they would have had a lot to contribute"
So, your saying you specifically discriminated against people based on their sex and race?
Yes, that is what liberals do. In the name of justice they commit injustice and call it good! Lol...
http://www.streetwisepundit.com/
I'd like to note that "these things are just a matter of who says yes for the date" shouldn't be taken as an indicator that I was dissatisfied with our panelists. I thought we had a group that reflected the overall state of local media - blogs, print, journalism, data miners, entertainment, etc. - and that diversity isn't just about the look of your panelists, it's about their breadth of experience. Was the 2nd panel a bunch of white guys (again, due to Easter not being able to make it)? Yes. But the back and forth all four of those men engaged in painted a diverse picture of the media landscape. And thats ultimately what you want for something like this. I think we delivered that, and I think the CHC will deliver the same with these four gents.
Link is broken?
I'm getting a 404 on headlineclub.org. Maybe we just brought down our first site? Doubtful but fun to conjecture.
The CHC site was hinky for me yesterday but it's working for me now.
I wonder if they're having DNS issues. I'm showing a big fat 404 on my end, too.
Not sure what could be wrong with the link, but here's the full text from the site:
Ponce is hispanic, right? I know he's only the moderator, but it's not a complete white-out.
I didn't realize he was Hispanic. However, that doesn't really change anything in my view.
Shall we invite any of the newscast anchors from the three largest broadcast networks? You may be surprised by what each has to say about their diligent work which produced their respective promotions.
On-topic suggested reading: http://www.lindatarrwhelan.com/author.cfm (h/t @Blagica)
I replied on the AWJ thread but wanted to also say here that the panel ought to be more diverse than it is. Maybe that can still be rectified. At the same time, I want to vouch for Our Man In Chicago; I know how hard he worked putting together the Future Media panel including finding diverse panelists. Seemed to me he was a bit snakebitten on that one; hopefully we can do better with this next one and still add/exchange some folks.
Oh, I was distracted, now I remember what I really wanted to say: Am I the only one who hopes sparks DON'T fly on this panel with Zorn et. al? I don't enjoy it, people! And it's not real productive. I'd rather stick to the topics (and facts) at hand. But if I must set some people straight, well, then I must . . . sigh. :)
Damnit, Rhodes, we are the Romans at the Coliseum! We want blood!
Or, you know, an intelligent exchange of ideas. I suppose that would be fine, too.
Post new comment