The Poynter Institute has published an important story on the difficulty of tracking layoffs of journalists, especially journalists of color. As Kristen Hare writes, very few news organizations let it be known when they’ve eliminated positions. “For an industry that prizes transparency,” she says, “we’re experts at asking for it and rotten at actually offering it.”
She’s right, and it’s something I’ve found pretty frustrating whenever I hear reports that newspapers owned by Gannett or Alden Global Capital have downsized once again. Since many news organizations follow the practice of last hired, first fired, journalists from underrepresented groups tend to be disproportionately affected — but finding out exactly what happened is difficult if not impossible. Hare offers three explanations for why this information is so hard to come by:
- “Lack of public notice about who was laid off and where
- “A reluctance among some journalists to say anything publicly
- “Growing use of nondisclosure agreements that include non-disparagement agreements”
Hare also quotes my Northeastern journalism colleague Meredith Clark, who’s been working with the News Leaders Association to revive its annual survey of newsroom diversity — a survey that was suspended several years ago because so few news organizations were responding. Dr. Clark puts it this way:
The thing is, journalism as an institution, as a business, has a vested interest in continuing to isolate people in terms of their knowledge of what the field actually looks like. And the corporatization of journalism helps with that because it’s easy to say, “Oh, this is a problem for HR,” or, “Oh, because of legal we can’t do this.”
Clark is absolutely right, and it extends well beyond layoff and diversity numbers. I’ve been covering the news media for more than 25 years, and though I’ve found a great deal of openness to the idea that journalists should be as transparent as they expect their sources to be, I’ve encountered plenty of examples of the opposite, too.
Unfortunately, we can’t file public-records requests or demand the right to attend meetings at media outlets. Rather, we have to rely on news executives to do the right thing. If they think government officials should be compelled to release data that casts them in an unfavorable light, then why do they think it ought to be different for media organizations?
3 thoughts on “News organizations need to stop stonewalling on layoffs and diversity data”
Amen! Thanks for sharing!
Spot on! The lack of transparency – a.k.a cover-up – by for-profit owners of news-media outlets is crippling civic engagement and may lead to the downfall of our democratic republic.
Please keep raising hell and – hopefully – having a blast doing it.
BTW: Why not unleash good, reliable investigative reporters, to expose the financial holdings and likely conflicts of interest of the oligarchs who own for-profit/opaque news-media outlets? Oh right, not enough – if any – of them remaining, to do so. 😦
PS: Yet another destructive result of those opague oligarchs’ refusal to become more transparent
has been the dangerous rise of non-civically-engaging infotainment.
Comments are closed.