News-Record.com

Not to stir up a hornet's nest...

But, does this mean the NEXT hire must be a minority since Michelle is not?

What was that quota again?

Appreciate your continued interest in our staff diversity, Jim. We're right on course in our commitment to hire more minorities.

In other words, Jim, yes.

We'll all just hang on to our resumes until the posting AFTER next. Don't want the commitment getting off course!

I had this dream last night ... something about the content of my skin, or the color of my character?

Like you and MLK, I too dream of that day. Meanwhile, I think he'd be with us in our efforts.

We're actually recruiting for several positions so feel free to send your resume in.

If I were a minority, I guess I'd feel a bit embarrassed that I was being hired as a result of my ethnicity instead of my qualifications and abilities to perform in a position. I'd like to think that I can compete with the best of society's applicant gene pool and come out on top.

I guess I'm not surprised that your paper is taking this public approach. Since moving here, I've realized that many Southern media types are still overcome with guilt with respect to their region's past conduct toward minorities, and more specifically, African-Americans.

I like to think that when I read your newspaper on Sunday mornings, I'm being presented with features that were written and investigated by individuals who were assigned that privilege as a result of their abilities to meet your paper's reporting standards and not as a result of some preferential treatment criteria.

In my estimation your paper's position with respect to hiring minorities greatly demeans the vast leaps that all minorities have made in our society by implying that they are not competitive and unable to excel unless given set-aside jobs.

"We're actually recruiting for several positions so feel free to send your resume in."

Snort.

John, you may have missed all the discussion about this when I announced our commitment to diversifying our staff back in November. There are a lot of mis-assumptions floating around out there about our initiative. We agree with you that the assumption by many that hiring minorities means hiring unqualified journalists is wrong-headed and insulting. And we never said that. There are many, many excellent journalists of color out there, and we intend to recruit and hire them. In fact, you are correct: the marketplace for minorities is highly competitive, which makes it harder to hire. These are hardly "set-aside jobs."

Michelle: welcome on board! I look forward to reading your articles in the News & Record soon. I don't know how he is as a boss, but it's cool that John has announced your hiring in such a public forum. He obviously is impressed by what he perceives you have to offer the paper. As you've read above, there are other issues that also interest readers, and I'm now going to join in on that discussion as well.

I'm not sure if it has anything to do with character, but it might have been nice if someone had congratulated Michelle Jarboe for being hired as a business reporter for the News & Record. That was the purpose of the original post.

I worked briefly for The Daily Tar Heel as a copy editor. Unlike many who worked there, I was not on a journalism track.

When I would go in to proofread stories, I was always amazed by the tremendous amount of work that so many students put into producing the campus's daily newspaper.

My recollection is that editors put in life-consuming hours. But it was their choice, and they loved what they were doing. As the editor-in-chief, Michelle almost certainly learned and accomplished a great deal.

Commenters so far have conveniently ignored this part of John's post: "We've spent some time filling this position with the right person; we think we've found her."

My bet is that Michelle will prove to be an excellent hire.

Since John never brought her race into the equation, it's interesting that a colorblind person decided to bring it up.

Also, I'd be willing to bet this: almost all those completely opposed to race having any bearing on hiring would be unlikely to think anything unusual if they walked in on an all white, or for that matter, an all-white-male population in the workplace or elsewhere.

Don't be too concerned about affirmative action. It still hasn't brought us anything but white male presidents and vice presidents. The same has been true of all our state's governors and U.S. Senators, with one very recent exception. The Triad has seen female mayors, but none of our mayors have been minorities. We've seen at least two minority chairman of our county commissioners, but that position is determined internally rather than through the general elections. Even outside of elected office, minorities are not undeservedly "stealing" our jobs and our positions as much as we'd like to believe. We also are a lot less likely to focus on all the "underly" qualified, incompetent, sorry white people out there who fill their own fair share of positions and so often manage to stay in them.

The fact that in 2005 there are still African Americans and women (and others) achieving "firsts" in various positions and with various accomplishments doesn't mean in the past that there were not better, more qualified, more impressive individuals out there in the past.

We all of a sudden want to switch over to an absolute system of fairness when the system in the past was everything but.

The pitiful thing is that there are whites out there today--this very moment--who honestly believe they are at as great a disadvantage as blacks and women (and others) were in the past. You almost wonder if they should not have their heads examined--or at least be required to study history a little more thoroughly.

I've ended up being as rude as anyone here, and for that I apologize, particularly to Michelle.

Back to the main point: best wishes to you, Michelle, in your new position. May you prove to be the best person for the job!

John,

Let me quote from the U.S. Civil Rights Act of 1964:

“It shall be…unlawful…for an employer…to limit, segregate, or classify… applicants for employment in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment opportunities…because of such individual's race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.”

Now let me quote you from the N&R, Nov. 27, 2004:

“Beginning now, at least 33 percent of our new hires will be minorities. If an editor hires two white journalists, the next hire must be a minority.”

It is the grossest of presumption on your part to claim that Martin Luther King would support somebody who openly, freely and smugly flouts and violates the very civil rights laws that he worked so hard to enact.

Thanks, guys. For the record, our attorneys say our hiring practices are on solid legal ground.

Whew! Lord knows an attorney would never agree to anything that was ethically questionable.

Don't confuse an ethical discussion with legal one, Lia. Even I know that they aren't the same. :)

John,
This is an ethical discussion as well. It should be of the highest ethical concern to a community when a newspaper holds itself to be above the law and justifies it with such lame statements as the one you made above, and have made previously. Be specific as a newspaper editor should. Tell us exactly how your statement and policy are not patent violations of the clearly stated section of the law that I cited. A newspaper rightly wouldn’t let any other institution get away with such a vague and bureaucratic denial as yours. Better yet, do the right thing. Admit that you made a mistake in making that statement and setting that policy in the first place. Save the newspaper and yourself a lot of future grief and give the community a chance try to regain some respect for you and the newspaper.

I'm not sure "give the community a chance to try to regain some respect for you and the newspaper" is quite warranted.

Are people walking around Greensboro cursing the News and Record for its hiring practices? I'd be willing to bet the vast majority of the readership has no idea that there is any such policy.

And if they did, I'm not sure they'd care.

If they did, I'm sure they'd read the Rhino instead. God knows they'd never be accused of hiring minority journalists for any reason at all - never mind as a specific policy.

Of course it's an ethical issue, and we believe we are doing the right thing. I'm no lawyer and know better than to argue the law as if I were.