Lack of diversity makes it harder for young Latino journalists

By Rosbelis Quinonez

When that unapologetic, yet small woman came into the classroom, I felt relieved. Maria Hinojosa is this incredible story of success. Her family moved from Mexico to Chicago when she was still a baby. With tons of work and persistence, overtime that child became an award-winning journalist who has worked for PBS, CBS, WNBC, CNN and NPR.

“I was the first Latina walking into the newsroom at NPR,” said Maria Hinojosa, who repeated that experience in several newsrooms in the country. “But we’re in a different place now.”

Today, she runs her own media company: The Futuro Media Group.

That first day of class, I met a Latino journalist I consider a role model. Her story tells me that my Latinity has a place in the media of this country. Do not get me wrong. As a graduate journalism student at DePaul, I have had amazing mentors, but it was hard for me to relate to their experiences. They are mostly white Americans, and I am as Venezuelan as it gets.

When Hinojosa referred to a different place, she was talking about the changes in the media industry during the last decades. As far as diversity in the newsroom is concerned, since 1978 the percentage of people of color employed in daily newspapers increased 10 percent.

According to the American Society of News Editor in 2014, minorities represented 13.24 percent in those organizations.  The same year, the Radio Television Digital News Association estimated minorities made up 22.4 percent of journalists in television and 13 percent of journalists in radio.

Despite the progress, those numbers still do not represent the American population landscape.  Hispanics compile 18.1 percent of the people in the US– almost 60 million. A trend that keeps growing and the Census Bureau projected it to reach 28.6 percent by 2060.

With my graduation around the corner, job hunting has taught me some things. Certainly, all young journalists have to be persistent and savvy to get an entry-level position. But, in this fierce competition, skin color is a natural advantage. In other words, being white helps a great deal.

Last year, the Pew Research Center data showed that about 77 percent of newsrooms employees were white, and 61 percent were men. That is a scary context for a young Latina or any reporter of color.

However, the conflict starts long before jumping completely into the labor market. During a recent job fair at Columbia College Chicago, Teri Arvesu, Vice President of Content for Univision Communications said she only considers applicants with at least two internships in their resume. Several students left the room after those comments.

News directors and all those who hire journalists often value the type of internships and experiences that are hard to get if you are part of a minority group.

Alex T. Williams found in a 2015 research study that minorities are less likely to complete unpaid internships, do not have the same connections than white students–consider that newsrooms are primarily white– and were less likely to engage in all-white college newspapers. Williams, who was getting his doctoral degree at the University of Pennsylvania, discovered a direct relationship between these three factors and the socioeconomic status of Latino students, who often times had to work while in college.

Williams concluded that “newsrooms should try to interview a variety of candidates. If a job candidate is a solid, curious writer with drive and a good work ethic, they deserve consideration.”

Who hires journalists shapes the appearance of the newsrooms. New York Times executive editor Dean Baquet, who is a person of color, said to DePaul students during a recent visit to the University that “[he wants] the newsroom to look more and more like the country.”

“When I look at the people who surround me, it’s a range of people,” said Baquet. “My goal is to be even less elitist.”

Here is a tip for young journalists looking for their first job: Look for the people of color in positions of power. They may be of some help.

Sadly, there are not enough Baquets in the industry or even within The New York Times. Almost 80 percent of the people in positions of power in that news organization are white according to a report from last year. The situation is similar across the industry in the U.S.

Diversity in newsrooms bring a large number of benefits for the media organizations and society. For instance, Latinos offer a different perspective to the newsroom because of their cultural background. Award-winner WGN Chicago investigative reporter Lourdes Duarte said often she has additional knowledge regarding some communities and consider facts in a different way. “I may pay attention to things that other people don’t and that’s important.”

Last January, the National Association of Hispanic Journalists criticized The New York Times podcast “The Daily” saying that reporters staged a border crossing into Mexico in the first episode of the series “Dispatches From the Border.” For many in the Latino community, the report failed to convey the reality of what is happening at the border with Mexico and the tragedy of thousands of immigrants’ families.  “The report [“Dispatches From the Border, episode one”] takes a joking and apathetic tone. In an ignorant attempt to understand border crossings, the clip excludes immigrant voices and any further context about the journey for those immigrants before and after crossing the river,” said the National Association of Hispanic Journalists in a statement.

While part of the society distrusts the media in the U.S., Hispanics value journalists and their work. Last March, the Pew Research Institute found in a study that 48 percent of people from predominantly Hispanic areas believe journalism has a lot of influence, and 43 percent are more likely to talk to a journalist. Ironically, 82 percent of those people have not spoken with local journalists.

Hispanics communities — $1.7 trillion purchasing power — are such fertile ground for Latino reporters and news organizations! Covering what happens and issues for these communities of color is not only part of the media social responsibility, but there is also potential revenue in the task. That is why bilingualism, cultural awareness and all Latino reporters’ skill set is so needed in newsrooms across the country.

Our job hunting is a matter of more than persistence, good portfolios and experience with college publications. “Overall, only 49 percent of minority graduates that specialized in print or broadcasting found a full-time job, compared to 66 percent of white graduates,” wrote Williams. To get a place in the newsroom, we need a well-defined strategy to market our talents, and the confidence to know our value.

Many Latinos are already changing the media industry in this country, but the new generations have the duty to keep opening spaces. It paves the way for future generations of journalists to worry more about reporting the stories that matter for all, and less about the color of their skin.

-30-

by Stacey Sheridan

“It is disheartening when people don’t vote”

During the 2019 runoff election, Chicagoans witnessed history in the making as two African American women vied to become the city’s first female mayor of color. On April 2, voters elected Lori Lightfoot, making her not only the city’s first black female mayor, but also its first openly gay mayor. And yet, the excitement surrounding the historic election appeared to have little to no bearing on voter turnout. Only 32 percent of Chicago’s registered voters cast ballots. Prior to the runoff, only 33 percent of 1.5 million registered voters actually voted. By all accounts, it was an utterly dismal turnout. However, low voter turnout is not unique to Chicago. Poor turnout is plaguing elections across the nation. So, who or what is to blame? Whose responsibility is it to fix it?

With the rise of so-called “fake news,” it seems almost fashionable to point the finger of blame at journalists. If journalists fail to provide citizens with adequate information regarding not only the election itself, but the platform issues of the running candidates, the voting public will be unable to develop an educated opinion and, without an educated opinion, may abstain from voting on the grounds of being uninformed. However, it isn’t that simple. News outlets report on races indefatigably, informing the public on everything related to the candidates, their platforms and the election itself. So, when people fail to show up on election day, it can be discouraging, not only for politicians and election judges, but for journalists too.

“It is disheartening when people don’t vote,” The New York Times executive editor Dean Baquet said in an intimate panel put on by the DePaul Center for Journalism Integrity & Excellence. “I’m always disappointed that people don’t understand how big a deal an election is and we’re in an election cycle that’s unlike any election cycle in modern times. These are really big deal, important elections. If you choose not to vote because that’s your choice that’s fine, but it’s up to me to make it clear that it’s a big deal, to make it interesting, to make it compelling.”

To do just that, journalists are now going out of their way to come up with inventive ways to get people involved in elections, in addition to traditional election reporting. Paula Friedrich, an interactive producer at WBEZ radio, came up with a simple, but innovative tool for Chicagoans during the mayoral race. Before Lightfoot and Toni Preckwinkle made the runoff ballot, there was a staggering 14 people running for Chicago mayor. It is justifiably difficult for the average civilian to wade through that large pool to find the candidate that aligns most closely to his or her political beliefs. For many people, spending a few hours reading up on candidates and their platforms, although important, does not rank high on to-do lists when they have jobs and other responsibilities that demand their time and attention.

Friedrich understood this predicament and created an online yes-or-no quiz that matched the quiz-taker with the candidate that shared views on issues. Quiz-takers were given an efficient and fun way to whittle down the 14 candidates to just one, without poring over questionnaires, interviews and biographies. But if those taking the quiz wanted to read up on candidates or issues, they could with ease. WBEZ provided the link to the written responses the candidates submitted that were compiled to create the quiz. Each question also included a link that directed those who clicked on it to a page with supplementary information on the pertaining topic.

Journalism outlets don’t have to use slick digital devices to be effective in conveying the importance of elections, while also making the election process easier on people. In fact, one of the best instances of innovation was completely devoid of technology. Ithaca Times, a New York-based weekly newspaper, gained national attention when it put a fully-functional blank voter registration form on the front page of its August 21, 2018 issue. Marshall Hopkins, the production director and designer whose idea it was to put the form on the front page, in lieu of the week’s top stories, received an honorable mention at the 2018 Better Newspaper Contest for the cover. Most importantly, it made registering to vote simple; all readers had to do was cut the form out, write in their information and then mail it out.

Both WBEZ and the Ithaca Times did an excellent job in simplifying the process for the public, and it is likely that publications and media outlets will continue to employ innovative approaches to simplify the process of participating in elections, but journalists cannot be held responsible for fixing the nation’s poor turnout. Journalists can do everything in their power to make the voting process easier on the public, but, when it comes down to it, we cannot frog-march people to their specific polling station and make them cast a ballot. Just like you can lead a horse to water, you can lead a voter to the polls, but you can’t make that horse drink or that voter vote. As disheartening as low turnout is, the role of a journalist is not to mother; journalists can’t force you to eat your vegetables and do your civic duty. All we, as journalists, can do is deliver the information required for citizens to make an educated opinion and maybe try to simplify the process as much as possible. It is the responsibility of the individual to decide for whom or what, or even if, to vote.

By: Marissa De La Cerda                      

Newsrooms can build trust with audiences by showing reporting process and inviting audiences to participate.

When talking to family or friends about the journalism industry or stories I’ve worked on, theyare always more amazed by the reporting process and less about the story topics themselves. They often ask questions such as, “How did you get this source to call you back?” “Why did you frame your shot this way?” “Can you walk me through the order in which you wrote, shot and edited the story?” I’m always happy to answer their questions because I want them to know how long and tedious the reporting process is for a story but more than anything, I want to help rebuild their trust with the media they’ve grown so skeptical of. By laying out the processes for them and allowing them to see how hard journalists work on creating stories for the public, they have learned to trust news a little more.

It isn’t just a matter of letting audiences in on the reporting process, however. It’s also about inviting them to participate. This can be referred to as engagement reporting. Engagement reporting, according to Mediashift, is when journalists combine community engagement with traditional news reporting. It isn’t as much about increasing how much audiences engage with their content as it is about inviting them to be a part of the reporting process. The goal of their collaboration is to serve the community and authentically reflect their needs and interests while also giving them insight into the reporting process itself. This transparency helps build trust (which has decreased by 70 percent over the past decade, according to a Gallup study) but it also allows newsrooms to learn from their audiences and boost story relevance by catering to their needs.

There are various ways newsrooms can successfully allow audiences to participate in the reporting process. The structure usually depends on the newsroom and the individual community’s needs but always revolves around putting the interests of the audience at the forefront of the work. Social media outreach, specifically, plays a huge role in engagement reporting. Journalists can tweet something as simple as “Chicagoans! What are some issues we should be paying more attention to?” and receive a dozen replies from community members expressing what they’d like to see reported. Outlets like Block Club Chicago and The Chicago Reader are exceptionally good at this outreach and have developed strong relationships with their readers. Since Block Club focuses on neighborhood reporting, the individual reporters ask what specific issues different neighborhoods want covered.

Aside from social media outreach, newsrooms and outlets can use social media to show the behind the scenes of their reporting process. The New York Times, for example, uses Instagram stories to lay out the process of their longer form stories in a more interactive way. It allows users to tap through their story to see the behind the scenes of stories while linking to the actual story itself. They’ve even had videos that give insight into how the paper itself is printed. All of this gives readers more of an in into the journalism industry. Another thing I’ve seen broadcast journalists do that helps build trust with the public is they post their own videos from the field or the studio giving viewers insight into what goes into shooting their packages. This may also help promote the story once it’s out.

Other methods newsrooms have used for engagement reporting are public newsrooms. City Bureau hosts weekly public newsrooms which is essentially a space for the public and journalists to gather to discuss ideas with one another. It’s “a place to find and shape stories in direct conversation with Readers,” according to the City Bureauwebsite. ProPublica Illinois has held workshops throughout the state in the past to listen to what matters most to communities. Above all, both the public newsroom and the ProPublica workshops seek to help journalists build relationships with people. This will allow them to reach out to them in the future for other stories or similar beats.

Engagement reporting doesn’t need to include an event, however. It can be as simple as sending out a questionnaire or posting a tweet. It only requires that the goal be focused on bringing the community’s wants and needs into focus and working with them on crafting stories to benefit the community, the media, and strengthen the relationship between the public and the media.

-30-

Emily McTavish

May 10, 2019

On any given weekday, I receive about five newsletters to my inbox. These are not from the blogs or businesses I follow but are from news organizations. Newsletters are increasingly my first source for news when I wake up and check my phone in the morning.

Hunter Clauss, writer of WBEZ’s The Rundown, said he, too, observed a surge in newsletter offerings and thinks it is in part due to a shift by social media platforms.

“Part of the reason you’re probably noticing it more is because it’s a way to get around Facebook and Twitter and their ever-changing algorithms,” Clauss said. “…Newsletters are becoming more important as a way to reach people when these social media companies are grappling with their own problems.”

A study commissioned by Powerinbox, an email platform company, found 60 percent of American adults subscribe to at least one email newsletter. Additionally, the top reason for subscribing is the trust in the publisher, according to the study. Analysts also found only 34 percent of participants trusted social media as a valid news source.

WBEZ launched The Rundown in July 2018. Less than 40 percent of radio stations offer a newsletter, according to data analyzed by the Tow Center for Digital Journalismat Columbia University. In comparison, 65 percent of daily newspapers surveyed had newsletter options.

Clauss said WBEZ’s strategy was to reach readers on their commute home rather than compete against the influx of early morning emails. He picks the five top stories of the day, which do not always include a story produced by the WBEZ, to share in a short, digestible summary with links.

The WBEZ reporter added that curating and sourcing stories can be challenging with more news sites limiting access for non-members.

“We are mindful that not everyone has a subscription to all these places,” Clauss said. “We will try and stay away from things that have paywalls when we can.”

Clauss also said integrating his own personality into The Rundown can be tricky. He said WBEZ wanted to have a tone reflecting how someone would explain the news to a friend.

One of the first email newsletters to go truly viral for its conversational style was The Daily Skimm. The operation was created by former NBC News producers, Carly Zakin and Danielle Weisberg, in 2012.

The Skimm now reaches more than 7 million readers each weekday morning and has expanded into a podcast, lifestyle blog, massive social media following and a forthcoming book.

However, The Skimm has drawn criticism over the casual writing targeting millennial women. In 2017, Christina Cauterucci compared the newsletter to Ivanka Trump in an article for Slate. Cauterucci argued the language used in The Skimm undermined the readers’ intelligence and knowledge about the world and news events.

“The newsletter keeps readers’ attention by peppering serious news items with conversational quips, like a thirsty high-school history teacher rapping about current events,” Cauterucci wrote.

As an example, Cauterucci included an excerpt from the newsletter describing the news of Chelsea Manning finishing her prison sentence for leaking State Department documents to WikiLeaks.

“What to say when your friend asks what time you can get drinks after work…I’ll be free earlier than expected. Just like Chelsea Manning,” appeared in The Skimm in May 2017.

In contrast to Slate, New York-based journalist Kaitlin Ugolik defended The Skimmfor the Columbia Journal Review. Ugolik said there isn’t one way to consume news and that it would be dangerous to alienate an entire demographic.

“What we as journalists haven’t yet seemed to grasp is that to reach more people—whether in a factory in Kentucky or at a cocktail party in Manhattan—our approach may need to change,” Ugolik wrote. “The goal can’t be to turn everyone into a newshound. If we want people to get more comfortable with the news, we have to get more comfortable meeting them where they are.”

While The Skimm may attract some readers and turn off others, their model for gathering the top news stories is valid, and the humanized style is crucial for newsletter writing.

Editors at The Seattle Times took the time to reexamine their automated newsletters during a digital redesign in 2015. Now their Morning Brief newsletter, for example, is written by reporters and editors.

Last year, The Desert Sun’s Executive Editor Julie Makinen announcedthe paper’s newsletters would be written by staff members rather than culled by artificial intelligence and algorithms. Makinen said their goal is to push out more informative and comprehensive news, and she noted this change would initiate an increase in dialogue between the newsroom and readers.

Newsletters have the added value of both bringing more information to a conversation and connecting to a community. These types of emails will continue to be an effective way to reach readers and be primary sources as the digital landscape changes.

###

By Jakob Emerson

Anderson Cooper lit the internet news scene ablaze in May 2017 when he set foot into territory rarely explored by television journalists before.

During an airing of the CNN show “Anderson Cooper 360°,” in which guest Kellyanne Conway defended President Trump’s move to fire former FBI Director James Comey, Cooper dared to roll his icy blues on camera, subsequently disrespecting his guest and demonstrating a clear demeanor of disagreement.

“It’s not something I consciously did and I want to be respectful to anybody I interview,” Cooper said on a live taping of Bravo’s “Watch What Happens Live with Andy Cohen.” “I absolutely regretted it.”

The interaction between CNN’s arguably most well-known anchor with Conway, counselor to the president, raises the question: Why do news media organizations invite guests that they undoubtedly know will issue flagrant falsehoods and deliberately lead the conversation away from the overarching goal of receiving accurate information from the White House?

“They’re in a jam,” said Dean Baquet, Executive Editor of The New York Times. “They want people on television to talk for the president. They have a billion liberal commentators who want to come on and trash the president. How do you find people who say the president is right and who have credibility?”

The most recent example of this type of interview aired April 28 on Jake Tapper’s CNN show “State of the Union,” in which Conway left Tapper with no choice but to interrupt her lengthy monologues multiple times. Tapper discussed the president’s comment of “fine people on both sides” after a Neo-Nazi march in Charlottesville, Virginia in 2017, but Conway twisted her way out of the argument and left Tapper sputtering his critiques. She did so by continually shifting the focus of the discourse and shuffling the timeline of the president’s actions.

Ultimately, Tapper appears to lose the argument. Now this is not to assume that the host did not come prepared with piercing questions and a developed ability to hunt for precise answers, but Conway is a master at spinning an indefensible position into a public relations victory. This mastery leads us once again to the question: Why do cable news networks book guests like Conway, even if she is one of the few individuals left to speak on behalf of the president?

It’s a question even late-night talk show hosts, such as Stephen Colbert, have asked Tapper directly.

“Kellyanne Conway,” Colbert said. “Why have her on TV? She is a collection of deceptions with a blonde wig stapled on top.”

Tapper replied without a smile, “I think that sometimes it’s worth it to have people on so you can challenge the very notion of the facts that are being disregarded and the lies that are being told.”

Lourdes Duarte, a WGN-TV news anchor, stated similarly, “You have to give them a platform and the ability to talk about the issues or be able to question them because they’re an important part of the story,” she said. “You need to do your best to verify the information they’re giving you. You need to be able to go back and forth with them.”

However, some would argue that the sentiment of giving a platform to a factually reckless opponent only fuels a post-truth era of propaganda and the rise of “alternative facts,” an infamous phrase coined by Conway herself.

The central ethical tenet of fair journalism also happens to be the root of the problem. CNN, and other outlets such as MSNBC, invite guests like Conway, and even pay Trump spokespeople such as Corey Lewandowksi, because they are networks that adhere to balanced reporting. The problem is that the Conways of the world are keenly aware of this ethical dilemma.

Evidence of this was present in a May 2018 interview on Brian Stelter’s CNN show “Reliable Sources,” in which he grilled Conway about the then-ongoing Mueller investigation into Trump campaign contacts with Russia.

By the end of the contentious debate, in which Conway accused Stelter of trying to “get the president,” she said “Just say it. Because I know your viewers expect that now. Look at their comments all the time, ‘Don’t have Trump people on.’ They expect you to be reflexively, invectively anti-Trump, and that’s problematic.”

With this single retort, it became abundantly clear that Conway is very aware that CNN’s viewers do not understand why she is included in national broadcasts and that her presence places the network in direct opposition of their core audience.

Nevertheless, it is that good old ethics thing that CNN remains loyal to, demonstrating to their viewers that they may not approve of Conway’s tactics or what she represents, but they will always be an institution that stands for open dialogue and discussion from varied perspectives.

Of course, some will say that bringing on Conway is simply a shield that large “liberal” networks use to protect themselves from criticisms and accusations of bias toward one side of the aisle.

It’s just like Lourdes Duarte said: “It’s my job to lay out the facts and the information.” That job includes finding sources and interviewing guests that speak in a way that may run circles around the reporter. More importantly, it is being prepared enough to push back on creative language and prepared to fight hard for the answers that must be revealed.

-30-