Wednesday, May 28, 2008

Survey: In recent hiring, whites still dominate

[What we say, not what we do: Gannett's top management]

Updated on May 30: The final survey results are here. 

Earlier: Despite buyouts, layoffs and the occasional mysterious departure of publishers, Gannett is still in hiring mode, as CEO Craig Dubow aims for more workforce diversity. In a new survey, I'm asking readers how this is playing out across the company, based on recent hires in their department.

If you haven't already, please consider completing the short survey, in the poll box at the bottom of the green sidebar, right.

A breakdown of the first 57 responses to the statement, the most recent person hired in my Gannett department was:
  • Asian-American: 10%
  • Black: 21%
  • Hispanic: 5%
  • Native American: 3%
  • White: 49%
  • Other/don't know: 1%
  • I'm not a Gannett employee: 8%
Related: After decades of diversity, looking for reader gains

Your thoughts, in the comments section, below. To e-mail confidentially, use this link from a non-work computer; see Tipsters Anonymous Policy in the green sidebar, upper right.

14 comments:

  1. I barely remember our last male publisher - well, he wasn't that memorable anyway. Our directors and staff are fairly even male/female ratio, or possibly even tilted female.

    But we have nearly zero diversity racially or ethnically or racially - which accurately reflects our community.

    People here would less balk at a black woman running our show than somebody with a southern accent telling us to be "local local local."

    Unfortunately, common sense usually fails when placed against the perceived value of some magazine ranking.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Makes sense to go after historically lower paid groups to bring in new people.

    If you give them a 10% bump over their current position, best to start with a cheaper female/ethnic to begin with. Creating equality can also be done by dropping the bar instead of raising it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Look around your company and count how many ethically diverse individuals make up your Operating Committees. Jim should post that as a survey. Ask everyone to count, then show the market-by-market list. This will more accurately illustrate how diverse Gannett is. Nearly all large companies are typically more diverse at the lower pay levels/staff positions. This demonstrates nothing. Show me a company that is more diverse at senior executive levels (i.e., people who are Unit/Group/Dept Heads or who report to Unit/Group/Dept Heads) and I'll show you a company that's serious about recruiting, retaining, and promoting an ethnically diverse workforce throughout its organization.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'm sure it was a typo, 8:42, but the idea of counting how many "ethically diverse individuals make up your Operating Committees."

    We can go from no ethics to only some.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Not sure what your survey is really going to accomplish... if Gannett is really slashing jobs and sending out buyouts, they're not going to be doing very much hiring at all these days.

    And, chances are, based on how popular your blog is at certain Gannett markets, the results will be off-kilter. If my paper hired an asian-american last, and ten of my colleagues respond to your survey, that makes it appear as though ten different asian americans got hired, when that's not the case.

    I expect whites to be in the majority anyway, since... well... in America, whites are the majority.

    So, while interesting in theory, I'm not sure your survey will provide much in the way of useful information. Which is a shame, because accurate data on this subject is something I'm very interested in.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Ahahahahahahahaaaa ... "hired"

    Good one.

    ReplyDelete
  7. we need more HOMO's like Jimmy and Spanky!!!

    ReplyDelete
  8. It was always a larger question of retention. We typically lost most of them over time. The culture of newspapering runs counter to most of their own ethnocentric culture.

    For a business that has been known to "eat its young," who could blame them for not staying. Not a wholesome environment.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Gannett, and any business for that matter, should hire and retain people because they are qualifed for the job and perform to the specifications of the job description, not just because they are of a certain ethnic demographic. Employing people on the basis (only)of demographics is, in itself, discrimination and possibly a means of lowering the bar. No, I am not a racist!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Our last two "information center" hires -- one white female, one African-American male.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Before I retired, I heard that editors received bonuses for employing minorities.
    My perception was that once hired, minority journalists had a much better ability to assess the B.S. factor of the job and so left for other opportunities or professions.
    Where I worked in NJ, the minority turnover was very fast. Asians, African Americans, Latinos and other non-mainstream folks flew out of there. Of course, this hindered the paper's ability to match the employee demographics with the regional percentages of minorities. Our percentage kept failing as minority writers balked at Day in the Life, bogus enterprise, Mugs & Quotes and other top-down stupid mandates that just seemed like a waste of time and energy.
    Some of the writers did very well in other settings, where their talent was not sucked dry by Gannettoid demands.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Considering that the data tracked in the poll have little knowable relation to the actual racial data of new hires, (especially if you have multiple readers in the same department), this is weak sauce.

    But suppose for a second that these numbers are somehow indicative of recent hire trends in Gannett.

    Throwing out the 8% that are not Gannett employees, you get new numbers:

    Asian-American: 11%
    Black: 24%
    Hispanic: 6%
    Native American: 3%
    White: 55%

    Considering what whites were 66% of the U.S. population in 2006 according to the US Census Bureau, it would be easy to infer from this data that whites are underrepresented among new hires.

    "Dominate?" Um, no. Not even close.

    ReplyDelete
  13. @9:07 p.m.: Indeed, this is a casual survey; I put these up to spark discussion.

    That said, you can't recalculate the figures the way you do. The percentages I posted on race/ethnicity of recent hires already reflect only responses from Gannett employees.

    ReplyDelete
  14. So if we don't recalculate, that's 49% for whites, making them even less representative of their national population in recent hires. Are they dominating yet?

    ReplyDelete

Jim says: "Proceed with caution; this is a free-for-all comment zone. I try to correct or clarify incorrect information. But I can't catch everything. Please keep your posts focused on Gannett and media-related subjects. Note that I occasionally review comments in advance, to reject inappropriate ones. And I ignore hostile posters, and recommend you do, too."

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.