Diversity in news organisations

The former BBC Director-General, Greg Dyke, famously described the corporation's management as "hideously white," but until now, no one has raised serious questions about the colour of correspondents' skin. The BBC's new diversity chief, Mary FitzPatrick, appears not only to have broken the ice on that count, but also to have cast doubt on the ability of some reporters to do their job.   

Ms. Fitzpatrick, who says her remarks were taken out of context, told The Observer newspaper that she was "tired" of the way in which correspondents report on Africa. 

"I would prefer to see somebody who understands that culture, understands what's going on and can say: 'look with me, because I am part of this.' It feels more authoritative and more involved." 

The BBC's award-winning reporter, Fergal Keane, has slammed the remarks attributed to Ms. FitzPatrick as "pretty absurd". He poured scorn on the suggestion that the colour of his skin made him less "culturally aware" when reporting on Africa. 

The campaign group Liberty even went as far as asking the UK's Commission for Racial Equality to intervene. A spokesperson expressed concern that Ms. Fitzpatrick's key role at the BBC might mean that the corporation's journalists were no longer treated fairly.    

This debate should interest all news organizations based in countries with sizeable ethnic minorities. To my knowledge, several European broadcasters are taking active steps to recruit ethnic minority reporters to reflect better the diversity of their countries.

But to my mind the controversy surrounding Ms. FitzPatrick's alleged remarks takes the debate one step further. 

Let's forget about the nonsensical aspects of the argument: a black reporter born and bred in the UK is unlikely to know more about Africa than a white journalist brought up there; you can be an expert on the Mahgreb without knowing anything about the cultures and traditions of Sub-Saharan Africa, and so on. 

Ms. FitzPatrick assured irate BBC staff that what she had meant to say was that "a deep understanding of the cultural background and issues surrounding a story is essential".   

I think she is right. But the real problem is not so much skin colour as the fact that large organizations, like the BBC, sometimes do daft things like sending Chinese-speaking correspondents to cover eastern-Europe, or Spanish-speaking reporters to Asia. 

But if you take the ethnicity argument to its logical conclusion, it would imply that only an Italian journalist, for example, can understand Italy, or that you need to be Chinese to provide a truly authoritative voice on China.   

It is not just that this is all highly debateable, there is also a more sinister side that sends shivers down my spine. Perhaps I'm being paranoid or I've had one too many beers, but in the 1930s, Nazi historians used to argue that only the 'Volk' were qualified to write about the 'Volk'.

(This post originally appeared in Media Helping Media)

Comments

[swoelfel]

The lack of diversity that I saw in my CNN days was not one of race or nationality, but of life experience and cultural background. I remember looking around the newsroom at one point and thinking that all these people are about the same age I am, went to college just like me, are of the same middle class background as I, speak English only, probably watch the same TV shows, read mostly the same books, eat at the same restaurants. Across the global organization this wasn't true, of course, but in Atlanta where most of the major decisions were made it was. This situation was made worse back in the late 80s and early-to-mid 90s because so many people working at CNN had never worked anywhere else. (I worked in local TV news as a cameraman and producer before joining CNN.) These people rose up in the ranks and made decisions based on knowing only CNN and were buttressed by others who in essence were them.

This partially was remedied later in the 90s when new blood was brought in with much broader experience. But I think the cultural background problem still exists at CNN and in most other news organizations. I think this is most acute in local news operations where increasingly the audiences are not college educated, may speak other langauges before English. How can they identify with the people bringing them the news and the choices they make?

[jaldeep]

Just to pick up on this really important discussion on Diversity and the quote:

"But the real problem is not so much skin colour as the fact that large organizations, like the BBC, sometimes do daft things like sending Chinese-speaking correspondents to cover eastern-Europe, or Spanish-speaking reporters to Asia."

Why is this is a problem? I've often thought that the best journalists are the ones who sit on the margins of societies and look in. A Chinese journalist is likely to come up with angles a Western European journalist (of whatever colour) might not even think of. Surely the question is how skilled is that individual in covering the story. Language is only one factor - it never stopped the same organisations sending for example journalists who can't speak Arabic to cover the Middle East.

As far as the Volk question, the other absurdity I've seen expressed (but never in writing of course, because it is so non pc ) is that journalists from a particular group shouldn't be allowed to cover their "native" patch - because they are somehow too close to the subject.

I think the only answer is going back to professionalism - if you're good enough, you're good enough - irrespective of where you come from, what you look like, or who you know.