How Newsroom Diversity Came to Matter
Commentary by Dori J. Maynard

In many ways the story starts in the mid-1960s, when the civil rights movement was morphing into the black consciousness movement. The story was huge. It had to be covered. Black reporters could get parts of it that white reporters could not. Black journalists suddenly found themselves in demand on white-owned newspapers. The change didn't happen because it was morally correct or a good marketing strategy. There wasn't time to worry about such niceties.

By 1978, a handful of African-American journalists had convinced key members of the American Society for Newspaper Editors to begin the annual ritual of counting journalists by race. The goal was for the nation's newsrooms to mirror the nation's society by the year 2000. The annual census would measure our steady progress.

Then the fires died, both literally and figuratively. We forgot why the numbers mattered. We argued it was simply "the right thing to do." We argued it was good business. But we forgot the truth of the heart of argument. Newspapers simply will not cover this nation well if they aren’t as American as America, if they don’t reflect America, if they don’t have access to all corners of American life.

Yes, there has been progress. In 1978, journalists of color were 4 percent of the workforce. Last year, they were 12 percent. Still, in 2003 -- three years after we missed the mark and set a new goal -- to look at the numbers is to know we failed. “Diversity fatigue” reflects that feeling of failure. Journalists of color are frustrated that the industry could not make good on its promise. Newspaper editors are frustrated because they do not get credit for progress made.

--reprinted with permission from the Robert C. Maynard Institute for Journalism Education