According to an article in today’s Washington Post, “possibly the largest gathering of journalists in the profession’s history” is about to descend upon the nation’s capital. Who are these hordes of ink-stained wretches? Who else but members of the various associations of underrepresented minorities? As Michelle Malkin put it in a delicious put-down (read her whole piece):
Every five years, a herd of perpetually disgruntled minority journalists gathers together to decry the lack of “diversity” in the media. This week, thousands of them will huff and puff in unison at the “UNITY: Journalists of Color, Inc.” convention in Washington, D.C….
The Asian-American Journalists Association will complain about the lack of Asian-American male television news anchors. The National Association of Hispanic Journalists will attack the radio industry for not hiring enough Hispanic on-air personalities. The National Association of Black Journalists will lambaste newspaper publishers for not hiring enough black editors. And the Native American Journalists Association will grumble about the Washington Redskins.
In response, journalists of non-color will engage in obligatory self-flagellation. They’ll promise to put more photos of minorities on the front pages of their papers. They’ll vow to add more ethnic flavor to their airwaves. They’ll step up racial sensitivity training. And they’ll loudly proclaim their commitment to ensuring “diversity.”
The diversity they seek is, by definition, skin-deep. They call themselves “journalists of color.” Not journalists of substance. Or journalists of integrity. Or journalists of independent thought….
And speaking of the absence of non-pigmentary diversity, the New York Times conducted an unscientific survey of journalists at the Democratic convention and received anonymous replies from 153 journalists, about a third of them working in Washington. I know you’ll be surprised to hear this, but the survey revealed … liberal bias.
When asked who would be a better president, the journalists from outside the Beltway picked Mr. Kerry 3 to 1, and the ones from Washington favored him 12 to 1. Those results jibe with previous surveys over the past two decades showing that journalists tend to be Democrats, especially the ones based in Washington. Some surveys have found that more than 80 percent of the Beltway press corps votes Democratic.
Now there may be a loud wailing hue and cry throughout journalism about this woeful lack of what in an older and more simple-minded day would have been called diversity, but if so it hasn’t reached the perhaps isolated shores of Discriminations. The Poynter Institute, the leading think tank on the profession, seems to pump out more diversity studies than Detroit does cars (though with far fewer recalls when they don’t work), but a quick glance at their output reveals nothing that, on the surface, seems to reflect any concern with an absence of diversity betweent he ears or under the skin. In that absence Poynter seems nicely to reflect the “diversity” of the profession it serves.
We’re on the same page. Yesterday I made fun of UM’s “critical mass” argument to support race discrimination.
OK, I’m sure this gathering is mostly the sort of lockstep politically correct nonsense that you see a lot of. But I would also say that Malkin picked a pretty easy target here.
Too bad about the childish twenty points at the end, though.
Most of these people are so terrified of idea diversity–the only kind of diversity that means anything in the intellectual world–that they hide behind pleas for other types of “diversity” that they hope will stifle views other than their own.
Of course they vote democratic. The democratic party has been on a crusade of intolerance for decades now. Independent thinkers need not apply to either journalism school or the democratic party.
There is difference between “thinking independently” and parroting homogenized, right winged conservative talking points to gain collumnist positions, television pundit appearances and book deals.
Blythe you are certainly correct. 90% of journalists are in lockstep with the democratic party, incapable of thinking outside the talking points.
This new, dumber leftist journalism suggests that one must fail an IQ test for admission to journalism school.
:^)
Color is the only thing that distinguishes them from other leftist “journalists”.
Cobra, please enlighten us with what those differences are. We’re not saying they should parrot any talking points, but rather that they shouldn’t.
Michelle Malkin is a stupid Chink and ugly too.