Tanzina Vega is an American journalist who prioritizes news stories focusing on the representation of minorities, race issues, and other aspects of inequality. Her career disclosed the obstacles that news reporters encounter while trying to bring minorities to public awareness. Now she is the host of “The Takeaway”, a WNYC weekday conversation, which analyzes issues pertaining women, ethnicities, their representation, and news coverage. At the beginning of 2020, WNYC aired a conversation titled “Talking race in America and diversity in journalism with “Takeaway” host Tanzina Vega”.
The talk was dedicated to the inadequate demographic coverage by the news as well as the lack of diversity. Vega believes that the United States has multiple problems that do not get sufficient attention. Most of such difficulties are related to minorities, regardless of ethnicity, gender, or other distinctive features. Vega’s goal is the advancement of diversity in society, work, and newsroom. However, her efforts were hindered by either news service management or editors. Therefore, she tries to raise awareness of the necessity of diversity via radio conversations.
Accomplishing and respecting diversity is important for at least three reasons. Firstly, it acknowledges the complexity of societies and the multitude of their contradictions. Few ethnic, social, or religious identities can coexist in complete harmony. Secondly, diversity allows engaging all groups of people in work, discussion, and planning. This is a just and rational way of organizing decision-making in society that does not neglect any of its members. Thirdly, it is one of the core American values that is nevertheless neglected. America experienced the resurgence of the nationalist sentiment, as well as the downplaying of various minorities. In order to resolve the underlying causes of fragmentation of society, the United States has to pursue diversity in all its entirety.
Identity Politics
One of the points Vega made but did not delve into was the evidence of race issues being prevalent. The journalist claims: “I have much data to show you that prove the point of inequality and disparate impact without having to mention those uncomfortable things” (“Talking race in America”, 2020, para. 12). While Vega leaves it to the discretion of the audience to decide which proof is relevant, it is possible that she was referring to the statistics on unemployment and poverty among African Americans and Hispanics. As Bhambra (2017) states, “the Pew Research Centre reports that blacks on average are at least twice as likely as whites to be poor or to be unemployed” (p. 216). Bhambra (2017) also adds that these are the categories that chose to vote for Hilary Clinton. As a result, the statistical data indicates that ethnic minorities are indeed at a disadvantage.
It seems strange that a country that prides itself on diversity is so engulfed in race issues. Partially the reason for the current status quo lies in the government’s endorsement of such policies. President Trump is infamous for his politically incorrect views and statements. While Trump’s stance is not surprising, the support he had gathered during the elections is. Trump never concerned himself with the implications of his beliefs on social justice. Fukuyama (2018) suggests that this unapologetic demeanour was precisely what made Trump attractive to his supporters. The same way people are easily swayed by claims of discrimination and maltreatment, they are drawn to strong and aggressive rhetoric that upholds their status.
However, Americans’ sudden shift to conservative attitude did not originate in Trump’s slogans alone. 20th century bore witness to numerous social groups gaining power or becoming more prominent, from Muslims to populations of color. The rise of their influence stirred feelings of discontent among the majority of the American working class. Fukuyama (2018) notes that there is a higher pressure in today’s society to underscore various forms of diversity, whether it is ethnic, sexual, or religious. Fukuyama (2018) also claims that “identity politics on the left tended to legitimate only certain identities while ignoring or denigrating others, such as European ethnicity, Christian religiosity, rural residence, belief in traditional family values, and related categories” (p. 180). Political correctness requires redirecting emphasis from these groups to minorities.
The result is fear of social displacement by the minorities. Trump’s campaign capitalized on such insecurities, gaining the support of those who felt a threat to their identity. Educated, middle-class representatives of European ethnicity are his target audience, which gets the most attention and support from the government. At the same time, other demographic groups do not receive a comparable attitude, nor do they get sufficient media coverage. Understanding that Trump’s authority is the effect and not the cause of the existing inequality is critical in ascertaining the methods of rectifying these issues.
Societal Stereotypes
If any meaningful change should start at the core, then correcting the popular sentiment should also begin with the grassroots. Any society that has numerous ethnicities, social groups, or religious sympathizers is prone to cultural stereotypes. In essence, stereotypes are “mental maps to help us cope with the complexity of groups and peoples” (Kidd, 2016, p. 26). Adopting simplistic ideas about people backfires when such associations are negative. If the mind is used to associating particular groups with harmful features, then all real-life interactions with such people will be biased.
Stereotypes are a natural response and can not be avoided entirely. However, it is possible to influence the formation of mental associations. If the human brain has the capacity to harbor hatred and prejudices based on ethnic stereotypes, it also has the potential to be tricked into believing that ethnic minorities are normal members of society that should not be treated with contempt or considered inferior. Subsequently, it might be plausible to use stereotypes to encourage healthy and a welcoming perception of minorities by exposing the mind to appropriate media messages.
The majority of opinions are formed not by immediate intrapersonal communications but rather by exposure to social narratives. A common way of influencing personal views is via media portrayal. Singh (2015) writes about a scientific survey that explored the relationship between exposure to narratives and the audience’s viewpoints. A group of students was asked to voice their viewpoints on the LGBTQ community. Afterwards, the same participants were asked to watch a TV show that had a homosexual character in a main role. The second survey showed that these students expressed more positive attitude to different sexual orientations. Singh (2015) also states that a similar study was conducted with another TV show and another group of subjects that produced the same results. Therefore, the effect that TV has on peoples’ minds is real.
It stands reason to suggest that entertainment media can be used to break prejudices and reverse biases. Unlike real-life interactions, which can solidify the existing negative beliefs due to the sense of discomfort, watching TV, or using a smartphone presuppose a safe location, where there is no threat. As Singh (2015) notes, “the TV screen offers a sense of separation and security that can help people lower their defenses and connect with people they might try to avoid in real life” (para. 12). The result is a soft form of affecting the audience to accept diversity.
The Implication of Diversity
Some might argue that pursuing diversity for the sake of it creates negative output. The primary cause behind the necessity to diversify workforce or news coverage with more comprehensive ethnic inclusion lies in a greater number of different opinions and ideas that can generate more qualitative content. However, having an excessive degree of representatives of opposite social, ethnic, or sexual groups can hinder the working process due to infighting and the lack of consensus.
At some point, the fact of greater representation of minorities is no longer the evidence of higher quality. Zhan, Bendapudi and Hong (2015) conducted a study the purpose of which was to ascertain whether all forms of diversity in the workplace are effective. While designing the study, the researchers divided the cultural and ethnic representation. The authors composed Team A for ethnic diversity, while Team B had more cultural variety. The goal was to establish which team would produce more innovations, which the researchers define as products or processes created by the study’s participants.
The results of the study favored cultural diversity rather than ethnic one. According to Zhan et al. (2015), “greater ethnic diversity can retard consensual decision making and infrastructure construction, both of which are crucial for innovative capacity building” (p. 32). That said, the researchers did not report evidence on the negative impact of collaboration of various ethnicities on innovative output. Nevertheless, the findings of the study recommend pursuing greater cultural diversity with low ethnic polarization.
Another issue that arises out of the requirement to diversify the working stuff is inappropriate hiring. Tanza (2020) referred to a similar situation in a newsroom as not organic. It implies that a representative of a minority is either invited to participate in a show or to work because they add to diversity, but not because they are competent or can provide valuable insight. In their article in Harvard Business Review, Gompers and Kovvali (2018) mentioned “daughter effect”. It manifests itself when managers hire their daughters in order “to reduce gender bias and increase diversity in their firms” (para. 9). Similar phenomena can be observed with the intentions to achieve ethnic variety.
Handling Diversity
As much as diversity can negatively impact the performance, innovative output, or content quality, the opposite is also true. Refraining from differentiating between members of the workforce can bring rigidity and the lack of an outside perspective. Employers committing to a particular category of employees as well as reporters focusing on only major social groups risk becoming disconnected with the prevalent issues in society. Diversity is implemented for a reason and neglecting it is the pathway to stagnation.
There is no data that would indicate the correlation between diversity-based hiring and negative returns. To the contrary, Gompers and Kovvali (2018) argue that “daughter effect” is actually beneficial. According to the authors, “Venture capital firms that increased their proportion of female partner hires by 10% saw, on average, a 1.5% spike in overall fund returns each year and had 9.7% more profitable exits” (Gompers & Kovvali, 2018, para. 9). Even more so, having a greater gender variety can attract investors or clients of the same sex. In a similar way, representatives of ethnicities can be encouraged to work or participate when they see their race being present and engaged.
As for the ethnic diversity poorly impacting innovations, the data supporting this also highlighted ethnic polarization as the cause for low output. Having different races work together does not presuppose conflicts, however, their distrust of each other does. As it is discussed above, negative feelings are caused by stereotypical thinking. The majority of take root in mass media and fictional portrayal. Therefore, it is possible to use fiction to nurture amicable relations and open-mindedness rather than ethnic rivalry and discrimination.
Conclusion
Altogether, it is evident the current deficit of diversity in American society can be attributed to the social distrust among various ethnic, social, and religious groups. Tanzina Vega is right in pointing out the inequality and minorities’ discontent. What she does not appear to realize is that changing the status quo requires actions targeting the overall populace of the United States, rather than the editorial stuff and reporters. The lack of active desire to diversify the working stuff and news content with minorities is symptomatic of issues with societal sense of security and harmony.
Despite all the steps taken to reduce the inequality, some groups are still impoverished. Moreover, ethnic minorities are more likely to experience economic problems like unemployment than the mainstream working class. Partially, it is the result of the change of governmental identity politics, which returns the attention to traditional social classes, family values, and ethnic affiliations. Trump has undoubtedly influenced the current turnout of events, however, it should be noted that he would not have gathered so much support had there not been excessive fear of the rising influence of minorities. Trump may be the most visible political figure promoting distrust threats to the working class, but he is merely a reflection of attitudes and fears in society.
In order to mitigate tension based on gender, race, sexuality, or religiosity, it is necessary to change the public perception. All attitudes are is some way driven by stereotypes, which are often incorrect representations of social groups in the minds of other people. It is essential to foster positive mental associations to accomplish harmonic coexistence of diverse affiliations. It can be done by correcting media portrayal and a greater inclusion of minorities in TV shows and other products for mass entertainment. Soft exposure to opposite viewpoints is more effective in changing the audience’s perceptions than immediate real-life encounters.
Inclusion of diverse groups in workplaces can increase their attractiveness and innovative output. No definitive scientific evidence exists that would prove the negative influence of diversity on the generation of ideas, implementation of innovations, and production of products. To the contrary, it is more appropriate to link diversity with effectiveness and the input of fresh perspective. However, there is some substance to the concern that diversity in the workplace is not a means in itself. It should be pursued until the adequate representation is achieved, without exceeding the necessary level. Otherwise, diversity backfires in the form of conflicts and tension that do not help the working process go smoothly.
References
Bhambra, G. K. (2017). Brexit, Trump, and ‘methodological whiteness’: On the misrecognition of race and class. The British Journal of Sociology, 68, S214-S232.
Fukuyama, F. (2018). Identity: Contemporary identity politics and the struggle for recognition. London, England: Profile books.
Gompers, P., & Kovvali, S. (2018). The other diversity dividend. Web.
Kidd, M. A. (2016). Archetypes, stereotypes and media representation in a multi-cultural society. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 236, 25-28.
Singh, M. (2015). How Shows Like ‘Will & Grace’ And ‘Black-ish’ Can Change Your Brain. Web.
Talking race in America and diversity in journalism with “Takeaway” host Tanzina Vega. (2020). Web.
Zhan, S., Bendapudi, N., & Hong, Y. Y. (2015). Re‐examining diversity as a double‐edged sword for innovation process. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(7), 1026-1049.