Week 5: Blackistone and Whiteside

As we have already gone over in previous weeks, there are several issues facing journalism. Among these issues were the problems of diversity and professionalism. This week’s readings, written by Kevin Blackistone and Whiteside, Hu, & Hardin, respectively, tackle these topics as they see them; Blackistone recognizes the lack of diversity in the newsroom and how it manifests itself into coverage of minority athletes, and the reading led by Whiteside addresses the topic of blogging and how this practice creates its own set of issues.

Blackistone’s article focuses on the topic of diversity and puts a lot of emphasis on the lack of diversity in the sports newsroom. Blackistone begins his article by diving straight into the issue with hard statistics. These statistics show the declining number of people of color in the newsroom of sports departments. Blackistone contradicts these numbers with statistics of the US population and the breakdown of minorities in sports, which clearly shows the misrepresentation of minorities in sports departments across the country. Blackistone also puts all of this in perspective by looking at the historical context. He cites a 1968 report that identified the need for more minority representation in journalism, yet the problem still persists today. Not only did a previous plan introduced by the ASNE in 1978 fail in getting more minority representation (including women) in the newsroom, but the altered version of this plan is also set to fail to reach its goal in 2025. This problem is also found in the structure of sports departments; in 2010, only one editor out of 1,456 total daily newspaper’s sports department was black (Blackistone, 2012).

While this may only seem like an issue in the structure of the newsroom, Blackistone points out that this problem manifests itself into the coverage of sports and athletes as well. He mentions early in the article that black athletes are seen as naturally gifted rather than intelligent on the field, and “thugs,” self-centered and arrogant off the field (Blackistone, 2012). He also notes how black athletes are judged more critically than white athletes, citing the examples of Michael Vick’s and Tiger Woods’s respective situations in comparison to Ben Roethlisberger’s incidents of alleged sexual assault. While Vick and Woods were severely criticized for their actions, Roethlisberger’s situation flew more under the radar in the national media. This is even found in more subtle ways, as Blackistone points out many black athletes are referred to by first names rather than their last, treating them with less respect than their white counterparts. Blackistone concludes by stating that unless changes be made in the structure of newsrooms, it will be virtually impossible for coverage of minority athletes to change.

The article led by Whiteside focuses on a different issue facing sports journalism: the idea that the sports departments have become “toy departments” within journalism. One of the reasons for this, as Whiteside explains, has been the rise of “new media,” which largely consists of blogs and other similar sites. To determine some of the differences in traditional journalism and new media, Whiteside analyzes the coverage of Manny Ramirez’s suspension in 2009. They seek to answer several questions including how the story was covered, what sources were used, how the story related to the larger issue of steroids in baseball, and who the suspension impacted.

The study found that the differences in coverage were very different between traditional journalism and new media. The study found that traditional journalism used direct sources, while new media only cited third-party sources such as other published works. With regard to addressing the larger steroid issue in baseball, as traditional media placed the suspension into a larger context moreso than its new media counterpart. Similarly, traditional media also found that traditional media was more likely to report on MLB’s drug policy, while new media was unlikely to do so. The study also found that traditional media was also more likely to put the drug Ramirez used into context, while new media was unlikely to do so, if they even mentioned the drug at all.

While this is only one example, Whiteside notes that this exemplifies the problem facing sports departments. Although many readers are viewing traditional media and new media as one in the same, the differences in coverage are vastly different. Most new media coverage is not as in-depth as its traditional counterpart, thus leading readers and even other journalists to buy into the idea of the sports department being the “toy department” of journalism. However, traditional media does everything any other journalism department does: they gather a great deal of information, contextualize it, and talk about the greater issue. Whiteside argues that in order to avoid this “toy department” label, traditional media needs to continue to view themselves as journalists, avoiding the stories that lack depth and context that seems to overwhelm the new media field.

For my paper topic, I would like to discuss the 2008 Beijing Olympics. This was obviously a major world event that not only showcased the best athletes in the world, but also started a conversation regarding China's status in the rest of the world.