When it comes to diversity in not only sports journalism but
journalism as a whole, there is a lack of it. People feel like they can go
ahead and say, “Turn on the T.V. Look at all the African American anchors and
reporters.” These same people say the same thing about women; but that is not
the main focus of writers such as Kevin Blackistone. It is not all about
television, journalism originated on paper, and that is where you see the lack
of diversity. Facts are facts, and Blackistone backs up the majority of his
statements with physical evidence throughout The Whitening of Sports Media and the Coloring of Black Athletes’’
Images”. Then again, I must repeat what I just said; he backs up the majority
of his statements with physical evidence.
To this day, racism and segregation is overlooked.
Information regarding “Sundown Towns” is not provided to children in schools,
and grudges continue to be held. It is not all about White Americans vs.
African Americans, but all ethnicities can be seen as “other” people. The
statistics Kevin Blackistone provides regarding the lack of diversity in sports
journalism is eye popping. From 2008 to 2010, the percentage of women or people
of color who had roles as sport editors declined from 11.7 percent to 9.42
percent. In contrast, sports editors who were white males increased by three
percentage points (Blackistone 215). Even if there was not such a decline, 11.7
percent is still unbelievably low. As much as the ASNE (American Society of
News Editors) push for a more diverse profession, all efforts seem to fail as
numbers continuously go in the opposite direction.
Throughout my time watching Kevin Blackistone reporting on
ESPN and participating on ESPN’s “Around the Horn”, I began respecting him as a
journalist. I read his columns and enjoy what he has to say; however the second
part to his title (The Coloring of Black
Athletes’ Images”) should not have been in this publication. Kevin Blackistone
did not back up his statements made regarding the portrayal of black athletes
as “self-centered, arrogant, and mercenary” (Blackistone 217). To this day I do
believe African Americans are more centered in the spotlight when it comes to
wrong doing and it is disheartening especially in this day and age; but what
Blackistone stated was unethical. None of this should be seen as white vs.
black. I witnessed the incident when former Oregon Ducks running back
LeGarrette Blount punched Boise State’s Byron Houl. Both actions were unnecessary;
unfortunately we do not know what Houl said, however we saw Blount punch him in
the jaw. Blount’s suspension may have been over the top, and Houl may have been
left off the hook too easily, but the punch should be seen as more serious.
Although Blount was “branded a thug” (Blackistone 221) and
Houl the victim, in my eyes Houl still seems like the jackass at the
playground. Houl was childish, but Blount took the action that caught more
attention. You can look at it either way you want. Who was the real victim in
the incident? Just this past month, Philadelphia Eagles’ wide out Rhiley Cooper
was caught on a camera phone saying a racial term against African Americans.
This was not placed under the radar and was reported on all over the country.
You could ask “why was Cooper not suspended by the league?” Well, that was not
a league issue but more of an issue regarding the Eagles’ organization. As
Blackistone states, Blount is “continuously referred to in the media by the
punch he threw in college” (Blackistone 222). Blount unfortunately will never
lose that title, but Cooper will forever be mentioned as a racist white male
all over the National Football League no matter what channel his games are
broadcasted. These actions can and will forever be debated as the treatment of
white journalists toward black athletes, but in regards to the reporting of
Kevin Blackistone, this was unethical.
As I read The News “Toy
Department”?, it is funny to see how editors portray sports journalists.
Maybe they are just jealous? I for sure do not know. Now they do make
interesting points regarding writers being too biased. How writers will not
tell the real story but talk up how great the organization they cover is. In
some cases I can agree, but sometimes it just isn’t that easy. To get their
stories out they need their sources, and they need to keep these sources happy.
If a reporter is to say the team they cover is awful, they owner of that team
or the head coach may not be so easy when it comes to answering their
questions. I am not saying this is right, if a story needs to be put out, if it
is the story of the year, get that story out. I do agree with the editors who
state some reporters talk up their home team. In the end, I wish there was a
reporter who would just go off on how bad their team stinks; but that just will
not happen.
In regards to The News
“Toy Department”?, I did like the information found on the Manny Ramirez
steroid case. It is true, they emphasized more the fact that he was an icon,
constantly bringing attention, most of which was not good. He was and still is
an iconic member of Major League Baseball. Although they did not bring up the
overall facts on drug use in baseball, it still was not the main story. Manny
was the story due to his popularity; it was all about his suspension and what
was next. If someone of lesser popularity was caught, maybe the story changes.
In regards to my paper topic, I am going to focus on Michael
Vick’s return to the National Football League after spending time in jail due
to the dog fights he held at his home. Many different reactions were shown, many
of which were hard to overcome.
No comments:
Post a Comment