I’ve been writing and teaching about diversity, race and ethnicity for more than 15 years — about as long as Keith Woods has been at The Poynter Institute.
His “Untold Stories” seminar shaped the way I reported on undercovered communities, and became the model on which I built a class on covering race issues. I know many journalists and educators share similar stories about Woods’ work at Poynter.
In the wake of controversial layoffs at National Public Radio, Woods recently accepted a new gig as NPR’s vice president of diversity in news and operations. Today marks his last day at Poynter. I thought it would be a good opportunity to ask him about his new role, and diversity in journalism as whole, during this pivotal time. Answers have been edited for brevity.
Angie Chuang: NPR has come under fire recently, most notably in a letter from the National Association of Black Journalists, for its lack of diversity in management, as well as cuts affecting certain programs and journalists (NPR posted a response online). How do you see these events from the perspective of your new job?
Keith Woods: I know that there are reasons beyond my vision for why NPR made those decisions. I don’t feel qualified to give an opinion on that. One thing, though, is clear: A bad situation — when you’re counting people and experience and influence — got worse.
This is not a new challenge for NPR, and it’s not limited to the news department, but I believe there are reasons to be optimistic, beginning with new leadership and the number of people who have put in time and energy to make this latest effort pay off.
Overall, how do you think diversity in journalism — both in staffing and coverage — has changed, given economic and technological changes in the field?
Woods: We are worse in both areas, but that requires a bit more explication. Clearly, the numbers are worse. I don’t know who’ll debate that. And there are fewer stories being done: fewer big packages in newspapers, fewer lengthy stories on air, and not nearly enough new material online to compensate.
We’re undeniably better in the last 10 years at the quality of the stories we’re telling — when we do tell the stories. I don’t know how long we should expect that to hold, though, when so many of the people who’ve gotten better at this work are also the prime candidates for the buyouts and layoffs.
What do all journalistic outlets need to do now to better reflect the communities they cover or serve?
Woods: That’s a tough prescription to write. Four things are evergreens: Hire a diverse staff. Diversify your source base. Learn — and keep learning — about the people in your community. Tell great stories.
I’d offer five more notions, a mix of time-tested wisdom and new-realities thinking:
1. Set priorities. Recognize that you serve everyone — but especially the most vulnerable communities — by sticking to two core principles: Hold the powerful accountable. Give voice to the voiceless. Make core principles the priority and weigh your coverage decisions against them. That’s good advice whether we’re talking diversity or not.
2. Talk to the community. Tell people what you can do with your resources and what you can’t; seek their help in getting their news to you and your news to them.
3. Pursue the ordinary: There is a cruel irony that often reveals itself as organizations position themselves as champions of the forgotten and downtrodden. The picture we paint tends to be a one-dimensional portrait of people who are only forgotten and downtrodden and in need of help. We miss their ordinariness. They become frozen in permanent pathology. We miss the normal parts of their lives that make them laugh, love, cry, rejoice.
4. Be strategic about platforms. Recognize that every platform — traditional or brand new — includes and excludes. Be thoughtful about who you’re trying to reach with your news and where you’re most likely to reach them. Some groups use Facebook more than MySpace and MySpace more than Twitter, e-mail more than texting, online more than radio, etc. Keep current on these differences through research and feedback.
5. Separate these two ideas:
A) Covering communities is core to your democratic mission.
B) Covering people better could get them to use your product more.
Too often, journalists conflate mission and money. That means that if (B) turns out not to be true, it negates the need to do (A). If your primary mission is to have an informed public so that they can make the best decisions, then your first responsibility is to be sure that whoever is watching/reading/listening/clicking is getting the most complete story about themselves and everybody else.
That’s why diversity is important no matter who’s in your audience. The mission remains paramount.
