|
December 09, 2005
Who Would Honor Geraldo ("There Would Not Be A
Lawn Mowed Or A Dish Washed But For Illegal
Immigrants") Rivera?
By
Joe Guzzardi
Do you remember the great
Groucho Marx line: "I don’t want to belong to any
club that would accept me as a member"?
Marx popped into my head
immediately when I read that the
National Association of Hispanic Journalists invited
Geraldo Rivera to chair its September "Awards Gala"
and deliver its keynote speech.
With apologies to Marx: "Why
would any association of journalists that is begging to
be taken seriously invite a comic figure to host its big
bash?"
Why not invite disgraced
Sacramento Bee columnist
Diana Griego Erwin and save some money?
We’ll be analyzing the curious and
misguided NAHJ today. But, before doing so, let’s pause
briefly to review an equally odd figure,
Rivera himself.
I assume NAHJ knows that Rivera is
barely a Hispanic. He was born
Gerald Rivera in New York to a Puerto Rican father,
Cruz Rivera, and Jewish mother, Lilly Friedman.
As much as Rivera likes to portray
himself as an immigrant underdog, even his father isn’t
an immigrant. The last time I checked
Puerto Ricans are American citizens and move freely
from the island to the mainland without
"immigrating".
The NAHJ was also obviously willing
to overlook Rivera’s checkered—to be generous—personal
life and professional career.
Five-times married and the
author of a sleazy autobiography,
Exposing Myself,
that infuriated women that he slept with (Bette Midler
called him a "slime ball") and women he
claimed to have bedded but who vigorously deny it (Chris
Evert).
Real gentlemen know that, when you
kiss,
you don’t tell.
Rivera’s
macho posing should be—but obviously isn’t—offensive
to the NAHJ’s president, Veronica Villafane and every
other woman in the organization. (Ask
Villafane why not).
As a journalist, Rivera’s
credentials are no better. You remember the highlights:
the empty
Al Capone vault,
his broken nose and his
recent dust-up with the New York Times.
At the dinner, Rivera predictably
made
several ignorant comments that would never have cut
mustard with an audience of true professionals. The NAHJ
loved them, though.
Among Rivera’s remarks were:
- "I'm for not being
embarrassed about who we are. If we make it, you
can't forget where you come from."
(Remember, Rivera "comes from" New
York.)
But the Rivera statement that
really caught my attention was this one:
I would venture that there was not
one single NAHJ member among those assembled that could
legitimately claim to have been "pushed around"
to write
fair and balanced stories on immigration.
The truth, as we all know too well,
is that
every major print daily has a strong
pro-illegal alien bias in its reporting.
And the NAHJ is determined to keep
it that way. Check out its
Parity Project
Here, from the NAHJ, are the Parity
Project’s goals and objectives:
- To "establish even stronger
ties than they might already have with
Latino leaders and groups in their areas that
can offer ongoing guidance when it comes to coverage
of Hispanics."
- To "conduct cultural
awareness sessions with the news staffs of
partnering organizations. The goal is to provide
greater awareness to Latino issues and to generate
story ideas."
- To "co-sponsor a town hall
meetings with Latino leaders to discuss concerns
about coverage of the community."
And precisely why is this
massive push to hire more "Latinos" needed?
(Notice that although the NAHJ uses
"Hispanic" in its name, it obviously now prefers
the more politically correct "Latino")
According to NAHJ:
- "Latinos make up only 4 percent of
newsroom personnel at all daily English-language
newspapers."
- "Latinos make up only 6 percent of
all newsroom staffers at English-language TV news
outlets."
- "Latinos make up 14 percent of the
total U.S. population and will comprise 25 percent of the
population by 2050."
This is a joke, right?
Let’s play with these numbers.
Using the NAHJ’s figures, roughly speaking about 5
percent of
today’s mainstream journalists is "Latino."
And I deduce from the NAHJ’s tone
that it fully expects that "Latinos" should have
a 14 percent representation in newsrooms right now (!) that
should increase to 25 percent by 2025.
But even in its wildest imagination
the NAHJ must know that’s a pipe dream.
- Third, net out those who speak
and write English but
not at a level it suitable for a professional
journalist.
What you end up with is a Hispanic
representation of about 5 percent—if even that.
Okay—so of course we expect an
organization named the National Association of Hispanic
Journalists to pump its own agenda.
But why doesn’t its website have
even a passing reference to
fairness and balance in reporting?
The NAHJ’s mission should be—but is
not—to make sure that every Hispanic journalist writes
outstanding stories or becomes a credit to his
profession through insightful reporting.
Instead, restated ad nauseum, the
NAHJ repeats that it:
"Is dedicated to the
recognition and professional advancement of Hispanics in
the news industry."
And works:
"To foster a greater understanding of Hispanic media
professionals' special cultural identity, interests, and
concerns."
I have read thousands
of newspaper stories both informally as an immigration
reform activist and professionally in my former capacity
as Director of the Media Standards Project for
NumbersUSA.COM.
(Read my findings
here).
What I can
say without fear of contradiction is that balanced
stories about immigration are so rare that they do
not even amount to 1 percent of the total.
In short, the NAHJ has
a lot of gall to claim that it is a group of
"professional"
journalists.
But now for the happy
ending to today’s saga: this bullying isn’t working.
According to a June
2005 report by the Knight Foundation, the share of
journalism jobs held by non-whites has decreased from
its peak in both large and small newsrooms. [Newsroom
Diversity Has Passed Its Peak at Most Newspapers,
1990-2005 Study Shows]
In their executive
summary, authors Bill Dedman and Stephen K. Doig state
that of the 200 largest dailies, 73 percent employ fewer
non-whites than they did when non-white employment was
at its peak.
Included are the most
sanctimonious of the lot: the
New York Times, the
Wall Street Journal, the
Washington Post, the
Los Angeles Times,
USA Today, the
Minneapolis Star-Tribune.
What the Knight
Foundation report means is that in the same time period
since the ethnic identity media groups like NAHJ came on
the scene tooting their own horn, diversity in the
newsroom—despite all the whining, lobbying and
pontificating—has declined.
Who knows? Maybe there
is a subtle shift toward trying to improve the currently
wretched quality of newspapers by hiring the most able
person—rather than obeying quotas.
In a related and
equally significant item, the San Jose Mercury News—employer
of the NAHJ’s Villafane—announced that it will
discontinue its Spanish language newspaper,
Nuevo Mundo,
and that it would sell its
Vietnamese publication,
Viet Mercury.
Neither is profitable. ["San
Jose Mercury News Unloads Foreign Language Newspapers,"
Greg Sandoval, Associated Press, October 21, 2005]
The announcements
regarding Nuevo Mundo and Viet Mercury
come on top of last month’s lay-offs of 60 Mercury News
employees including 52 from the newsroom.
Think of it! We are
witness to the slow but certain deaths of
artificially-enforced newsroom diversity and the
newspapers that spawned it.
I hate to gloat. But I
can’t help it. This is better than a Christmas present.
Joe Guzzardi [email
him], an instructor in English at the Lodi
Adult School, has been writing a weekly newspaper column
since 1988. This column is exclusive to VDARE.COM. |