Change Is Gonna Come
It's been a long, a long time coming but I know
A change gon' come oh yes it will
- Sam Cooke
16 months "surveyed." From January 2008 to April 2009
Five different sections, excluding "news" pages written by TPM staff and contributors to "All Readers' Posts"
Persons in the following sections are "invited" to participate.
Twenty-one (21) total posts by
Eight (8) different writers, including
One (1) "member" of the Coffee House "regulars" from May 14 to July 14, 2008
Four of the five sections, which break down as follows:
Special Guests section
:Kia Franklin
- "Will Our Legal Rights Become a Concern?" Jan. 10, 2008 and
- "Happy 100th Birthday Thurgood Marshall," July 2, 2008
Glenn Loury:
- "Losing the Narrative," March 31, 2008
- "Further Thoughts on 'Race' Discussion," April 4, 2008
Ta-Nehisi Coates:
- "The Issue is Black and White," March 31, 2008
- "Bursting the Elite Bubble," April 2, 2008
Both Mr. Loury's and Mr. Coates' posts were made in the wake of Barack Obama's speech on race in America.
Special Features section:
Peniel Joseph:
-
"President Obama and the Price and Promise of American Citizenship," January 23, 2009
Orlando Patterson:
-
"Equality in the Private Sphere," January 20, 2009
Olati Johnson:
-
"Integration's Future," Jan 20, 2009
These posts were part of the Obama inaugural special section
Table for One section: 0 posts by 0 authors for as far back as the archive went
Coffee House Regulars
section: Seven (7) posts by 1 authorTa-Nehisi Coates: (cross posting from his regular blog)
- "Introductions," May 12, 2008
- "The Myth of the Black Racist Voter," May 12, 2008
- "The Negro Sings of Zionism," May 13, 2008
- "The Oppression Olympics (Again)," May 19 2008
- "More Dumb Questions About Barack Obama and Black Folks", June 9, 2008
- "The Post-Black Man's Burden," June 17, 2008,
- " The Tragedy of Jesse Jackson," July 14, 2008
TPM Book Club
-- Five (5) posts by 3 authorsMia Carter:
- "On Mobility," July 27, 2008,
- "Wanderers and Homies," July 21, 2008
- "A Satellite Enabled Perspective," July 29, 2008
A Wilkins:
- "Stacking the Deck Against Success," Sept 17, 2008
Peniel Joseph:
- "Post-1968 Civil Rights Movement, Combustive and Combative," April 2, 2009
Books featured in the TPM Book Club listed in the archive written by black authors, 0
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
When I commented on the lack of diversity and the need for more black voices here at TPM -- especially in sections like the Book Club and the "regulars," I had not done a hard count of authors and posts. I had a notion, bolstered by what I thought was a pattern, but not put to any test. I was reacting based on "feel" and not fully on fact. And I was disappointed that my comments when responded to by TPM staff were not taken as seriously as I hoped. Part of the purpose of this post is to back up my claim with the numbers. Numbers. they say, don't lie. (Unless you're talking about statistics and then there are "lies, damn lies, and statistics.") I'm just talking numbers.
So today, I decided to satisfy my curiosity. I guess one says her "feelings" were confirmed.
But the good news. In the "All Readers' Posts" section, we have to be proud of ourselves for creating a wildly diverse community (and after the outpouring of concern and help for DickDay and his ailing computerm community is the right word!). Our passion for politics -- okay, the need to either have our views confirmed or the need to argue with strangers -- has brought us together. We post when we feel the urge, comment, commiserate, conglomerate and at time conflagrate. We make everyone feel welcome (okay, most of the time.) But new faces of all hues come, hang out, stay, go and return.
The "All Readers'" section of TPM is hands down my favorite part. It's the part I look over first. It's the part I linger over longest. It's the part that makes me laugh out loud. It makes me fume. It makes me pound the keyboard, talk to my computer. It fries my brain. I read your stuff even if we are sworn mortal "cyber-enemies." Heck, I read the spam.
The rest of TPM -- judging by the numbers -- is a bit of a different story. That has to change. and not with just more black writers. I didn't do a tally for other ethnicities, but it did stand out that I didn't see any Latino/a authors or issues, or Native Americans and just a few (less than five?) Asians. Something is terribly wrong with that in country that's supposed to be "post-," you know, "post-racial," "post-ethnic," et cetera.We are all affected by the economy, by war, by the lack of healthcare, by our foreign policy, by education and other domestic policy issues. To not have a wider variety of ideas and opinions represented is disappointing. And whether TPM's editors want to admit it or not, it does affect their editorial coverage. It's hard to be "fair and balanced," so to speak, when there is no one to speak for those who are, well, overlooked.
Thankfully, all of us "All Readers" bring our own diversity with the posts we write and the opinions we share. I will continue to press for TPM to expand and diversity its staff, its invitations to authors, its choice of books and other features. In the meantime, thanks to you all for being so different, for being so diverse.
Jade, I'm with you...the All Readers portion of TPM is my favorite. I go to the front page if I have time, but if it's one or the other, All Readers is where I head.
In the 9 months I've been here (sure seems like a lot longer!) I've been exposed to more diversity of thought than ever before in my life.
Do you have a feel for WHY there isn't more ethnic representation elsewhere on the site? Do you think it is an editorial bias, or just fewer people of color blog, or what?
April 25, 2009 10:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Do you have a feel for WHY there isn't more ethnic representation elsewhere on the site? Do you think it is an editorial bias, or just fewer people of color blog, or what?
Stilli, I am almost afraid to answer those questions.
I spent the better part of two days clicking through the archives of every section I mentioned above. I went back to January '08 because it would be a fair starting point from which to judge a "news" organization, with a defineable starting point and bringing that coverage to the present.
Many media outlets increased their use of minority reporters, writers, analysts, commentators, pundits, and experts during the course of the campaign -- starting as far back as February 2007, when Obama announced he was running. This is fairly typical of the media -- you staff up with experts on a given topic when that topic is in the news. (During war, you see more military experts participating in the news than you do when it is peacetime.) Mainstream media staffed up. Organizations which would like to be considered as alternatives to the MSM, it's fair to posit, would likely do the same.
So January '08 was not just a random date, but one that could be considered a real milepost.
Now let me circle around and answer the second part of the second question. People of color DO blog, they do write newspaper articles columns and books, they are pundits, analysts, commentators, experts and more. As the mainstream media shows, there must be a concerted effort to reach out and include them.
Typically, in the MSM when a topic is deemed to have "minority appeal," the news outlet had more incentive to include token minority voices on the subject. However, until recently, few in the media would present a minority as representative for "mainstream" topics. That is, unless, let's say swine flu, was inordinately affected minorities, you were not likely to see a minority doctor talking about swine flu as it affected the general populace.
One of the unspoken benefits of "The Age of Obama," is a more seamless inclusion of minorities as experts on everything.
So in my opinion and experience, there are lots of minority writers and experts more than qualified to participate in media of all kinds and at every level.
As for the first part of the second question, I think, unfortunately, the answer is yes. But I cannot answer that question fully or fairly because I can only based on the narrow range of facts I've been able to gather.
That the self-selecting Readers section is diverse answers part of your question. We Readers choose to read and comment at TPM. One could say, if the Readers section was a "hostile" environment for minority readers and writers, we would go elsewhere.
The other "by invitation" sections of TPM are different. The site's managers extend invitations to persons to be part of the Cafe Regulars, to join book discussions, to include their books as part of those discussions, to be part of the Table for One "experts," to be Special Guests, or participate in Special Feature. When you consider the sheer volume of posts in a single year -- and I confess, I should have counted to be able to give you a total -- 21 posts by 8 individuals in 16 months is stunning.
April 26, 2009 12:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is a wonderful survey here, Jade. And I hope management takes note.
As an aside, I have to say that I was SO IMPRESSED with Paniel Joseph on the PBS coverage of Obama during the campaign. I wish we could hear more from him. I predict he is going places. What a great human being, a great commentator. I was blown away by him! So let's have more of him here if possible.
And yes, Reader Blogs has become a wonderful conversation place. More and more. People play off each other (in many ways). Blogs play off each other. We're refining our understanding of things over time.
And I so appreciate the diversity here! Diversity and civility are great commodities. And it's been particularly helpful to have certain issues related to that diversity opened up by people sticking around the Cafe. We need to be discussing issues of race and tribe and so on. It's not good when society tip-toes around vital topics and they become taboo. It's really a relief to be talking about these things. It's been a great contribution. We are richer for it.
Speaking to Stilli's question - I suspect that the climate here in the Reader Blogs has something to do with what's happened over time. Because it's not just race or tribe but it also relates to people like dd, and others, who are disabled for whatever reasons. There's a caring, I'd say. And that goes beyond the "reporting" aspect - which sparked tpm to begin with. It began as Josh's blog - just him. And grew from there. I'm not sure he had a grand plan.
I hope this thread addresses what we'd like to see as readers. Some things we have no control over at TPM. But this is clearly a door we seem to have opened and a welcome mat laid. I recall some individuals being cautious and nervous about posting here or posting on topics related to race. And finding, to their surprise, not just a welcome, but a joyful welcome. (Which reminds me, where's Wattree lately?)
April 25, 2009 11:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ah, Jade...
Once again you dare to venture where....
Bless you. So appreciate you. Always.
All I can say is....
'Please, dear lady, encore!'
From your post to JM's (and all) sooner, rather than later, actions - because (dare I say it?) we are hoping here for 'Change we can believe in!'
April 25, 2009 11:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good observation regarding ethnic diversity jade, and thanks back to you too.
April 25, 2009 11:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wasn't Alan Keyes here once :)
Good work here, Jade (and it looks like a lot of work). Our paths don't cross much here and, when so, usually taking opposite sides. But I appreciate you taking the trouble to do this and trying to achieve some changes (and it would seem pretty hard to argue against those numbers).
But, aside from the numbers, you do realize that MJ Rosenberg represents all minorities here at TPM (and has from the beginning). I'm kidding of course (but, just out of curiosity, do you have his numbers?).
April 26, 2009 12:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
That we can take opposite sides at the same place is encouraging, and exactly what we need to get and keep dialogue going.
I didn't count MJ's numbers but the word to describe him is "prolific."
April 26, 2009 5:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, and dialogue is the right word. Too many complain about "rants" and "whining" and "platitudes," but it really is just a conversation here, if sometimes heated.
"Superabundantly-prolific" might apply...:)
April 26, 2009 6:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Glad to hear you say this, Jade. I believe in my heart it is just a matter of time. The young who see Obama in the White House can now believe their writing talents can get them the job with TPM. It is only a matter of time before they gather courage enough to apply. I suspect that may be more the critical issue for them not being here then that anyone is seeking to keep them out. Nevertheless, remind TPM we wish to hear more voices.
April 26, 2009 1:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
I happen to think that focusing on race, gender ethnicity etc is to miss the larger theme of degradation of equality of the majority. For the most part the very harmful failures of our government over the years are a product of the general state of inequality. This is reflective of the class struggle which has it's genesis firmly anchored in the attainment of wealth and power, from which all else follows.
It is crucial that we correctly assess the root causes of specific instances of inequality. We've had a sustained growth in generic class inequality for quite some time and in spite of Obama ostensibly recognizing this he is facing an uphill battle with very long odds of actually changing it. The broad scheme of entrenched political power accompanied by inappropriate private sector associations makes it exceedingly difficult to modify the evolved formulation of governance. The chaotic indecisiveness we are seeing informs us that the nation has yet to grasp the altered fundamentals of governance that have so harmed the country. Change is very, very hard.
April 26, 2009 6:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
I happen to think that focusing on race, gender ethnicity etc is to miss the larger theme of degradation of equality of the majority.
You need someone to speak for the minorities, because far too often they are affected first by what later comes to be seen as a "majority" problem. Speaking in larger terms, when it is "okay" for a government to trample freely on the rights of the minority, it gives them license to trample on the rights of enough other groups that soon the "minority" is the majority.
April 26, 2009 11:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not in the least in disagreemnt with your view. However, don't expect anything to change while we still have the presence of the broader discrimination I have described. Discrimination has always been, first and foremost, about money or power or control or some combination of the three. What we too often fail to recognize is the extent to which it is fundamentally about preserving those things.
April 26, 2009 4:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I too spend most of my TPM time in the Cafe with readers posts. My only wish is the front pagers, regulars, editors, and special guests would join us from time to time. A comment would go a long way.
I wonder if they really know what a wonderful, self-sustaining, flourishing community they have created?
April 26, 2009 9:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wow. Jade. The research you did for this blog is outstanding and astounding. Thank you from the bottom of my Anishinaabe heart.
April 26, 2009 11:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
OT Jade, but I wanted to make sure you saw this.
My parting shot at Sailer.
April 26, 2009 12:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'd say you put him squarely in his place, PCA!!! WELL DONE!!!! And thanks for taking him on.
April 26, 2009 1:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
J
Well...
I rarely comment here but I read a hand full of posters and I must admit that your posts have been at the top of my list.
As a hispanic/native american person I guess I do not look directly for other peoples of color here at our little cafe. I know the phrase has been both overused/misused but I like to think of our community as color blind.
I know there are issues we all need to deal with and if you or I bring them up each will be discussed here openly I am sure.
Bring it on sister!
M. Paul
April 26, 2009 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess I notice the absence of "color" more. I can't say I'm a "colorblind" person, because that vibrant exchange is what makes us so unique. Your world view and life experience is different from mine, but at the same time we can share things that bring us closer together.
Take immigration, for example. We may share the same opinions on what needs to be done (if anything), but the factors that bring us to similar opinions may be vastly different.
April 26, 2009 5:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Congratulations Jade!
Without doubt the most polished parody of saccharine, content free, leftist cry-baby thinking I've seen in a long while.
Lets note this comment to PCA:
"I'd say you put him squarely in his place, PCA!!! WELL DONE!!!! And thanks for taking him on."
Priceless patronizing there Jade, PCA will be pretty red-faced when he catches on.
And the hypocrisy here:
"Location New Mexico.... If I squint real hard on a clear day I can see Old Mexico before my eyes tear up."
Obviously in reality anyone who felt that strongly about (Old) Mexico would head straight off to live there.
Like I said, priceless. More like this please Jade.
April 26, 2009 8:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
ROTFLMAO
It's brutally ironic that a racist anti-immigrant vigilante group that calls itself "MinuteMen" would be led by some clown named "SimCox". Just exercising their 2nd amendment rights to use a pistol as a codpiece; a prosthesis to help alleviate the feelings of inadequacy concomitant with Acute Genitalia Deficit Disorder (AGDD).
April 26, 2009 10:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
SIMCOX?!
Is he a teabagger, too?
=D
April 27, 2009 9:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think you will find that the Minutemen are concerned about illegal immigration. That is, people breaking the law. I realize the Mexican drug gangs spreading their operations is just an inconvenient detail to you but the whole issue is bound up with immigration.
So the guy is called Simcox, he didnt choose his name, who are you to make fun of that.
Why you are actually rambling on about the minutemen with your Dummies guide to Freudianism open at page one escapes me. Dealing with some inadequacies of your own perhaps?
April 27, 2009 8:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think that anyone that takes a name like simcox seriously might have a few issues of their own.
You know what? My last name is funny, too. I enjoy people enjoying the humor of it.
What's YOUR problem?
April 27, 2009 9:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Simply by using the term; "illegal immigrant", you prove that you are not an American who adheres to the founding principles of The Nation:
Poseur
April 27, 2009 9:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not sure how this passage proves that "illegal immigration" is one of "the founding principles of The Nation."
1. Talbot v. Janson didn't decide that "illegal immigration" was one of "the founding principles of The Nation." It simply decided that the jurisdiction of the court extended to the seas and that a citizen of the United States could also hold the citizenship of another nation.
2. A right of expatriation is not the same as a right of immigration into a particular country or all countries. This passage addresses the "right of expatriation" that is, the right to leave a country. This is clearly distinct from a right to immigrate INTO a particular country, or INTO all countries.
3. Justice Iredell explicitly states that the "right to expatriation" is an open question that has not been settled: "the great question as to the right of expatriation." Many Founders disputed that there was a "right of expatriation" let alone some kind of right of immigration. Furthermore, considering that this is in 1795, it certainly can't be considered to be one of the "founding principles." How can a supposed "principle" or "right" that has not been established and is up for debate AFTER the founding, be construed as one of the "founding principles of The Nation"?
April 28, 2009 1:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
So what is your name; Insecure Bed-Wetting Liberal III?
I'd need to be able to laugh at myself if that was my name too.
May 2, 2009 11:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I not entirely sure how my use of the term "illegal immigrant" and your reaction to it proves anything except your belief that the border should be wide open.
However I'm not an American.
May 2, 2009 11:23 PM | Reply | Permalink