Hiring criteria at First Look Media: "Not white. Not male."

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/04/14/passover-greetings-editor/#comment-22673

by pvnick • 12 years ago

45 38 12 years ago

firstlook.org

hmgibson232• 12 years ago

A hilarious backfiring of positive discrimination...

trhway2• 12 years ago

in a zero-sum game my positive discrimination is your negative discrimination

interstitial• 12 years ago

I imagine this story to be off the HN front page any minute now.

hmgibson232• 12 years ago

Well predicted.

hashbanged6• 12 years ago

Almost instantly.

carsongross• 12 years ago

Now we see the violence inherent in the system... Elp! Elp! I'm being repressed!

MrZongle2• 12 years ago

Apparently to enlightened members of society like editor John Cook, it's ok to discriminate against white guys.

ba5ecamp2• 12 years ago

First Look hires white male editor to hire anyone but white male reporters. LOL

bagels2• 12 years ago

Did they edit this? I don't see that in the link...

protomyth• 12 years ago

The John Cook comment at 14 Apr 2014 at 12:34 pm

jffry• 12 years ago

Nick Manes 14 Apr 2014 at 12:20 pm Are there particulars attributes or beats you’re looking to fill for as you staff up with reporters?

John Cook 14 Apr 2014 at 12:34 pm Not white. Not male. Fast. Interested in reporting as a live, iterative process that plays out on the internet as well as one where you go away for six weeks and come back with 4,000 words. Eager to make a name for themselves. Beat-wise, intelligence and national security are obviously important to us at the initial stages, but I’m more interested in good capable people who can apply their skills to all manner of stories than subject-area experts.

bagels2• 12 years ago

I see, in the comments. Thanks.

chaghalibaghali• 12 years ago

The link is to a specific comment that the author replies to.

Someone asks:

"Are there particulars attributes or beats you’re looking to fill for as you staff up with reporters?"

and he replies:

"Not white. Not male. Fast. Interested in reporting as a live, iterative process that plays out on the internet as well as one where you go away for six weeks and come back with 4,000 words. Eager to make a name for themselves. Beat-wise, intelligence and national security are obviously important to us at the initial stages, but I’m more interested in good capable people who can apply their skills to all manner of stories than subject-area experts."

astrodust• 12 years ago

It's a fair answer to a fair question. "What would you like to see?" is different from "What are your hiring criteria?"

HN should be filled with outrage at the "discrimination" of job postings demanding 10 years of experience with Go or Rust.

worklogin2• 12 years ago

It was pointed out already: A firm started by Glenn Greenwald and edited by "John Cook" who I am assuming is as white as snow, putting discriminatory standards as their lead qualifiers.

hashbanged6• 12 years ago

This does not mean what most people are going to interpret it to mean. Here was the question:

"Are there particulars attributes or beats you’re looking to fill"

The way I interpret this is that given that they already hired a lot of white males, they are looking to hire more people who are not white males.

But I'm sure plenty of people will use this mostly white male work place as an example of "reverse racism," somehow...

lucisferre• 12 years ago

Sure but here at HN hiring for diversity is discrimination. Totally makes sense.

MichaelAza• 12 years ago

I get what he meant ("we're looking to create a diverse team") but the way he phrased it is just all kinds of wrong.

Keeping a terse style doesn't justify saying silly things which I assume weren't meant literally.

worklogin2• 12 years ago

Best comment so far. If his intention was to say "Diverse staff; we are looking for new and varied backgrounds and cultures to cover our stories", he should have said something along those lines to avoid the expected (and justified) "WTF" of saying they aren't accepting any more "privileged" positions.

hashbanged6• 12 years ago

Or maybe we white males should just rest assured that we aren't being discriminated against, especially not by an organization of mostly white males, and think more carefully before we post things like this to HN. You knew exactly how people would interpret it, but you chose to ignore the context in which the question was asked.

michaelrhansen• 12 years ago

And this is a guy in journalism. Where communication is his career. Awesome.

trhway2• 12 years ago

obligatory reference to affirmative actions in Undercover Brother.

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/an-EJKebbn24hbmtn/undercover_b...

frandroid• 12 years ago

One of the comments: "I mean we all get you, and I agree with a strong approach to diversity, but that is just wrong."

How does anyone think they're going to achieve diversity without diversity hiring?

oskarth• 12 years ago

I don't know what happened to my comment, but I posted something along these lines.

You are kidding right?

Where would firstlook be without Glenn Greenwald and Edward Snowden? Affirmative action is great, but this is absolutely ridiculous.

To clarify, there's nothing wrong with having a strong policy to counter-act "normal" discrimination. What is wrong is explicitly discriminating against a group of people, regardless of who they are.

This reminds me of some radical feminist fractions who say most books are not worth reading because they are written by dead, white, males [no citation]. It's absolutely true that white males are unfairly dominating the classics section, but the way to combat this is not to blacklist them. That's a recipe for disaster, and I'm quite certain Simone de Beauvoir would agree with me.

EDIT: Since this will be part of the discussion, it's important to understand what affirmative action is. Here's the definition from Wikipedia: policy of providing special opportunities for, and favoring members of, a disadvantaged group who suffer from discrimination.

It's about positive discrimination of disadvantaged groups, not elimination of advantaged groups.

EDIT 2: This topic has been flagged already, but I'm writing this for future reference. What this seems to imply is that if a new Greenwald or Snowden comes along, they are explicitly not welcome. This is not affirmative action at all, it's just an unreflected usage of it, without understanding the true meaning or function of affirmative action.

An organization with such an attitude will eventually die. I hope this was just a poorly worded reply from an individual that doesn't reflect how firstlook actually deals with these things.

hashbanged6• 12 years ago

This is what affirmative action is. They are not outright saying NO to white males, they are specifically looking for people who are not white males though, considering they already hired mostly white males. Read the comment he replied to. They did not say that they will not hire white males, because that would be ridiculous, considering that they are already mostly white males.

greenyoda• 12 years ago

"They are not outright saying NO to white males"

Cook's statement was: "Not white. Not male." That seems to be pretty unambiguously saying "no" to white males.

Affirmative action would be something along the lines of: "We encourage applications from women and ethnic minorities."

true_religion• 12 years ago

Affirmative action as it is implemented in the US simply states that if two candidates on paper have the same qualifications then choose the minority candidate.

The reasoning is that it counters a pre-existing bias towards non-minorities and/or women.

hashbanged6• 12 years ago

EDIT 2: This topic has been flagged already, but I'm writing this for future reference. What this seems to imply is that if a new Greenwald or Snowden comes along, they are explicitly not welcome. This is not affirmative action at all, it's just an unreflected usage of it, without understanding the true meaning or function of affirmative action.

Go back and read the question. You're perpetuating a narrative that takes his words out of context. The question was asked if there was anything they were specifically looking for. He said yes, people who are not white males. They are already mostly white males and they want to write something that is less from the perspective of mostly white males.

That is affirmative action. You have the definition correct.

Also, what are you trying to do by name dropping Simone de Beauvoir? It doesn't earn you any credibility. It does sound though like you think of yourself as a feminist or at least a supporter of equality if you won't use that label, since you're also creating strawmen feminists (who the hell says most books are not worth reading because they're written by men? Please tell me about which feminist scholar or author wrote about that). Read things more critically before you promote a narrative established by taking things out of context to pretend that First Look is discriminating against white straight men by being a bunch of white straight men and not trying to become MORE white straight men while not explicitly ruling that out at all.

xianshou• 12 years ago

Can we just agree that evaluating anonymized work samples the way orchestras evaluate blind auditions would make things simpler and easier?

http://www.theguardian.com/women-in-leadership/2013/oct/14/b...

devilshaircut4• 12 years ago

I don't agree with that premise though. I agree you would end up with a complement of capable employees but it doesn't address culturally-embedded, systemic discrimination. That is what affirmative action is designed to address. I presume to respect your intellect, so I am sure you are aware that access to quality education is problematic for various ethnic and racial groups in the United States (and beyond - but I am specifically addressing affirmative action).

ba5ecamp2• 12 years ago

John Cook has a bit of a cowboy/male bravado writing style which I don't think really fits stylistically with First Look/the Intercept but he also did interesting things at Gawker

devilshaircut4• 12 years ago

The follow-up comments:

Malcolm Pollack 14 Apr 2014 at 2:33 pm “Not white”? “Not male”? How about “No Irish need apply”? Imagine if you announced that you were looking to fill job openings, but didn’t want any women or blacks. That this can be done so openly, so blithely — and that it is considered not an act of unconscionable bigotry and race war, but rather as a badge of honor — is very ominous indeed.
Ralph Thayer 14 Apr 2014 at 3:27 pm “Not white. Not male.” Noted.
BubbaMustafa 14 Apr 2014 at 5:56 pm So you hate whites and males? That’s a blatant discriminatory statement. You have shown your true colors. Way to go!
LitThom 14 Apr 2014 at 6:04 pm “Not white. Not male.” That is just wrong. I mean we all get you, and I agree with a strong approach to diversity, but that is just wrong.
Will Cate 14 Apr 2014 at 8:02 pm re “Not white. Not male.” Thanks for letting us know that this is not an operation to be taken seriously.
JOC 14 Apr 2014 at 8:35 pm It’s so hip to discourage employment of white males, especially if you are one (and already have a newsroom full of them.) #johncook’swhiteguilt
JOC 14 Apr 2014 at 8:49 pm It’s so hip to discourage employment of white males, especially if you are one (and have a newsroom full of them).#johncookswhiteguilt speaks in terse, serious language.

As a minority, I understand how these people feel; as a minority, it does however also bother me that these people react in such a reflexive manner. It is such a small percentage of times where people like that experience any sort of discrimination. Frankly, if I reacted in this reflexive manner every time I faced some mode of discrimination, the people I surround myself with would find me to be an insufferable, whiney brat.

Strong language, perhaps, but I can think of no other way to characterize how I would be perceived in analogous circumstances.

AnimalMuppet2• 12 years ago

But hopefully, you do find ways to point out that this is not OK. I mean, it's not OK when it's done to a minority because of them being a minority. When it's done to white males because an outfit wants more diversity... meh, I can't get too excited about it, even though I'm white and male.

Don't become an insufferable whiny brat. But don't stop trying to find effective ways to call out racism when you run into it, either.

devilshaircut4• 12 years ago

I really appreciate your sentiment. I will say this (and again I do agree with you): bigotry of varying degrees is so common and so engrained in society that if I were to bother to recognize its presence consistently, it would quickly become unsustainable.

I do try and find ways to point out the "not okay" aspects of situations when I can, but it is rare. Here, for example, I took a leap of faith in the HN community for it to be okay for me to criticize the knee-jerk reactions of the aforementioned respondees to the original post. For me, it's just such a "weak" reaction for said people to complain in some rare, ambiguous case that in no way relates to them personally, about discrimination against white males. "Weak" is really the only word I can come up with right now.

burntroots• 12 years ago

When did HN become a gossip rag? Quote taken out of context. Nothing to see here, move along.

Hiring criteria at First Look Media: "Not white. Not male."

Related Stories