The top job, take two

Great piece on women (or lack thereof) in high-profile media positions at The G Spot. H/T to Jill for sharing the link. I wrote about the dearth of women in high-profile journalism positions recently here. 

Here are a couple of take-aways from the G Spot piece, but I hope you'll read it in its entirety.

"Liberal women, and especially liberal feminist women, are not particularly welcome in opinion journalism."

"Media outlets have gotten beaten up so hard by the right for their alleged "liberal" (ha!) bias that for a long time now, they've shied away from hiring strongly liberal columnists (and the ones that fall through the cracks, like Paul Krugman, seem to get there by accident -- remember, Krugman was hired by the Times back in the days when he best-known as a fan of globalization and the neoliberal world order)."

"The key to getting more women opinion columnists and more (salaried) women bloggers out there is … to keep on publicizing this issue, and need to keep the pressure on … Some of it is just plain laziness -- men considering only people they know through their own personal networks, who tend to be largely male. Or men having an unconscious bias in favor hiring others like them (same sex, same race, similar class or educational background, etc.) With the well-meaning guys out there who are sympathetic towards feminism, probably all they need is a little pressure, a bit of pushback. I'm pretty sure we can through to them. And if we make enough noise we can at least have some influence over the others."

Time is short today, but rest assured I'll be returning to this topic frequently. 

And the top job goes to....?

...Another guy.

Yep, that's right. Women are remarkably absent from any discussion of replacements for Leonard Downie or Meet the Press or NBC Washington Bureau Chief . The ME of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution has announced his resignation, so I wonder what names will circulate to replace him?

I have no problem with men holding powerful positions in journalism. I have a problem with them holding virtually ALL the powerful positions in journalism. If you want to know why our mainstream news coverage resembles a middle-aged white guy, you need look no further than the newsrooms of most major newspapers.

As it happens Len Downie, a hometown boy, happens to be one of the greatest editors of one of the greatest newspapers. I would have worked for him in a heartbeat. You don't get 25 Pulitzers without fostering a sense of possibility, creativity and high expectations in a newsroom. Likewise, Jim Amoss at the New Orleans Times-Picayune is another I'd work for in a snap because of his commitment to fulfilling the promise of the press as a watchdog for the public.

But seriously...how far do newspapers in particular have to decline before news organizations start looking a little differently at who is at the helm? This isn't an anti-guy rant, but more an anti-establishment rant. You know the old definition of insanity? Yeah, well, I think it applies to newspapers by the bucket loads.

Check out the numbers: According to the American Society of Newspaper Editors 2006 census: 38 percent of journalists working in daily newspapers are women; 65 percent of all supervisors are men.

Only 3 percent of women hold clout positions in journalism, according to the Annenberg Public Policy Center.

All this is despite the fact that women have been the majority of college journalism majors since 1977. (Ah, yep, that would include me.)

AN-ND... newspapers that enjoy growth from innovation and development are more likely to have a diverse set of leaders at the top.

But, hey, we don't pull our weight, right? Women correspondents report ONLY 25 percent of the stories on television, and women comprise 25 percent of contributors to "general interest" magazines.



Maybe THAT'S why we leave journalism in droves. Or maybe it's because the longer we work in this business the less we get paid compared to our male counterparts.

These statistics are helpfully gathered at McCormick Foundation's New Media Women Entrepreneurs, where they encourage and yes reward us for our knack with new media, social networks and our broader network of contacts and insatiable curiosity.

C'mon! We've got the data, now let's do something about it. And then maybe we can stop mourning for what was and start reaching for what's next.

Women lawyers falling behind at local firms

[Sigh] Well, here we go again.

There's another study out indicating [shockingly] that women attorneys quickly fall behind at local law firms. Are we surprised?

We shouldn't be. Women partners at local firms range from 7 percent to 22 percent, according to the Cleveland Bar Association, and despite graduating from law school at the same rate as men.

PD reporter Alison Grant writes:

Though law firms are gradually become (sic) more diverse, the panel said lopsided patterns persist because of:

The entrenched model of billable hours as a measure of productivity.

The diminished chance to make partner after taking a detour to have children or care for elderly parents.

Discounting of women's ambition and drive if they don't follow a standard path.

The tendency of some women to be so relieved about their success that they forget to help female associates coming behind them.

Let's look at these a little more closely, shall we? Billable hours means the more hours you work, the more you can bill and the more money the firm (and ostensibly the partners) can make. Related to that is reason number two, which basically means if you take time off to have a family or care for aging parents, you're no longer producing money for the firm and hence, become a liability.

Not following the standard path? Seems to me that's cause for celebration and meritorious pay, not a hindrance to success. But I suppose if you break out of a firm's group think mentality by combining unusual interest areas—hmm, say law and social work—that throws the good ole boys into a quandary. I mean, what do you do with such a lawyer? Hey, quantity over quality though, right?

Sadly, that last point is something I've written about for The Plain Dealer business section, though at the time the topic was greeted with a healthy dose of skepticism.

Women need to recognize that the sooner we start helping each other out in business, law, education, leadership development, finance, philanthropy, social services, etc., the sooner we will achieve a more equitable playing field with men. We certainly can't leave it to THEM to grade the terrain.

My favorite quote in this story comes compliments of Bob Duvin, founder of Duvin, Cahn & Hutton. He says:

"I've been dazzled, stunned by the ability of many women to work either full time or something close to full time and also be wives and mothers," Duvin said. "It isn't easy, and a byproduct is it sometimes hurts your career."

Bob—can I call you, Bob?—to say we are dazzling in our ability to juggle is a gross understatement. How do YOU manage working full time and being a husband and father? I mean, it isn't easy and the byproduct is that is sometimes hurts YOUR career.

Oh...wait...only it doesn't. THAT, Bob, is the fundamental problem. It's called a "double standard." So take that back to your board room and chew on it for a bit. Better yet, why don't you talk to the female partners and lawyers in your firm and ask them how they do it. While you're at it, why don't you ask them how the firm can help them better balance both with impunity. Please, Bob, don't forget to bring a woman into that discussion.

Then you can come back to a public forum and talk intelligently about this topic.

One more quibble on this story: I would've asked the women partners quoted in the story how they've gotten where they are in their career. How do they balance marriage, family and career? Did they give one or more of those up in favor of the other? Did they feel they had no choice?

It's not enough to say they lead law firms, we need to know in the context of this story how they broke the mold to get where they are.

Heights teacher champions leadership

Here's a mini-profile of one of the teachers I'm following this year at Cleveland Heights High School.

Obama is hope for my generation

I'm not going to get all Barack Obama-crazed just yet, but I do think the Senator from Illinois has something that our country desperately needs — well-spoken passion and a world view that was shaped by something other than the Vietnam War.

He represents a generation of adults who grew up in a globalized world, one that views societies as less-dualistic and more in terms of shared values. Regardless of where we live, our primary goals are to feed, clothe and house our children, give them clean air to breath and clean water to drink, provide an education that allows them to excel as adults and give them to tools of understanding that promotes peace among societies.

The hype surrounding a 2008 presidential bid is growing. Although he is praised for his charisma, his hopeful message and his charming personality, Obama also is criticized for his inexperience. I'm willing to bet that his inexperience could be an asset.

As much as I would like to see a woman elected president, I don't believe that Hillary Clinton is the one. She is of the generation that has been leading our country since 1992. We need a generational shift in leadership more than a gender shift (though ideally we'd like both!). She comes with baggage that is difficult for many voters (not necessarily me) to overlook. And she has failed to captivate with a resounding message.

I have doubts that Obama will be elected and there's still much more to learn about his vision for this country. But I do think it's high time that our generation steps up to leadership plate and at least takes a few swings. Who knows? We may just hit one over the fence.