Black journalists and journalists of colour

In a truly bizarre column in yesterday's Globe, two journalists complained about hiring practices in the communications and publishing industry.  One was the head of the 'Canadian Association of Black Journalists', the other from "Canadian Journalists of Colour'.  Both were female. 

(Aside:  Why you need two such associations representing basically the same demographic I have no idea?!  But I digress.)  

Anyway, their premise was that newsrooms need to hire more blacks and browns.  As a journalist who plied my trade for a number of years in Toronto's cutthroat and competitive publishing world back in the seventies, I have to ask, why?  Just because they are black or brown?  That's just dumb.  No one hired me because I was a woman.  I was hired because of my competence and even had to take a writing test as part of the process.  The fiasco of the women's movement comes to mind when hiring began to be based on gender 40 years ago.  How did that work out?  Just look at Payette, Hadju or Tam.  We could also throw in Clarkson and Jean and hundreds of others who didn't work out.  They're your answer.

In their column, they bizarrely, but predictably, tossed in the George Floyd killing, for no reason apparent to me?  (It's similar to how Indigenous spokespeople and columnists link everything to colonialism and residential schools.  Whatever the issue, it's the fault of residential schools and colonialism.  Regardless.)  In the Floyd case, was this unfortunate not hired by some newsroom?  What has his killing to do with hiring black journalists?!  Beats me!?

These women have apparently been badgering media companies demanding answers to what they have labelled a "Call to Action".  They seem not to understand that journalists are hired because of competence, not colour.  That's not to say there aren't qualified black and brown candidates, but obviously not as many because of demographics.  It's all in the numbers, not colour.

They claim that one national broadcaster created an internal tool that measures inclusion to weave diversity data into every facet of news operations.  Huh?  How is that relevant to the actual business of journalism?  

Forty-five years ago, I applied, and was interviewed, for a job at Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation.  I got the job and was thrilled, but when they discovered I was pregnant, they immediately cancelled the competition.  But lo and behold, a few months later, they quietly hired the guy who had come second.  I took it to the Department of Labour, who wrote a weak letter of enquiry to the president of CMHC (at the time, Bill Teron).  Naturally, Teron wrote back saying that was not the reason.........blah blah blah.  Nothing happened and I left CMHC for another job.

Not getting a job because of a pregnancy was unadmitted standard practice back then, which is why I tried to hide my condition.  Afterall, who wants to hire someone who will shortly be taking six months' maternity leave.  It was wrong, but I get it from the employer's perspective.  However, this is not the same as insisting someone be hired because of colour, which these women want.  A journalist of colour would not be leaving his/her post because of colour as a pregnant woman would be doing.  I believe hiring is -- and should be -- based on competence, never on colour.

Seems to me, the more people like these women insist on qualifications extraneous to the actual work they will be doing, the weaker their position becomes.