Where Joe Williams’ departure leaves Politico’s newsroom diversity

Reporter Joe Williams’ departure from Politico is part of a longer story that began back in 2009 when the National Association of Black Journalists and others publicly chastised the publication for its lack of diversity. This week, under pressure from conservative online publications that claimed Williams had made racist comments about Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, Politico accepted Williams’ resignation.

What does Williams’ separation mean for the media organization’s reputation in terms of diversity, and what does it say about Politico’s sensitivity to external criticism?

NABJ President Greg Lee Jr., says that while the company has made some diverse hires, there is still a severe lack of African Americans and other persons of color in newsroom management. “Politico has said diversity is a priority, but the numbers just don’t bear it out,” Lee told Poynter in a telephone interview, adding that he planned to reach out to both Williams and Politico. Lee said he is particularly interested in the kind of support system Politico has in place for journalists of color, especially those in management.

Williams and his ex-boss, Politico’s Editor-in-Chief John Harris, declined to discuss specific details of their separation, but both spoke candidly by telephone about the publication’s diversity efforts and its climate.

In June 2010, Williams was the first African American editor hired at Politico after an outcry erupted over the news organization’s lack of diversity, as evidenced in a March 2010 CNN report that showed only white men in an editorial meeting. Williams’ arrival came “as the operation expands its staff and tries to shake a reputation for lacking racial diversity,” the Maynard Institute’s Richard Prince reported at the time.

Williams, a 28-year veteran journalist and then-deputy chief of The Boston Globe’s Washington Bureau, became Politico’s Deputy White House Editor. But that stint would prove short-lived. Politico reassigned Williams to White House Correspondent, specializing in the intersection of race and politics, less than a year later. (Williams said he was replaced by Rachel Smolkin, a white, female journalist who had formerly supervised the White House and legal affairs teams at USA Today. Smolkin remains White House Editor, according to her Politico bio.)

Williams’ move to a reporter slot was supposed to be a win-win for all involved: Politico got someone who it thought was telegenic, who happened to be a person of color, to help build its brand on TV news shows while Williams, in turn, was able to hone broadcast skills that he’d rarely used as a print journalist.

“They said they wanted me as a reporter, which would get me closer to the action so that I could describe some of the things I would talk about on TV with more authority,” Williams said. “They said I was good at it.”

All of that came to a crashing halt last month when, in an appearance on MSNBC, Williams said that Romney appears to be “very, very comfortable with people like him.” Williams went on to qualify his statement by saying, “white folks.”

Certainly worse has come from the mouths of journalists and they weren’t fired. Most notably Mark Halperin called President Obama “a dick” on-air in 2011. While Halperin apologized and was suspended from his side-job as a regular commentator on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” no action was publicly taken by his full-time employer, Time Magazine, where he is an editor.

Politico’s decision to initially suspend Williams indefinitely without pay before the two parties mutually decided to part ways reflects a double standard in the news media of political correctness for some journalists, but not others, writes Nida Khan in theGriot, a website owned by MSNBC that targets an African American audience.

“Politico didn’t hesitate to give in to right-wing pressure and call into question this man’s stellar journalistic career,” according to Khan, a New York-based journalist and contributor to The Huffington Post. “The real question for Politico (and other news outlets for that matter) is: Would they have been so quick to suspend Williams if he were white?”

NABJ’s Lee agreed that Politico was likely feeling pressure from conservative media outlets, which contributed to Williams’ exit.

“If they are feeling the pressure from a group of people, it would be unfortunate that they couldn’t stand up to that,” said Lee, a senior sports editor at The Boston Globe. Even when considering controversial tweets that Williams may have published on Twitter, Lee said Williams’ comments “were not an offense that should have led to [Williams] leaving Politico.”

John Harris, left, editor in chief o Politico, and Jim VandeHei, executive editor, speak to advertisers in Arlington, Va., Friday, Jan. 19, 2007. (Jacquelyn Martin/AP)

When asked if Politico is sensitive to external criticisms, Harris said that the publication tries to be transparent about how it does its work, but isn’t reactive. “Saying that we’re sensitive to criticism means that we sort of react precipitously to it and I don’t think we do,” he said. “Most of the people who are senior managers in our newsroom have been at this business a long time, so we’re accustomed to criticism and public pressure, and we’re perfectly prepared to resist that when we feel that we’re right.”

Harris said he did not believe, as some conservative news outlets and mainstream media blogs suggested, that Williams’ comments on MSNBC were racist.

“I was more interested in whether the comments met our standards of what we consider fair,” he said. “We have expectations for our reporters [who appear on television] that are the same as when they are writing under their bylines. We want them to reflect that it’s our job to observe politics in a non-partisan way.”

Harris acknowledges that it is sometimes tough for journalists to do that these days, when there is a lot of pressure to pick sides, especially on cable news channels with their fundamental interest in ideological arguments. “We ask, we insist, that our people don’t partake in that,” Harris said. “We’re there as neutral observers.”

NABJ’s Lee said that Williams was a high-profile hire for Politico two years ago, and that his departure from the publication “makes Politico’s situation worse” in terms of diversity.

Harris countered that Williams’ absence from Politico is independent of its diversity efforts and that he planned to soon talk with NABJ about how they can work together to continue Politico’s diversity outreach.

“Obviously Joe Williams is an African American journalist, a voice and a reflection of diversity who is no longer with us,” Harris said. “But our commitment to diversity is undiluted.”

When asked if Politico is a good place for black journalists, Harris said the organization he helped found in 2007 is a good place for any journalist who is passionate about politics, government and policy.

Politico is not a great newsroom for any and all journalists. There’s a particular type of journalist who seems to thrive at our publication, someone with a high metabolism and very high in these core topics,” he said. “We’re a great publication for any journalist, particularly and especially journalists of color, to come work. Politico journalists have more fun and more impact than they did in their previous jobs. It’s a damn good place for journalists who are interested in politics and share our kind of competitive feel for being the best in politics.

“I see Politico as a place of opportunity because we are growing,” Harris continued. “We are hiring. We don’t have a hiring freeze like many newsrooms. We don’t have buyouts and layoffs and in some cases closures like many other newsrooms. I’m pleased with, proud of the opportunities we’ve been able to give any number of journalists, mid-career journalists but particularly young journalists, to come in and show their stuff.”

“We’ve got responsibilities and obligations broadly in the newsroom to be more diverse. At one point, early in our existence, I was quite unsatisfied with our progress in that. I would say now I am still not satisfied, but I am more encouraged by the efforts we’ve made,” Harris added.

“We’re doing better and I want to be better still. No individual gets hired for any reason other than we think they will be a hell of a great journalist covering politics, government or policy. In an individual case, I don’t put people in a particular category or a box. More broadly, as a whole, I look at, ‘Are we giving opportunities for the best reporting jobs, are we moving people up the ladder, putting people in senior management jobs and doing that in a way that reflects our goals, including diversity? ‘ ”

Williams, who is simultaneously defending himself against reports that he assaulted his ex-wife while also trying to save his professional reputation, acknowledges that his former employer has hired a handful of young reporters from diverse backgrounds, but says that those hires have not resulted in “obvious advances in diversity.”

When Williams was asked whether Politico was a good place for journalists of color, he said: “Politico is a place where you make your own opportunities, build your own brand,” he said. “If you get the opportunity to do that, it’s up to you to take advantage of that.”

Williams, who has written that he was targeted by “the right wing noise machine,” said he hopes to parlay the experience he gained at Politico to reinvent himself, and that he hopes to remain in journalism.

We have made it easy to comment on posts, however we require civility and encourage full names to that end (first initial, last name is OK). Please read our guidelines here before commenting.

  • Anonymous
  • Anonymous

    The irony. This has been going on for a long time. For a while, small, reluctant, gains were being made in news positions for “other-than-white people” in the 1970s and more in the 1980s (small, tokenized). But even that mild shift seems to have been reversed with the Telecommunications act of 1996. I thought I was seeing a gradual loss of black personnel but I didn’t have a TV in the late 90s. Not until a friend of mine, a black camera guy, told me what was happening in his newsroom with veteran staffers being replaced by non-news managers just out of college.

    There seem to be at least two trends forming an otherwise unrelated nexus: 1) the loss of news staff replaced by advertising kiddies (white newbies) 2) hiring blindness causing a condition in which only white people seem to get considered. Just look around.

    (should note, I’m white) I get very annoyed and flat out offended when I see staff (not just in news orgs) who all look like me. There is a weekly print “news” magazine here in Kansas City, “Ink,” created by the local paper that I call the “Whitey Pitch” to slice up the ad market from the “Pitch” – (a once independent mag that started well and was then sold to a national outfit). In the same breath, I note that the Pitch is hardly “The Call” (our black newspaper).

    In each and every edition instead of the traditional masthead text listing they have an entire page of head shots of the staff (remember, printed on paper). The page looks more like a high school yearbook page but for the several years of their existence they keep this full page going.

    The head shots at first glance look like troupe of white staffers until you notice in the upper right corner two (used to be three) non-whites who are either light or printed light. I don’t know them in person so I can’t determine which is the case.

    This might not be so out of place in an inaugural edition, or to retain on a website, but to place a full page of staff pictures in each and every print issue for several years now, means displacing a pricey full-page add space they could sell instead. So that means that this staff-pictures page is very clearly “identity” advertising.

    Because the magazine advertises itself as for and by 30-somethings we are supposed to see that these are people in their 30s, which supposedly means no “old folk” need bother to read it, such as me, but then I check it out just to check it out. What I see is that clearly “old folk” with money put this up and are showcasing youngish faces to pretend this magazine is really created by a 30s demographic. That is the intended impression, but I just see someone going after an ad market.

    As a conscious advertisement the age-range identity was certainly intended. But, I have to wonder, whether in their blindness, they actually missed that the other thing they advertise is whiteness. Most of their stories are also about white folk with only a few black folk thrown in once in a while.

    I can’t believe I am the only person who has this reaction to “Ink.” Surely someone else has noticed by this time so I find it hard to believe that after the three or four years of Ink’s existence, they themselves are not aware of this. They don’t seem to be embarrassed by it. But I am.

  • Alfred Ingram

    Politico, like Romney seems to be comfortable around people like themselves. It’s interesting that Mr. Williams was originally hired as an editor, but was replaced by someone white once the spotlight was off. They talk a good game when it comes to neutrality, but the game on the field is different. In the end they seem to have the same problem with Williams that they have with the President. Black men acting independently and  making decisions makes them uncomfortable.