Five White former employees of Gannett Corporation are suing the news publisher, alleging that they were victims of a “Reverse Race Discrimination Policy”. The workers allege that diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives at Gannett resulted in White workers being passed up for promotion, being denied job offers, and being offered lower pay than similarly situated minority peers.
Steven Bradley, a former editor, alleges he was fired from his management job with Rochester, New York’s Democrat & Chronicle due to being White. He also alleges he was later denied a newsroom management position in Utica, New York due to the same Gannett diversity policy. Gannett has made a commitment “to better represent the demographics of the communities they cover” in their newsrooms “by 2025”, a commitment which Bradley and others allege excludes them.
The lawsuit itself details some egregious examples of discrimination which, at face value, sound horrible. In Mr. Bradley’s case, he alleges a woman of color “was selected…despite not having expressed interest or applying in the first instance, and despite having far less qualifications than Mr. Bradley, including no prior newsroom management experience.” In another example, plaintiff Noah Hiles alleges that, after being left as the sole sports writer following a resignation, he was told an open sports position “needed to be filled by a minority” — after helping to hire one of his own contacts, the new writer of color would make more than him.
However, when one examines the lawsuit, this all seems to go back to one directive.
The former Gannett employee that was tasked with overseeing talent recruitment and retention, Hollis Towns, informed Gannett managers that no more straight White males should be hired going forward.
Bradley et al. v. Gannett
If this allegation is true, this isn’t a function of any culture at Gannett — this is the result of a talent manager misunderstanding what “diversity” means. If you think that “diversity” is accomplished simply by “not hiring straight White males”, you have a very shallow view of what diversity is, and what diversity is meant to accomplish.
Diversity is meant to bring the maximum number of views to the table, the maximum number of perspectives, to be able to come up with better solutions than one’s competitors. Driving more value with more viewpoints. Diversity and equity initiatives, while also there to combat the effects of white-centered American history and its racist legacies, translate directly into value for the business – whether through more skillfully executed marketing campaigns, navigating expansion into new markets, or even delicate legal compliance issues. Having as many seats as the table will accommodate means that the maximum number of possibilities are considered, resulting in a better solution than a homogenous group would have devised on its own.
To think – “Want to increase diversity? Stop hiring White people” is not only discriminatory, it’s counterproductive.
Accomplishing this means thinking out of one’s own box. From a talent recruitment perspective, where were they recruiting? Was this person reaching out to Black journalist organizations? Were they out at the LGBTQ+ networking events? Did they send representatives to job fairs or expos catering to any marginalized community? The fact that, if Mr. Bradley’s Utica allegation is true, leadership had to approach a Black woman essentially randomly and offer her a position she had no interest in? Were any Black women in the recruitment pipeline to begin with at all? Are zero Black people applying for any of your positions?
To think – “Want to increase diversity? Simple – stop hiring White people” is not only discriminatory, it’s counterproductive. Are you still recruiting from the same pools? Using the same language and the same messaging on LinkedIn? Maybe these things might be impacting recruitment and retention? If your contact list is shorter than a text message, are the people that do respond the problem?
If this was the “diversity” directive – “no more White guys” – then it’s not “DEI policy” that’s the problem. The problem was whoever came up with that.
And now that they’re gone, Gannett can move onto new DEI policies, policies that better serve the company and all of its workers. If these allegations are true, I hope these workers get everything they ask for in their lawsuit – but the replacement for this policy should be just as robust at outreach to marginalized communities, and be just as “out there” for people of color, just not to the tune of “no White males”.
