A FORMER CNN anchor is suing the cable news network for discrimination. Marina Kolbe says that CNN released her because she was a 42-year old white woman.Her lawyer, according to the Fulton County Daily Report, claims that CNN, "embarked on a plan to replace its white anchors with on-air talent who were younger or who were ethnic and racial minorities."
According to the article, Internal CNN memos suggest that, beginning in 1999, in some cases a job candidate's race and ethnicity were key factors in hiring on-air talent.
One memo also revealed a push by CNN to hire "younger, more attractive anchors" to draw younger audiences in what was fast becoming a highly competitive 24-hour news environment.
Is having a diverse staff a good or bad thing? Shouldn't the staff be representative of the viewing public? Doesn't a diverse staff only introduce a diversity of thoughts and ideas?
Or should the best candidates get the jobs regardless of their age, ethnicity, gender, race, religion, whatever?
Shouldn't TV just be populated by really good looking people anyway?
And here's an interesting article about Gerald Boyd, the pioneering African-American newsman whose journalism legacy was tainted by the Jayson Blair debacle at the New York Times.
8 comments:
I think this blog should be complied by someone who is younger and more attractive.
I think if you complain you should spell properly and leave your name.
Oh, snap!
- George (the teacher who thanks you for visiting!)
What is all this about being younger and more attractive, anyway? I mean, there's no accounting for taste, right?
Either way, I'm interested to see whether or not it's ruled that CNN is guilty of discrimination, because from what I know at this point, it sort of looks like they are. I think it's a little bit excessive that Kolbe is asking for extra monetary damages for "pain, suffering and emotional distress," though. I always love when people ask for money because their feelings were hurt.
It is ridiculous on CNN's part, though, if they did not renew her contract based solely on the fact that she was a 42-year old white woman. Forty-two isn't even that old, and she looks younger.
I think people should be hired based on their credentials and talent, not on how they look or whether they speak with an accent (what a random thing to look for in an employee).
This makes me wonder if CNN would hire a minority who is "competent but not a star," as they described Kolbe to be, over someone who is not a minority, but is a "star." It remains to be seen if this diversity thing is more important to CNN than good journalism. While diversity is important, I feel that having good journalists, regardless of age, race or whether or not they are attractive and speak with accents, should be a news organization's number one concern. I would rather watch a quality newscast without a diverse staff than a mediocre one with staff from around the world, but that's just me.
It's definitely fair game for a private network to hire and fire whoever they please (given a few overlooked boundaries, of course). I don't think that they should create quote systems or anything, but I obviously advocate diversity in the newsroom.
I would like to believe that the best journalists get the best jobs but we all know it doesn't always roll like that. I think that journalists should be judged on capability alone but the fact of the matter is, the playing field is still uneven.
Poverty and race are constantly oppressing the most brilliant minds and many of them do not get through college--a sort of basic requirement for journalism jobs.
I'm very on the fence of the matter. I feel that maybe she just will not take responsibility for the fact that someone was better than her, or maybe not.
I don't really know. I would like to, though.
There are reasons for anti-discrimination acts. They protect people from being not hired for jobs based on age or ethnicity and I think that is a necessary law. However, these laws should not and apparently, do not apply to professions where your appearance is at stake. Isn't acting a profession where all of your success rides on your race, age, and overall appearance? Then hell, we could have all kinds of under qualified, unattractive, old people in blockbuster movies. Yes, it's unfortunate that she lost her job, but she had her run and I'm sure she has more than enough to get by. Being a news reader is essentially being an actor. And sadly, credentials don't matter if you're an old woman in America. People won't watch.(I'm writing this post assuming that she doesn't write stories, but reads them.) Networks cannot favor these politically correct laws while letting their ratings drop. As for the minority issue, it just brings something new to the table because almost every newscast I watch, the anchor is white. If CNN had the exact same material and coverage as another network, I'd probably watch the one with an anchor who's a little more easy on the eyes. And I'm sure others would agree.
right..?
Affirmative action, which is ultimately giving an unfair advantage to a minority, or "discriminating" againts the majority is illegal, is it not? Is this the same as that? If they didn't want to renew her contract to hire younger, more attractive people, isn't that in their hands? Aren't they doing it for variety's sake anyway? Hopefully they younger people will be just as qualified as this woman is, maybe thats all we can hope for.
Rayan
As much as it annoys me that they would rather have younger employees, I think that they have the choice since they own the company. It makes sense for them to want to be more racially diverse too. Maybe they should just not be so forthright about it to the employees that are being fired.
I say enough with this diversity thing. Temple's a "diverse" campus...and it seems worse off than if it wasnt. I'm no racist, but we shouldnt push other people to work/get educated at places just because they are more "diverse".
I think CNN has always been corrupt and this accentuates my point. "Diversity" doesn't mean you fire anyone because they make the atmosphere 'less diverse,' it means you should give all races an equal chance.
Post a Comment