In Her Words: ‘Ladies Leading’

The Black women who control television news

View in browser|nytimes.com Continue reading the main story July 10, 2021 Dr. Ava Thompson GreenwellAkilah Townsend for The New York Times By Patrice Peck "There are still lots of firsts, but not as much has changed as it should have, given that it's 2021." — Ava Thompson Greenwell, the author of "Ladies Leading: The Black Women Who Control Television News" Continue reading the main story ADVERTISEMENT Ava Thompson Greenwell had been writing the final chapter of her book "Ladies Leading: The Black Women Who Control Television News" when news broke of the police killing of George Floyd. How would television stations handle the cellphone footage of Mr. Floyd's final moments, she wondered. How often would the video be replayed on air? Who would report the story? And how many of those decisions would be made by Black women? Less than a year later, she was asking similar questions about who would cover the trial of Derek Chauvin, the former police officer accused of killing Mr. Floyd. And how it would be covered. Historically, African Americans have been more likely to be studied as subjects of the news, rather than shapers of the news. But Dr. Greenwell's book and podcast, "Ladies Leading," change the narrative, placing the spotlight on the experiences and contributions of some of the highest ranking Black women in television news management today. Continue reading the main story ADVERTISEMENT In anonymous interviews with 40 pioneering women, she pieces together intimate stories of racism, sexism, and misogynoir, or anti-Black misogyny, and spotlights their efforts to achieve more fair and balanced news coverage and better mentoring. With titles like executive producer and news director, these women greenlight (or block) the stories audiences see on television and online. They hire, fire and set the culture in their newsrooms. They develop growth strategies, and lead all aspects of journalistic decision-making. They may not be particularly famous or visible, but the women behind the camera "wield a lot of power," Dr. Greenwell explained in an interview. They're arguably more powerful than anchors and on-camera correspondents. Exactly how many Black women wield this power isn't known because most industry surveys and reports account for race and gender separately, but Dr. Greenwell estimates it's about a hundred. For context, last year, the percentage of African American news directors — the top editorial position in most newsrooms — hit 6.5 percent, which was a new, record high, according to the 2021 Radio Television Digital News Association survey. But, white people still represent four in five news directors, and among TV news general managers, 90 percent are white and 77 percent are men. Still, Dr. Greenwell says there has been progress, but it's been slow. In November 2020, CBS named Andrea Parquet-Taylor news director of the jointly-run KCBS-TV Channel 2 and KCAL-TV Channel 9 in Los Angeles. Last March, Adrienne Fairwell became the first Black general manager of Arizona PBS in its 60-year history. The following month, ABC News appointed Kimberly Godwin president, making her the first Black American to lead a major broadcast news division. "There are still lots of firsts," Dr. Greenwell said. But "not as much has changed as it should have, given that it's 2021." Prompted, in part, by this slow change, Dr. Greenwell spent nearly a decade tracking down and interviewing current and former managers across the U.S., using her own networks as a professor at Northwestern University Medill School of Journalism and as a former on-air reporter of eight years. She doesn't shy away from going deep on Black studies concepts, framing her questions through microaggression theory, double consciousness, respectability politics and intersectionality. Taken together, the interviews tell a story about the persistent workplace biases and harmful inequities these women experience both despite and because of their high-powered positions. But you also get the sense of how valuable those identities and experiences are when it comes to shaping the news. One leader, the first Black female manager at her station, recalled her general manager and boss flying "into a rage" when she suggested the station cover a Miss America contestant who was Black. "Why do we always have to cover Black people?" he said. In another story, a supervisor recalled how her boss didn't trust her to oversee and balance the editorial budget. "Either he would do them himself or he would ask a white man to look at my numbers," she said. "And the white guy and I were friends and had worked together a lot longer so the white guy would come to me and say: 'OK, just so you know, he wants me to check all your numbers. All your numbers are right, but he's asking me to check them.'" Dr. Greenwell's own experiences show up in the book too. She was reminded of incidents that she had considered resolved or had suppressed and forgotten. One particular instance that stood out: When she was 28, she landed a hard-to-get interview and a white male manager asked her whom she had slept with for access. "I can't believe he just said that," she remembered thinking. "But then I kept working." These kinds of experiences are significant in shaping the perspectives Black women bring to the table. Through what Dr. Greenwell calls a "second sight," these leaders spoke of recognizing and disrupting racial profiling and stereotypes; suppressing historical inequities like the domination of white girls and white women in missing people coverage; and prioritizing the perspectives of Black and other marginalized communities to balance out a history of negative stories. This "second sight" doubles as an unpaid education resulting in increased awareness among white colleagues. When covering Hurricane Katrina in 2005, one news manager prohibited her staff from describing the displaced, most of whom were Black, as "refugees," explaining that it was unfair. "We were not going to use that term to describe the taxpaying citizens of the United States of America who were victims of a hurricane," she said. "And I went on to say that, had that hurricane hit New Hampshire, they would not have thought once to refer to those people as refugees." Another news manager challenged a white male colleague's assumption that a young Black woman declared missing by the local sheriff's department had probably run away. "If she's been missing longer than 24 hours and they think that she's missing, then who are we to say she's a runaway?" she said. "We do every other missing woman's story there is. We're doing this one." While working on the book, Dr. Greenwell found patterns in experiences and language that Black women professional leaders encountered consistently like FOMM, or fear of making a mistake, and Intellectual Theft Syndrome. Read more about those here. Subscribe Today We hope you've enjoyed this newsletter, which is made possible through subscriber support. Subscribe to The New York Times with this special offer. What else is happening Here are three articles from The Times you may have missed. Zaila Avant-garde, 14, from New Orleans, Louisiana, won the 2021 Scripps National Spelling Bee.Joe Skipper/Reuters "M-U-R-R-A-Y-A" Zaila Avant-garde, a 14-year-old from Harvey, La., became the first Black American to win the Scripps National Spelling Bee in almost 100 years of contests. [Read the story] "It's completely inverting the legal system." People across the country may soon be able to sue abortion clinics, doctors and anyone helping a woman get an abortion in Texas, under a new state law. [Read the story] "I'm a visitor here myself." Patricia Marroquin Norby is bringing a Native American perspective to the Met. [Read the story] In Her Words is edited by Francesca Donner. Our art director is Catherine Gilmore-Barnes, and our photo editor is Maura Foley. Did someone forward you this email? Sign up here to get future installments. Write to us at inherwords@nytimes.com. Follow us on Instagram at @nytgender. Continue reading the main story Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance. You received this email because you signed up for In Her Words from The New York Times. To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences. Subscribe to The TimesGet The New York Times app Connect with us on: Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

On Politics: A crucial test is coming for Biden’s climate agenda

We spoke with the climate reporter Coral Davenport about the obstacles the president faces.

View in browser|nytimes.com Continue reading the main story July 8, 2021 By Maggie Astor People protested the use of fossil fuels outside the Capitol in Washington last month.Stefani Reynolds for The New York Times Climate change is everywhere you look: in the staggering heat wave that hit the Pacific Northwest last week, killing more than 150 people; in the Western wildfire season that started early this year and is likely to be severe; in the weather throughout June, which was the hottest on record in North America; and even at summer camps where children are having "flashlight campfires" instead of the real thing. President Biden took office with a promise to treat the climate crisis with far more urgency than his predecessor. During the campaign, he released a $2 trillion plan calling for an emissions-free power sector by 2035 and for the United States to reach net-zero planet-warming emissions by 2050. But whether the U.S. meets those goals could depend on whether Democrats in Congress are able to unite around a big enough version of an infrastructure bill. To get a better sense of where Biden's climate agenda stands, I asked Coral Davenport, a climate reporter for The Times, to answer a few questions. Hi, Coral. President Biden took office with a $2 trillion climate plan, but his first big legislative pushes have focused elsewhere. What steps has he taken on climate so far? In his first two weeks in office, Biden signed a series of executive orders setting in motion a slew of federal policies on climate change. On his first day, he rejoined the United States to the Paris climate agreement, from which President Donald Trump had withdrawn, and canceled the permit for the Keystone XL pipeline, which would have carried heavily polluting oil from tar sands in Canada. He then directed federal agencies to begin the process of reinstating and strengthening Obama-era climate policies that Trump had rolled back. The White House has also begun what it calls an "all-of-government" approach — essentially directing every agency, from the Treasury to the Pentagon, to rapidly push policies focused on tackling climate change wherever they can. For example, it has ordered government financial officials to report the risk that climate change poses to federal assets and tax revenue. Continue reading the main story ADVERTISEMENT The administration has taken several steps to slow fossil fuel development and increase the development of renewable energy. Biden has suspended new leases to drill for oil and gas on public lands pending a review of the program, but has moved forward with steps that would open up the east and west coasts to the nation's first large-scale offshore wind farms. Congress has also begun to take some action. This spring, it reinstated an Obama-era rule on methane, a powerful planet-warming pollutant that leaks from oil and gas drilling wells. And the framework for a bipartisan infrastructure deal includes $15 billion for electric vehicle charging stations and electrification of buses — more than the federal government has ever spent on such programs, but a sliver of what Biden envisioned in his campaign pledges. Democrats are separately crafting another bill, magnitudes larger than the first, that they plan to advance on a party-line vote. Biden wants that bill to include hundreds of billions of dollars to accelerate a national transition to electric vehicles, as well as a mandate that electric utilities generate a majority of their power from zero-carbon sources within the next decade. Both of those proposals would need support from every Democratic senator, which is far from guaranteed. Are you expecting Biden to announce additional climate actions in the near future? The administration is expected to announce in July or August that it will largely reinstate Obama-era regulations on pollution from vehicle tailpipes. That's a significant step — vehicles are the nation's largest source of climate-warming emissions — but the rules, which would probably go into effect next year, would last only through 2026. Continue reading the main story ADVERTISEMENT At the same time, the administration is expected to begin work on new rules that would go out to 2030 or 2032. If — and this is a big if — those rules are extremely tough and ambitious, they could force automakers to begin a rapid transition away from fossil-fuel powered cars and toward a near-term future in which the vast majority of cars sold in America are electric. But getting political support will be tough. Auto unions and automakers are wary of such a rapid, government-mandated shift. Similarly, while Congress reinstated the rule on methane pollution from new oil and gas wells, the Environmental Protection Agency is working on a new rule that would restrict such pollution from existing oil and gas wells — a step that would capture many of the most potent greenhouse gas leaks — and possibly shut down some oil and gas producers. How much of a dent would those actions make in meeting the 2035 and 2050 deadlines? If the final infrastructure package includes a robust clean electricity standard that would eventually force out the use of fossil fuels to power electric plants, and if it includes hundreds of billions of dollars for electric vehicle infrastructure and tax credits for purchasers of electric vehicles, that could rapidly reduce emissions from vehicles and power plants, the nation's top two sources of greenhouse pollution. Continue reading the main story ADVERTISEMENT It could also make it easier for Biden to gain support for going even further — if the federal government has already spent heavily on building electric vehicle infrastructure, it could ease the way politically for it to create tough standards essentially requiring an increase in electric vehicle sales. If that rule is enacted on top of a climate-centered infrastructure package, most experts say Biden could probably get most of the way toward his promised emissions cuts. How do climate activists feel about what the administration has done so far? Climate activists have been pleased with Biden's rhetoric but displeased that they haven't seen more concrete action. They fear that robust climate measures could be removed from the second infrastructure bill, which would probably leave them on the cutting room floor for the foreseeable future, as Republicans could gain majorities in Congress in the 2022 midterms. Activists have been pushing progressive lawmakers to tell the president "No climate, no deal" — essentially, that if the most ambitious climate initiatives get left out of the infrastructure package, they won't vote for it. Researchers said yesterday that the recent heat wave in the Pacific Northwest would have been "virtually impossible" without climate change, and the West is facing an early and potentially devastating fire season. Has the immediacy and visibility of these effects increased the sense of urgency within the administration? Biden has absolutely been using the links between climate change and extreme weather to push his agenda. Speaking yesterday in Illinois, he said: "In Illinois, farmers downstate are dealing with more frequent droughts. And two weeks ago, just south of here, you just had a nearly unprecedented tornado. We can't wait any longer to deal with the climate crisis. We see it with our own eyes, and it's time to act." In Michigan, pro-impeachment House Republicans face voters' wrath. By Jonathan Weisman GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. — Representative Peter Meijer cites Gerald Ford as his inspiration these days, not because the former president held his House seat for 24 years or because his name is all over this city, but because in Ford, the freshman congressman sees virtues lost to his political party. Ford took control after a president resigned rather than be impeached for abusing his power in an attempt to manipulate the outcome of an election. "It was a period of turmoil," said Meijer, who was one of 10 Republicans who voted to impeach former President Donald Trump for inciting the Capitol riot. Ford's greatest asset, he added, was "offering — this word is becoming too loaded of late — a sense of morals, moral leadership, a sense of value and centering decency and humility." "Sometimes when you're surrounded by cacophony, it helps to have someone sitting there who isn't adding another screaming voice onto the pile," Meijer added. Six months after the Capitol attack and 53 miles southeast of Grand Rapids, on John Parish's farm in the hamlet of Vermontville, Meijer's problems sat on folding chairs on the Fourth of July. They ate hot dogs, listened to bellicose speakers and espoused their own beliefs that reflected how, even at age 33, Meijer may represent the Republican Party's past more than its future. The stars of the "Festival of Truth" on Sunday were adding their screaming voices onto the pile, and the 100 or so West Michiganders in the audience were enthusiastically soaking it up. Many of them inhabited an alternative reality in which Trump was re-elected and their votes were stolen. "God is forgiving, and — I don't know — we're forgiving people," Geri Nichols, 79, of nearby Hastings, said as she spoke of her disappointment in Meijer. "But he did wrong. He didn't support our president like he should have." For all its political eccentricities, Michigan is not unique. Dozens of congressional candidates planning challenges next year are promoting Trump's false election claims. But Western Michigan does have one distinction: It is home to two of the 10 House Republicans who voted to impeach Trump. The other one, Representative Fred Upton, finds himself in similar political straits to Meijer. Both will face multiple primary challengers next year who accuse them of disloyalty — or worse, treason — for holding Trump responsible for Jan. 6. Read the full article. Subscribe Today We hope you've enjoyed this newsletter, which is made possible through subscriber support. Subscribe to The New York Times with this special offer. RECOMMENDED READING Pool photo by Saul Loeb Spy Agencies Turn to Scientists as They Wrestle With Mysteries American intelligence agencies are tapping outside expertise as they wrestle with mysteries like the coronavirus and U.F.O.s that are as much about science as they are about espionage. By Julian E. Barnes Alyssa Schukar for The New York Times The Russia Inquiry Ended a Democratic Lobbyist's Career. He Wants It Back. Tony Podesta turned to art dealing after becoming ensnared in the Trump-Russia scandal. With his friends running Washington, he is eying a return to lobbying. By Kenneth P. Vogel Were you forwarded this newsletter? Sign up here to get it delivered to your inbox. Is there anything you think we're missing? Anything you want to see more of? We'd love to hear from you. Email us at onpolitics@nytimes.com. Continue reading the main story Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance. You received this email because you signed up for On Politics With Lisa Lerer from The New York Times. To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences. Subscribe to The TimesGet The New York Times app Connect with us on: Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018