Journalists of color were right about Trump. Why didn't we listen?
Why America's newsrooms must employ more minority writers
Jamelle Bouie tried to tell us. So did Nikole Hannah-Jones. Jelani Cobb spoke up, as did Vann Newkirk II, Adam Serwer, and Jenée Desmond-Harris.
Back in 2016, these journalists of color all used their platforms to send a warning about the racist undertones of Donald Trump's presidential candidacy. All too often these writers were dismissed as alarmists, or as race-obsessed practitioners of "identity politics." But as the events in Pittsburgh last weekend and those in Louisville last week have demonstrated, these writers were absolutely right.
This country needs more minority journalists in its newsrooms. And we fellow Americans need to do a better job of listening to them.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
Is this really an issue? After all, the writers I've named here work or have worked for places like The New York Times, Slate, The New Yorker, and The Atlantic — all of them prestige publications. Most of them have widespread followings on social media. Hannah-Jones was named a MacArthur Genius in 2017.
But you don't have to look much beyond the surface to detect a real problem with minority representation in newsrooms. A 2017 survey showed that just one in six American newsroom employees are racial minorities — and the situation is even worse for women of color. That's not good enough: America needs these voices. Journalists of color can and often do point out America's blind spots.
Paging through Bouie's 2015 and 2016 dispatches for Slate, one is struck by their stubborn prescience, informed by a deep familiarity with this country's history and a refusal to view that history through rose-colored glasses.
"We can't just dismiss Trump as entertainment," Bouie wrote in 2015, when many pundits were doing just that. Like segregationist politician George Wallace, Bouie wrote, "Trump is an eruption of the ugliest forces in American life, at turns authoritarian, like the Louisiana populist Huey Long, or outright fascistic, like the Second Ku Klux Klan. And like all of the above, he's brought the background prejudice of American life to the forefront of our politics, and opened the door to even worse rhetoric and action."
In the hours after the 2016 election that gave Trump the White House, Bouie was even more blunt: "I see a man who empowered white nationalists and won."
Cobb, writing in The New Yorker on the eve of the election, was similarly uncompromising: "The problem of Trump is not simply that his opinions far exceed his knowledge; it's that what he does know is so hostile to democracy, not only in the Republican Party or the United States but in the world." Having now watched Trump make nice with dictators ranging from Vladimir Putin to Rodrigo Duterte in the Philippines, who can now doubt it?
Perhaps because of their racial backgrounds, these journalists haven't necessarily been inclined toward a gauzy view of America's past, and they haven't been immersed in the idea of American exceptionalism the way many of their white counterparts have. As a result, they've often been able to view and describe events with greater clarity than many of their colleagues.
And research since the election has borne out the reporting and commentary of these journalists, debunking the idea that "economic anxiety" powered Trump's victory, and offering evidence that Republican voters in 2016 were instead motivated primarily by the ugly forces of racism and sexism. That's not a message that has often been welcomed in mainstream journalism.
"Donald Trump won the thing by appealing to white voters, and running an unabashed campaign of bigotry, racism, xenophobia, and other odds and ends of nastiness," Newkirk wrote after the election, reflecting on his family's history of dealing with racism. "This is who we are."
Why didn't we heed the warnings of minority journalists?
Part of the problem, surely, is that race is complicated: Some of Trump's voters did indeed support Barack Obama during the previous two elections. Some of it was about persuasion: It's hard to win the support of white voters when you're calling them racist. And some of it was simply strategic: Many observers were convinced after 2016 that white working class voters were the key to any election victory, and urged Democrats to play down the concerns of racial minorities to make the appeal.
But the wake-up calls from minority journalists have only become more prescient as time marches on. The problems of Trump's presidency don't go away if you try to ignore them, and these journalists have, by and large, refused to do any ignoring.
Representation matters. It's incumbent upon editors to do more to make sure their newsrooms look like their communities. It's up to us in the audience to make sure that we hear and encourage the minority journalists already being published. They were right about Trump. If only we'd listened.
Editor's note: This article has been slightly revised since it was first published.
Create an account with the same email registered to your subscription to unlock access.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Joel Mathis is a freelance writer who has spent nine years as a syndicated columnist, co-writing the RedBlueAmerica column as the liberal half of a point-counterpoint duo. His work also regularly appears in National Geographic, The Kansas City Star and Heatmap News. His awards include best online commentary at the Online News Association and (twice) at the City and Regional Magazine Association.
-
'Make legal immigration a more plausible option'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By Harold Maass, The Week US Published
-
LA-to-Las Vegas high-speed rail line breaks ground
Speed Read The railway will be ready as soon as 2028
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
Israel's military intelligence chief resigns
Speed Read Maj. Gen. Aharon Haliva is the first leader to quit for failing to prevent the Hamas attack in October
By Justin Klawans, The Week US Published
-
Arizona court reinstates 1864 abortion ban
Speed Read The law makes all abortions illegal in the state except to save the mother's life
By Rafi Schwartz, The Week US Published
-
Trump, billions richer, is selling Bibles
Speed Read The former president is hawking a $60 "God Bless the USA Bible"
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
The debate about Biden's age and mental fitness
In Depth Some critics argue Biden is too old to run again. Does the argument have merit?
By Grayson Quay Published
-
How would a second Trump presidency affect Britain?
Today's Big Question Re-election of Republican frontrunner could threaten UK security, warns former head of secret service
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
'Rwanda plan is less a deterrent and more a bluff'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By The Week UK Published
-
Henry Kissinger dies aged 100: a complicated legacy?
Talking Point Top US diplomat and Nobel Peace Prize winner remembered as both foreign policy genius and war criminal
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Last updated
-
Trump’s rhetoric: a shift to 'straight-up Nazi talk'
Why everyone's talking about Would-be president's sinister language is backed by an incendiary policy agenda, say commentators
By The Week UK Published
-
More covfefe: is the world ready for a second Donald Trump presidency?
Today's Big Question Republican's re-election would be a 'nightmare' scenario for Europe, Ukraine and the West
By Sorcha Bradley, The Week UK Published