Conclusion
The low number of responses to both surveys makes it difficult to generalize these findings to newsrooms throughout the state, particularly given the concentration of responses to urban areas in North Carolina. However, despite the low number of responses to both surveys, some findings from this study stand out and reflect data from previous studies.
First, the demographic data from both surveys is in line with previous research, which gives us reason to expect that future iterations of the survey could provide richer information about newsroom diversity with increased responses. About 70% of staff in newsrooms that responded to our organizational survey were identified as white. This is similar to San Diego SPJ’s finding that approximately 70% of journalists in that city’s newsrooms were white, the only subnational study for which the research team could find data. It is also in line with RTDNA’s finding that 72% of staff at TV stations were white. NLA’s survey of print and digital newsrooms and RTDNA’s survey of radio stations both give higher estimates, which indicates that future versions of our survey might take publication platforms into account more fully.
The individual survey also saw results that are in line with some previous research. Just over three-quarters (77%) of respondents to our individual survey identified as white, similar to the 75% of journalists in Pew’s June 2022 study but lower than the 87% of journalists in Northwestern’s earlier study of attitudes towards diversity initiatives in newsrooms.
There is little data collected about journalists with disabilities, so we do not have data to compare to the 30% of individual survey respondents who identify as having a disability. However, we do know that there is a lack of resources in supporting journalists with a disability, reflected here in the very few who have requested accommodations for their disability. This is an area not only for more research but for much more support and intervention.
Second, when compared to Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates, salary ranges reported by individual survey respondents seem slightly higher. We believe this is a reflection of a response pool that is heavily urban. However, more than 40% of individual survey respondents say they earn a salary below $50,000, below the minimum needed to make ends meet in North Carolina.
In addition, nearly 70% of respondents began their current newsroom job within the past three years. Taken together, this is potentially reflective of journalists’ feelings about the financial challenges faced by newsrooms and their sense of job security. Pew found that 57% of journalists surveyed did not have a pay increase in the past year, and 70% indicated that their newsroom is not growing.
While our analysis indicates high levels of inclusion among individual survey respondents, an analysis of the demographics did not show any differences across racial groups. However, future iterations of this survey should continue to explore differences in newsroom inclusion across racial groups, especially if response rates improve.
Limitations and Recommendations for Future Research
As mentioned above, the primary limitation of this report is that the results cannot be generalized and should only be viewed as applicable to those who responded to the survey. Not only were response rates low, but responses to both surveys were heavily concentrated in urban areas in the state.
The concentration of responses from metro newsrooms, particularly in the central region of the state, is likely a reflection of the network effect we had hoped would increase responses statewide. The recruitment included outreach via social media, email, and newsletters but also included direct outreach to the networks of the research team and the analyst panel. We did see an increase in responses, particularly to the individual survey, after this direct outreach, but recruitment for future versions of this survey may need to include pre-minders and previews of the survey.
In future iterations of this study, we would look to convene a panel of analysts from diverse backgrounds before distributing the survey. We would also design different organizational surveys in order to better fit newsrooms of different types, such as a separate survey for student media, since it was difficult for those organizations to fill out our survey due to their particular structures. In addition, we would offer a version of the survey translated into Spanish, a shortcoming identified by two members of our panel.
We decided to do this study in spite of unsuccessful attempts to measure diversity in newsrooms at a national level. The organizational survey saw a response rate of about 10%, similar to both the NLA diversity survey and the Colorado Media project survey. While other surveys have had higher response rates from news organizations, it appears that most newsrooms are unlikely to participate in such surveys. In addition, although our response rate for the individual survey was not much higher than our organizational survey, limits on the data that newsrooms keep and are prepared to release make a focus on surveying individuals potentially more fruitful for measuring and tracking diversity in newsrooms.
Despite the limitations on the conclusions we can draw from these surveys, this study provides a foundation for understanding diversity in North Carolina’s newsrooms and for building an equitable and sustainable future for local news.