Essence Magazine’s recent hire of a white fashion director is the latest in a series of newsworthy topics about race. From the Shirley Sherrod debacle to Senator Jim Webb’s Wall Street Journal article advocating for the elimination of affirmative action programs, America is struggling to talk about race constructively. Essence’s hiring of Elliana Placas, who has been working at the magazine for the last 6 months, reignites the conversation about the role of race in hiring practices and the expectation that black owned or targeted businesses will act as equalizers.
I’ve read a few differing opinions on Essence Magazine‘s decision, and I am sensitive to the fact that people support and oppose the decision for a variety of historical, social, personal, and sentimental reasons. I think Mark Anthony Neal does a great job of capturing those issues here. The most prominent argument in support of Ms. Placas’s hiring has been the magazine’s own argument that essentially implies that companies should pick the “best person for the job” and that race shouldn’t be a determining factor. While I’m not surprised to hear such an argument in a country like America that fancies itself a meritocracy, I would be remiss if I didn’t point out that these matters aren’t quite that simple.
America has always struggled issues of inequality. We’ve made much progress but in many cases the consequences of remaining bias is hidden behind the achievements of a relative few. We all carry the burden of reconciling this dynamic; however, black-owned or targeted businesses bear a special responsibility to be cognitive of these issues. Before I go further, I want to note that it’s important to understand that these types of considerations aren’t limited to racial minorities.
For example, weeks ago the web publication Jezebel posted an article about sexism on the set of the Daily Show. The article included first hand accounts from women who’d worked on the show stating that it’s hard for women to be hired on the show, harder for them to keep the job, and near impossible to get an on-air role. The article was met with criticism most notably from the 39 or 40 women who work on the show. The Daily Show women wrote a letter defending the show and its host Jon Stewart with the crux of the point being that the show is hard for everyone, comedy is a rough business, and still, women make up 40% of the show’s staff.
The most poignant response to the Daily Show story came from the show’s co-creator Madeline Smithberg who pointed out that the comedy industry is so biased against women that a disproportionate amount of women are already eliminated from the pool before they could even gain the necessary experience to be hired on such a show. The women’s present experience may not be sexist, but sexism has already colored the circumstances.
I think what many women are looking for, and deserve, is some sort of equalizer but there’s none in place. I think this point is relevant to Essence as well. The fashion industry is harder for blacks than whites to navigate. Though Essence may have chosen the “best candidate for the job,” by basing its decision on skill alone the magazine contributes to the overarching problem (or at least maintains the status quo) by refusing to play an equalizing role. The fact that a white woman is considered to be the best qualified fashion director for a fashion magazine geared toward black women says more about the makeup of the pool of candidates and the magazine’s agenda than it does about Ms. Placas’s relative skill.
In the whole of America there are great many factions of people (mostly white men due to their historical advantage) that work feverishly to keep their associates protected and to increase the chances that they can create opportunities for each other in the future. For black owned or targeted businesses to choose not to employ some targeted favoritism to augment their largely meritocratic practices is perplexing. By virtue, we expect black businesses to look beyond the present and consider both the historical implications of their hiring decisions as well as the potential outcome.
In addition to considering the present benefits of hiring Ms. Placas, Essence should also consider the future result e.g. whether or not hiring a white woman would result in more or less opportunities for black women going forward. I think a strong argument could be made that not only does Ms. Placas’s hiring take an opportunity away from a black woman in the present, but she is probably also less likely than a black fashion director to use Essence as stepping stone to later create more opportunities for black women. But as Danielle Belton points out over at the Black Snob, Essence Magazine is no longer black-owned and doesn’t exist in a vacuum. Still, a black-focused fashion magazine’s decision to install a white person as its fashion director is both symptomatic and consequential.
Essence, Fashion, Flawed Articles, Michelle Obama
