Connect with NYTMetro
Friday, May 24, 2013
Wednesday, May 15, 2013
The RACIST News Media of Philadelphia
This story of the DJ shot on South Street while entering his apartment after a gig has taken a new turn. Turns out our boy wasn't just an innocent victim - he was a drug dealer. Most likely supplying the 2 people that shot him. Police found a sizable quantity of weed and blow in his apartment, which notably he had access to via the Haagan Daz ice cream shop below.
Initially it was reported that he was found behind the counter of the ice cream shop while bringing his DJ equipment home from a gig at 3:30am. And that's still the 'story'. But that's unlikely the story.
More than likely, he was the supplier to the young guys who shot him. Let's re-think this scenario: perhaps instead of being an innocent victim, he was the end result of a drug deal gone bad. Or the shooters, who had likely dealt with him before, knew he had quantities of drugs and money in his apartment, snuggled on tony South Street in Society Hill. They came to buy, or to rob, or both, something went wrong during the robbery of the drug dealer, and now he's dead.
Philly Confidential went to great pains to try to neutralize the drug aspect of the story, likely because he was white. Had this been a black drug dealer, all the bloggers would have had a field day with stories of more urban street violence cause by drugs, and black-on-black crime. Instead, they harbored a poor hard working fella story that seems to apply to every white thug out there, even when the evidence so far points to the obvious, that he was nothing more that part of the problem with street crime driven by drug dealing. So DJ Fenix, FUCK YOU!! ROT IN HELL!! He got what he deserved.
Note they had no problem displaying this pic of the alleged shooter, an 18 year-old from the hard streets of Southwest Philly. To be sure, such fellas would never get an apartment on South Street no matter what their credentials.
And the owners of the Haagen Das should be investigated; this drug thug had open access through the store to his apartment. You mean to tell me they didn't know he was a drug dealer? Not on your life. Perhaps they sell more than ice cream out of that store.....
Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/dncrime/Southwest-Philadelphia-charged-in-South-Street-murder.html#MpESuSsPUExRgltG.99
On the other hand, here's how ABC's Channel 6 in Philadelphia reported the story on the same day (note how they have a lot more information on the drugs, motive, and a fight caught on camera between the drug dealer and the shooters just before):
Action News
Josephe Murray, 18, of the 5700 block of Reedland Street, was arrested on Wednesday and charged with murder and robbery.
Tom Watson, 36, known as DJ Fenix, was shot and killed at the Haagen-Dazs ice cream shop at 242 South Street around 3:45 a.m. Saturday. Watson's apartment was in the same building.
On Monday, police sources told Action News they found a large amount of cocaine and marijuana in his apartment.
Those sources believe Watson would sell drugs at his performances.
Police sources say they also believe Watson was targeted because of the drugs, because his attackers made no effort to steal his music equipment.
In addition, police sources say, they have surveillance video of the attack and the killers were not wearing masks.
The video shows Watson fighting with his attackers, police sources say, before he was shot multiple times.
Watson worked as a DJ at Tavern 222.
It was not immediately known if any more arrests would be made in this case.
Initially it was reported that he was found behind the counter of the ice cream shop while bringing his DJ equipment home from a gig at 3:30am. And that's still the 'story'. But that's unlikely the story.
More than likely, he was the supplier to the young guys who shot him. Let's re-think this scenario: perhaps instead of being an innocent victim, he was the end result of a drug deal gone bad. Or the shooters, who had likely dealt with him before, knew he had quantities of drugs and money in his apartment, snuggled on tony South Street in Society Hill. They came to buy, or to rob, or both, something went wrong during the robbery of the drug dealer, and now he's dead.
Philly Confidential went to great pains to try to neutralize the drug aspect of the story, likely because he was white. Had this been a black drug dealer, all the bloggers would have had a field day with stories of more urban street violence cause by drugs, and black-on-black crime. Instead, they harbored a poor hard working fella story that seems to apply to every white thug out there, even when the evidence so far points to the obvious, that he was nothing more that part of the problem with street crime driven by drug dealing. So DJ Fenix, FUCK YOU!! ROT IN HELL!! He got what he deserved.
Note they had no problem displaying this pic of the alleged shooter, an 18 year-old from the hard streets of Southwest Philly. To be sure, such fellas would never get an apartment on South Street no matter what their credentials.
And the owners of the Haagen Das should be investigated; this drug thug had open access through the store to his apartment. You mean to tell me they didn't know he was a drug dealer? Not on your life. Perhaps they sell more than ice cream out of that store.....
Southwest Philly man charged in South Street murder
Josephe Murray, 18, of Reedland Street near 58th
An 18-year-old man has been charged in the murder of a popular disc jockey on South Street, while a second suspect remains at-large.
Police arrested Josephe Murray, of Reedland Street near 58th, on Wednesday. Murray and an accomplice fatally shot Tom Watson, 36, during a robbery as Watson entered his apartment on South Street near 3rd above the Haagen Dazs ice-cream store Saturday, police said.
Watson's body was found behind the counter in the ice-cream store by a friend who had dropped him off, friends said. Medics pronounced him dead at the scene at 3:37 a.m.
Watson performed at local clubs as DJ Fenicx and was a cook at Tavern 222 on South Street, according to friends.
A police source said investigators recovered an undisclosed amount of cocaine and marijuana in Watson's apartment. The source said the drugs appeared to be a larger amount than for personal consumption, but said there is no indication Watson was selling the drugs. Police have not said whether the drugs played any role in his murder.
Murray is charged with murder, robbery and related offenses. Police are still searching for a second suspect.
Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/dncrime/Southwest-Philadelphia-charged-in-South-Street-murder.html#MpESuSsPUExRgltG.99
On the other hand, here's how ABC's Channel 6 in Philadelphia reported the story on the same day (note how they have a lot more information on the drugs, motive, and a fight caught on camera between the drug dealer and the shooters just before):
Suspect in South Philadelphia DJ murder charged, identified
Wednesday, May 15, 2013
Josephe Murray and Tom Watson
Action News
SOUTH PHILADELPHIA - May 15, 2013 (WPVI) -- Police have arrested and charged a man with the murder of a DJ in South Philadelphia.
Josephe Murray, 18, of the 5700 block of Reedland Street, was arrested on Wednesday and charged with murder and robbery.
Tom Watson, 36, known as DJ Fenix, was shot and killed at the Haagen-Dazs ice cream shop at 242 South Street around 3:45 a.m. Saturday. Watson's apartment was in the same building.
On Monday, police sources told Action News they found a large amount of cocaine and marijuana in his apartment.
Those sources believe Watson would sell drugs at his performances.
Police sources say they also believe Watson was targeted because of the drugs, because his attackers made no effort to steal his music equipment.
In addition, police sources say, they have surveillance video of the attack and the killers were not wearing masks.
The video shows Watson fighting with his attackers, police sources say, before he was shot multiple times.
Watson worked as a DJ at Tavern 222.
It was not immediately known if any more arrests would be made in this case.
(Copyright ©2013 WPVI-TV/DT. All Rights Reserved.)
Thursday, May 9, 2013
HOUSING DISCRIMINATION RUNNING RAMPANT IN THE MOST "LIBERAL" CITY IN AMERICA
New Bill Seeks to Curb Discrimination by Co-op Boards
By MIREYA NAVARRO
Published: May 9, 2013
Real estate agents in New York City have long complained that co-op boards mistreat potential buyers they do not like. The boards sit on applications and never make a decision. If they turn down an applicant, they never explain why. And sometimes, the agents suspect, rejections are based on an applicant’s race or national origin.
Now, a bill pending before the City Council would require co-op board members to sign a statement saying that they did not discriminate on the basis of race and other criteria, in violation of fair housing laws, when turning down an applicant.
The bill also includes a provision that for the first time would impose a 45-day deadline on boards to accept or deny an application. It is intended to prevent the use of delays or nonresponses as a backdoor way to discriminate, according to the measure’s sponsor, Councilman Lewis A. Fidler, a Brooklyn Democrat.
Mr. Fidler said that when he was a lawyer in Brooklyn he often represented buyers who suspected discriminatory treatment.
“I absolutely won’t accept that it’s not a problem,” he said. “This is not always a white-black, gay-straight thing. In the community I was in, they discriminated against Russian-Americans.”
Mr. Fidler’s proposal is a watered-down version of several anti-discrimination bills, introduced as far back as 2004, that have met with stiff opposition from real estate groups. Those bills, civil rights advocates and some real estate brokers say, went farther in trying to curb discrimination by forcing boards to state their reasons for rejecting an applicant.
The new bill has some support in the Council, but has not been endorsed by Christine C. Quinn, the Council speaker and a Democratic candidate for mayor.
Ms. Quinn’s aides declined to comment on the bill, other than to say that she was reviewing it.
Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg opposes the bill for creating “burdensome record-keeping” and “additional impediments to private real estate transactions,” according to a statement from the mayor’s office.
Representatives of co-op groups have sought to block the new measure, asserting that it is unnecessary, would invite lawsuits and would discourage co-op residents from serving on boards. They said that instances of discrimination were aberrations, and that the main reason they rejected applicants was financial — the candidate had not shown enough resources to afford to live in the co-op.
Board members also said they regularly came across instances of applicants lying.
Stuart M. Saft, chairman of the Council of New York Cooperatives and Condominiums, testifying before the City Council last week in opposition to Mr. Fidler’s bill, recalled how one applicant submitted a reference letter purportedly from George Stephanopoulos, a co-anchor of ABC’s “Good Morning America,” that misspelled “Stephanopoulos.”
“You’d think George knows how to spell his name,” Mr. Saft said.
Legally, co-op boards have wide latitude in deciding who fits into their buildings. Co-ops operate much like private clubs and can reject people they deem unsuitable as long as they steer clear of about a dozen categories, including race, religion and marital status.
But even if the reasons for a rejection were legal, most board members would be loath to publicly state them, said John A. Doyle, the senior vice president of government affairs for the Real Estate Board of New York.
“Nobody is ever going to say ‘This guy stinks,’ ” Mr. Doyle said. “They’d never say it for fear of getting sued for one reason or another.”
At the Council hearing last week, some real estate brokers testified that discrimination was rampant in some areas of the city.
One agent, Radmila Rada Veselinovic, who sells properties in Manhattan and Queens, recounted being asked about a client’s nationality by a board member. On another occasion, she said, a seemingly perfect application from a couple with an Arab last name was denied.
As usual, the co-op board gave no explanation.
“Do you know how people feel when they are rejected?” Ms. Veselinovic said in an interview last week. “Horrible. They say, ‘Why? We’re nice people.’ There’s nothing you can say.”
Unlike other forms of homeownership, co-ops inject a third party — the board — into the real estate transaction, requiring board approval of the sale after the seller and buyer already have a contract.
For that reason, it is more difficult to investigate discrimination with methods normally used to test homeowners or landlords, like deploying people posing as prospective buyers or renters to inquire about apartments.
“With co-ops you can’t test — you have to enter into a contract before you get to the co-op board,” said Councilman Brad Lander, a Brooklyn Democrat, who is sponsoring the most recent incarnation of a tougher bill that would require boards to state their reasons for a rejection.
Mr. Lander said he would continue to pursue his bill, citing the experience of Suffolk County, where a similar measure passed three years ago and has led to fewer discrimination complaints and no lawsuits.
But while Mr. Lander’s bill is supported by civil rights advocates and many real estate brokers, it is staunchly opposed by the co-ops, the Real Estate Board of New York and Speaker Quinn. Ms. Quinn said through a Council spokesman, Justin Goodman, that the bill would have the unintended consequence of giving a cause of action for litigation and thus make “homeownership less attainable and more expensive” without reducing discrimination.
Mr. Fidler’s tamer bill has already received a hearing, inching a step closer to a vote, but Mr. Lander’s is languishing.
YOUR BIGGEST PROBLEM IS: WHAT TO DO WITH ALL THE CASH!
THIS STORY TOPS WHATEVER YOU HAVE HEARD SO FAR WHEN IT COMES TO CYBERCRIMES - AND WHY YOUR BANK CAN'T BE TRUSTED WITH YOUR MONEY.
Cyberthieves Looted A.T.M.’s of $45 Million in Just Hours
By MARC SANTORA
Published: May 9, 2013
It was a huge bank heist – but a 21st-century version in which the robbers never wore ski masks, threatened a teller or set foot in a vault.
Multimedia
Yet, in two precision operations that involved people in more than two dozen countries acting in close coordination and with surgical precision, the organization was able to steal $45 million from thousands of A.T.M.'s in a matter of hours.
In New York City alone, the thieves responsible for A.T.M. withdrawals struck 2,904 machines over 10 hours on Feb. 19, withdrawing $2.4 million.
On Thursday, federal prosecutors in Brooklyn unsealed an indictment charging eight members of the New York crew – including their suspected ringleader who was found dead in the Dominican Republic on April 27 — offering a glimpse into what the authorities said was one of the most sophisticated and effective cybercrime attacks ever uncovered.
“In the place of guns and masks, this cybercrime organization used laptops and the Internet,” said Loretta E. Lynch, the United States attorney in Brooklyn. “Moving as swiftly as data over the Internet, the organization worked its way from the computer systems of international corporations to the streets of New York City, with the defendants fanning out across Manhattan to steal millions of dollars from hundreds of A.T.M.'s in a matter of hours.”
The indictment outlined how they were able to steal data from banks, relay that information to a far-flung network of “cashing crews,” and then launder the stolen money by buying high-end luxury items like Rolex watches and expensive cars.
In the first robbery, hackers were able to infiltrate the system of an unnamed Indian credit-card processing company that handles Visa and MasterCard prepaid debit cards.
The hackers – who are not named in the indictment – proceeded to raise the withdrawal limits on prepaid MasterCard debit accounts issued by the National Bank of Ras Al-Khaimah, also known as RAKBANK, which is in United Arab Emirates.
By eliminating the withdrawal limits, “even a few compromised bank account numbers can result in tremendous financial loss to the victim financial institution,” the indictment states.
With five account numbers in hand, the hackers distributed the information to individuals in 20 countries who then encoded the information on magnetic stripe cards.
On Dec. 21, the “cashing crews” made 4,500 A.T.M. transactions worldwide, stealing $5 million, according to the indictment.
But that robbery was just a prelude for what prosecutors said was a more brazen crime that took place two months later.
On Feb. 19, “cashing crews” stood at A.T.M.'s across Manhattan and in two dozen other countries waiting for word to spring into action.
This time, the hackers infiltrated a credit-card processing company based in the United States that also handles Visa and MasterCard prepaid debit cards. The company’s name was not revealed in the indictment.
After securing 12 account numbers for cards issued by the Bank of Muscat in Oman and raising the withdrawal limits, the cashing crews were set in motion. Starting at 3 p.m., the crews made 36,000 transactions and withdrew about $40 million from machines in the various countries in about 10 hours. In New York City alone, a team of eight people made 2,904 withdrawals, stealing $2.4 million.
Surveillance photos of one suspect hitting various A.T.M.'s showed the man’s backpack getting heavier and heavier, Ms. Lynch said, comparing the robbery to the caper at the center of the movie “Ocean’s 11.”
“New technologies and the rapid growth of the Internet have eliminated the traditional borders of financial crimes and provided new opportunities for the criminal element to threaten the world’s financial systems,” said Steven Hughes, a Secret Service special agent, who participated in the investigation. “However, as demonstrated by the charges and arrests announced today, the Secret Service and its law enforcement partners have adapted to these technological advancements and utilized cutting edge investigative techniques to thwart this cybercriminal activity.”
The authorities did not immediately provide details about how they became aware of the operation or whether any other arrests have been made in connection with the case.
While the indictment suggests a far-reaching operation, there are no details about the people responsible for conducting the computer hacking or who might be leading the global operation. Law enforcement agencies in more than a dozen countries, including Japan, Canada, Germany and Romania, have been involved in the investigation, prosecutors said.
The authorities said the leader of the New York cashing crew was Alberto Lajud-Peña, 23, who also went by the name Prime. His body was found in the Dominican Republic on April 27 and prosecutors said they believe he was killed.
Seven other people were charged with conspiracy to commit “access device fraud” and money laundering. The prosecutors said they were all American citizens and were based in Yonkers.
The indictment says that the defendants “invested the criminal proceeds in portable luxury good, such as expensive watches and cars.”
The authorities have already seized hundreds of thousands of dollars from bank accounts, two Rolex watches and a Mercedes S.U.V., and are in the process of seizing a Porsche Panamera.
Monday, May 6, 2013
FOOD FOR THOUGHT: IS THERE EVER A WAY PAST RACIAL DISCRIMINATION IN AMERICA???
How Social Networks Drive Black Unemployment
By NANCY DITOMASO
It’s easy to believe the worst is over in the economic downturn. But for African-Americans, the pain continues — over 13 percent of black workers are unemployed, nearly twice the national average. And that’s not a new development: regardless of the economy, job prospects for African-Americans have long been significantly worse than for the country as a whole.
The most obvious explanation for this entrenched disparity is racial discrimination. But in my research I have found a somewhat different culprit: favoritism. Getting an inside edge by using help from family and friends is a powerful, hidden force driving inequality in the United States.
Such favoritism has a strong racial component. Through such seemingly innocuous networking, white Americans tend to help other whites, because social resources are concentrated among whites. If African-Americans are not part of the same networks, they will have a harder time finding decent jobs.
The mechanism that reproduces inequality, in other words, may be inclusion more than exclusion. And while exclusion or discrimination is illegal, inclusion or favoritism is not — meaning it can be more insidious and largely immune to legal challenges.
Favoritism is almost universal in today’s job market. In interviews with hundreds of people on this topic, I found that all but a handful used the help of family and friends to find 70 percent of the jobs they held over their lifetimes; they all used personal networks and insider information if it was available to them.
In this context of widespread networking, the idea that there is a job “market” based solely on skills, qualifications and merit is false. Whenever possible, Americans seeking jobs try to avoid market competition: they look for unequal rather than equal opportunity. In fact, the last thing job seekers want to face is equal opportunity; they want an advantage. They want to find ways to cut in line and get ahead.
You don’t usually need a strong social network to land a low-wage job at a fast-food restaurant or retail store. But trying to land a coveted position that offers a good salary and benefits is a different story. To gain an edge, job seekers actively work connections with friends and family members in pursuit of these opportunities.
Help is not given to just anyone, nor is it available from everyone. Inequality reproduces itself because help is typically reserved for people who are “like me”: the people who live in my neighborhood, those who attend my church or school or those with whom I have worked in the past. It is only natural that when there are jobs to be had, people who know about them will tell the people who are close to them, those with whom they identify, and those who at some point can reciprocate the favor.
Because we still live largely segregated lives, such networking fosters categorical inequality: whites help other whites, especially when unemployment is high. Although people from every background may try to help their own, whites are more likely to hold the sorts of jobs that are protected from market competition, that pay a living wage and that have the potential to teach skills and allow for job training and advancement. So, just as opportunities are unequally distributed, they are also unequally redistributed.
All of this may make sense intuitively, but most people are unaware of the way racial ties affect their job prospects.
When I asked my interviewees what most contributed to their level of career success, they usually discussed how hard they had worked and how uncertain were the outcomes — not the help they had received throughout their lives to gain most of their jobs. In fact, only 14 percent mentioned that they had received help of any kind from others. Seeing contemporary labor-market politics through the lens of favoritism, rather than discrimination alone, is revealing. It explains, for example, why even though the majority of all Americans, including whites, support civil rights in principle, there is widespread opposition on the part of many whites to affirmative action policies — despite complaints about “reverse discrimination,” my research demonstrated that the real complaint is that affirmative action undermines long-established patterns of favoritism.
The interviewees in my study who were most angry about affirmative action were those who had relatively fewer marketable skills — and were therefore most dependent on getting an inside edge for the best jobs. Whites who felt entitled to these positions believed that affirmative action was unfair because it blocked their own privileged access.
But interviewees’ feelings about such policies betrayed the reality of their experience of them. I found these attitudes evident among my interviewees — even though, among the 1,463 jobs they discussed with me, there were only two cases in which someone might have been passed over for a job because of affirmative action policies benefiting African-Americans. These data are consistent with other research on affirmative action.
There’s no question that discrimination is still a problem in the American economy. But whites helping other whites is not the same as discrimination, and it is not illegal. Yet it may have a powerful effect on the access that African-Americans and other minorities have to good jobs, or even to the job market itself.
Nancy DiTomaso, the vice dean for faculty and research and a professor of management and global business at Rutgers Business School, is the author of “The American Non-Dilemma: Racial Inequality Without Racism.”
PREVIOUS POSTKierkegaard’s ‘Antigone’
RELATED POSTS FROM OPINIONATOR
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
238 Comments
I think that some people have a difficult time accepting how easy life has been for them. I am a leader in a supposedly elite profession: Physician, medical school professor, multiple degrees, etc. I have had a very easy life. While not wealthy, my family was educated and stable, I had almost free access to elite public universities, school was easy and designed for people like me, all that. So it was for many of my colleagues; we are lucky. What I find curious is how many of those colleagues overestimate their efforts and underestimate their good luck. I also find that many of us cultivate a fallacy of agency: that because what we do is important, we ourselves are inherently more important than others. This fallacy can amplify our misconception of our efforts and good fortune.
That said, I do not believe that we should expect to coast through life, or give up - we have to accept what we get and make the best of it. But we do need to be honest with ourselves and as fair as we can be with others.
So much distortion, where to start...
The most obvious reason for employment disparity is not racial discrimination, it is lack of job skills.
And there's so many other types of discrimination much more often practiced than racism - it's not even be in the top five. IMHO, those are 1) ugly, 2) stupid, 3) fat, 4) old, and 5) poor. Ask black people if they'd rather be any of those to know I'm right.
The Prof rambles on describing as "research" what has been doorknob dumb common sense down here forever. The government has done all it can to end discrimination. It already practices reverse discrimination. Further progress has to come from people. You can't pass laws that make people like each other.
If she wants to waste more taxpayer money, she can next figure out that any significant progress on racism will only occur generationally. Granddad was a racist, Dad less so, me only accidentally, my kids not at all, etc. All her research and peer-reviewed pork won't make it will happen faster. It's all a waste of time and brain cells.
And all the other DiTomaso0like racebaiters are a pox on mankind as well for that very reason: the battle is over. Our children are not racists. In fact, they laugh at the DiTomasos of the world.
Duh, yes, Professor DiTomaso, favoritism exists. How else can you explain your doctorate?
The failure to confront and address the cultural breakdown in the black community will only serve to entrench and prolong it.
High drop-out rates, high incarceration rates, broken homes.... these are the drivers of high unemployment.
If the author's thesis was correct, you could extend it equally well to other races of color - but you can't - because, as I said, Bunkum.
The over-arching area of concern is the lack of will by the elites and leaders (Obama??) - who should know better - to at least start a conversation on these concerns.
I have exactly one black connection on LinkedIn, who I met in my undergrad program. If there had been more blacks at my college, then I'd be happily referring and recruiting them to come work with me.
I'm now doing a masters program and there are no blacks in my program. As a result, I won't be referring any black associates to positions I find out about. Instead I'll be referring my white-American, Indian and Chinese associates who I have been working with for the last two years.
What's the solution? Part of it is to get more blacks into college where they can develop those networks. I think think college entrance should be entirely merit based though, so it probably has to start lower down the chain than that -- probably in grade school or high school.
And the sooner we all recognize that these jobs are not coming back (short of total war), the better we can address the consequences.
That's true as far as it goes, but try to get through a job interview or securing such a position if all you have to go on are connections. The author appears to imagine a 1950s kind of world in which there are a wealth of positions available to a young, college educated white person from the 'right sort of family'. Certainly, there are still job placements based on such criteria, but in today's job market it's a lot more likely that the connections one employs to get a job are people able to testify to your skills, experience and aptitude.
What some people fail to realize is something called history. History will show that racism and discrimination has led to our present day issues in AA communities. People are unaware that when laws were enacted that prevented blacks from obtaining wealth, from owning land, when programs like the homestead act prevented blacks from gaining land. When you free a group of people and then actively prevent them from gaining resources, this leads to point were after many generations there is nothing to pass on to ones children and future generations..
However I do believe that today AAs have more opportunities and thus we have to work harder. I do not deny that. But as I can attest to. It is an uphill battle everyday. And college definitely sets on apart but even being a person of color and having a degree. I still find it an up hill battle. Lets face it when I walk into a room full of whites there are some who will judge my skills based on my skin color. I wish that is wasn't that way but what can I do. So I don't deny that AA communities need to work harder.
It is a given that people will actively "help" those that they know and that this does create an element of favoratism. This is inevitable, as it is often quite difficult to hlep someone you don't know, particularly when it concerns job prospects. Even as a student, I have helped many of my friends and colleagues get jobs through the various networks of people that I interact with on a daily basis. As I live in a diverse city, this includes a diverse group of people.
I could see people of my parent's generation finding themselves considerably more segregates simply by virtue of the fact that there wasn't a lot of diversity when they were building their networks, although even this isn't entirely true as friends, colleagues and coworkers of my parents have also come from diverse backgrounds.
In short, I believe this view may be more applicable to C-Suite executives and long-time workers in management, but I would strongly disagree with this premise from the perspective of Generation Y.
Could it possibly be that black unemployment is "driven" by lower than average graduation rates, higher than average families led by single mothers, higher crime rates, and other social problems in the black community that lead to black underemployment.
Looking to blame "social networking", provides just another excuse to avoid the hard look at the real problems underlying the issue.
Are there proportionately less white rappers because of anti-white discrimination? Are there less Jewish basketball stars because of anti-semitism? Obviously not -- it would be absurd not to control for things like athletic ability, height, and upbringing before fingering racism as the cause.
It is equally absurd to automatically assume that differing unemployment rates are due to discrimination. Is the low Jewish unemployment rate (about half the average) due to anti-Christian sentiment?
Her findings also form a persuasive argument against affirmative action policies: if they're causing so much resentment despite the fact that they are so ineffective that in only 2 out of 1,463 jobs were people "passed over" (another way of saying that people were hired due to affirmative action policies), such policies are clearly causing far, far more social harm than their intended good.
This story just points out that people who know one an other help each other. If due to housing patterns, education, a stratified society and other factors result in races choosing to self segregate (ALL groups do this to some degree) why would social networks suddenly violate normal patterns of behavior?
What does this mean other then pointing out the obvious?
You can't be helpful to individuals who you don't know or socialize with for whatever reason.
While working in a totally integrated workplace I observed social networks divided along the lines of job titles and skills not race or ethnic lines.
Upper management seemed to offer helping hands that went to school buddies and old family ties.
There is nothing new in what you write. Of course, you can define racism differently and that is allowed. Your research would be more interesting if you explored white and black expectations using an economic and social status grid rather than a skin color grid. There are enough prep school blacks with wealthy parents to do some real research. What do Obama's girls expect? Do they sound white?
In California, efforts were made to curb Asian enrollments in universities due to "too many" getting in.
We rail against affirmative action, but not legacies in college admissions.
Who are we kidding??
There are pockets where African American networking in government jobs is extremely strong. It depends on local demographics i.e. The U.S. Post Office, the I.R.S. in Chicago among others.
For everyone upset about this practice, remember you do the same thing all the time. Have you ever asked a friend for a recommendation for household work or a good place to eat? Have you ever stayed in the same hotel twice rather than research all available options or eaten at a chain restaurant in an unfamiliar town? There's no difference between this and networking. You're picking winners and losers, potentially harming better local businesses who need the work, because it saves you time and effort while attempting to guarantee a better outcome.
Networking is the most effective way to get a job because it's the best way employers have to find employees they're confident can do the work required. Otherwise, they're forced to vastly expand the number of applicants examined, which includes a huge amount of time, while simultaneously reducing the available information on each candidate. Resumes are designed to mislead and lots of people can succeed in an interview or two. It's much more effective to get a referral from a friend in the industry or pursue someone you know from elsewhere. That it happens to be easier makes the practice all the more appealing.
(1) People of color, on average, don't make as much money as whites, nor do they hold as many high status/high paying jobs. Check.
(2) Not only do people network with each other socially, but those network connections often lead to more lucrative employment opportunities. Check.
(3) We live in a society where our social networks still tend to be racially segregated.Check.
(4) This tendency to racially segregate our social networks leads towards a differential in high paying/high status job opportunities, accessed through socially networked opportunities, perpetuating the historical economic divide between blacks and whites in this country. Check.
(5) People tend to see their unique personal qualities as the reasons which they advance in their careers. Check.
(6) This is why white people don't regognize the role which social networking has had in their own economic advancement compared to others of other races, nor the machinations of institutional racial inequality. Check.
My question is why did the New York Times publish an essay whose points were so painfully obvious?
I am an officer in a volunteer organization that was sued for multiple forms of alleged discrimination, one of which was age discrimination. We hired a 35-year-old woman as general manager to replace a 62-year-old man whom we had terminated (for failure to do his job). There were several months between the termination and the hiring of the replacement. The governing board would much have preferred not to have to expend the considerable effort to find a new manager. By the time the case was settling (a euphemism for legal extortion) she had left and we had hired someone older than the guy we terminated.
You disagree with the premise so the research was false.
You compare blacks to Asians yet only one of those groups was enslaved and openly discriminated against in the U.S. And it wasn't the Asians.
This gem is my favorite, try to read this twice without laughing out loud:
... In fact, the ONLY people on earth that are make a fetish out of NOT showing racial favoritism are whites. ...
Enjoy your day people.
I recently helped my nephew land a job with a good company in New York because I happened to know the Vice President. The kid is competent.
Should I have also put out an ad on Craigslist to advertise that job for the public to level the playing field?
You are writing about social networking as if it's a new phenomenon. It's not. It's as old as the human race and it will continue this way.
We help people we know, not people we don't.
But it does have detrimental effects on those people who don't have the same opportunities. That's why there are laws in some financial markets against insider trading - to give everyone involved in the market a fair shot. Of course, the idea that most people who have information about a stock that will significantly affect it's performance won't use this info for their own benefit, or share with friends and family, is a farce. But at least the laws make people aware that capitalizing on information that isn't available to the general public is detrimental to a free market.
Affirmative action does the same thing: counteract our natural inclinations to only help those like us, to the detriment of those who haven't been blessed with having the right friends in the right places.
Educationis important; there have been articles on how those fromlower economic classes often have no useful coaching as to how to obtain aid to attend college otr where to apply; they have no family members who are familiar with the procedures and no adequate guidance. If they are able to successfully complete a four year college, at least they may also have opportunity to break into some useful networks
This isn't crying racism, it's confronting an aspect of hiring that has been first, always been in existence, and secondly, is an unspoken and generally invisible barrier.
Just a side comment - I think that Civil Service has traditionally been one way up for many working class families. One where connections may still matter, but can be overcome. Now that public employment has given way in many places to temporary contracted services, that route has been limited.
What I do not have a clue about is how to confront this - other than focusing on education, beginning early in life.
Consider Ms. Nancy Ditomaso. Like quite a number of people in the identity politics industry, she is white and holds a highly coveted position. (I took the liberty of looking up her bio at Rutgers where she's Professor and Vice Dean at the Business School, having a primary research interest in "Diversity in Organizations. )
If one's living is made in the business of solving diversity problems, it is only natural that one will tend to discover new such problems and exaggerate their importance. In this case, Ms. Ditomaso has uncovered a new boogeyman -- social networking -- which purportedly discriminates against African Americans.
She claims that her research supports this claim. Unfortunately she does not cite any specifics, other than "all but a handful" (of people she supposedly researched) used "used the help of family and friends to find 70 percent of the jobs they held over their lifetimes."
This proves precious little, other than that the diversity industry is self-perpetuating, and that the standards of scientific inquiry are very watered down in the social sciences, and at business schools, and especially where the two intersect.
A key element missing in the article was the experience of immigrants. Immigrants from Africa and the Caribbean have about the same unemployment rate as Whites. How does this article explain this, much less the unemployment rate for other immigrant communities?
Oh, never mind!
They know that every black employee has the option to go to the HR department or a government agency to claim discrimination, and that will cause the company thousands of dollars to defend.
Even when black employees do not follow this path, it is still a hammer that is always hanging over the business owners' heads.
We even see this with our black president. Every disagreement is now claimed to be based on racism. Rather than improving the situation, electing a black man as president has only served to drive a wedge between races.
The problem with affirmative action is that it attempts to legitimize racial discrimination if it's for a good reason.