L.A. Times apologizes for its 'history of racism'

To underscore the critical nature of the current state of race relations in the United States, the Los Angeles Times issued an apology for the way it portrayed minority communities in the past as an institution enabling the white power structure and vowed to do a better job of reflecting their readers and reporting on concerns of communities of color.

In its Sunday edition, owner Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong issued this statement in a letter:

“This year, across America, we’ve engaged in conversations about race and discrimination that have been candid, direct and consequential. They are happening among friends and co-workers, through protests and political debates, at athletic events and in pop culture. And they are happening at the Los Angeles Times.”

His letter continued: "We also feel a deep personal responsibility and duty to fight racism and bias. The national reckoning on race and that within the Los Angeles Times are welcome developments that have already led to productive conversations, concrete plans and accelerated progress for us.

"We are committed to change, both because it is just and because it is mission-critical for our business. Only a diverse newsroom can accurately tell this city’s stories. Only a newspaper that holds power to account and uncovers injustice can truly succeed," writes Soon-Shiong.

"The Times has committed to a close examination of its past, beginning with the project we are launching today. It starts with an overview by the editorial board of The Times’ history in covering and employing people of color and an acknowledgment of the paper’s failings. Over the following days, we will run stories by staff reporters and columnists examining in greater depth, and from a personal perspective, aspects of the paper’s coverage of nonwhite communities and treatment of journalists of color."

The paper's editorial went further by recounting some of the stories and issues where the Times failed by writing from a white, Protestant, suburban perspective when writing about communities of color, which in the past were portrayed as crime-ridden ghettoes, ignoring the hardworking, honest residents.

The Times apologized for past editorial positions including the newspaper's strong support of the incarceration of Japanese Americans during WWII and for its endorsement of Proposition 187, which banned health care and social services to undocumented immigrants and which the courts eventually turned down.

The editorial went on to say:

"On behalf of this institution, we apologize for The Times’ history of racism. We owe it to our readers to do better, and we vow to do so. A region as diverse and complex and fascinating as Southern California deserves a newspaper that reflects its communities. Today, 38% of the journalists on our staff are people of color. We know that is not nearly good enough, in a county that is 48% Latino and in a state where Latinos are the largest ethnic group. We know that this acknowledgment must be accompanied by a real commitment to change, a humility of spirit and an openness of mind and heart.

"The Times will redouble and refocus its efforts to become an inclusive and inspiring voice of California — a sentinel that employs investigative and accountability reporting to help protect our fragile democracy and chronicles the stories of the Golden State, including stories that historically were neglected by the mainstream press. Being careful stewards of this new company, privately owned but operated for the benefit of the public, is our first obligation. But that stewardship will also require bold and decisive change. If we are to survive as a business, it will be by tapping into a digital, multicultural, multigenerational audience in a way The Times has never fully done."

It will be interesting to see if other publications that encouraged racist policies or made stitlted portrayals of minorities make similar apologies.

To say that the mea culpa by the Los Angeles Times is long overdue is a vast understatement, but the promises it makes to be more inclusive and to step down from its Ivory Tower should be welcomed, but viewed with cautiously because we've heard these promises before only to have minority journalists leave print careers in droves because they were tired of butting heads against the institution's walls of explicit and implicit bias.

EDITOR'S NOTE: A word of caution, this article is news laced with opinion. Readers are encouraged to seek multiple news sources to formulate their own positions.