The National Association of Black Journalists handed out five Thumbs Down Awards at its annual convention in Atlanta on Saturday — the most in the organization’s history.
One recipient created a big stir and overshadowed the others: Stephen A. Smith.
The ESPN host and YouTube personality was singled out for his “recurring public pattern of disparaging commentary directed at prominent Black women across politics, sports, and media.” Other awardees include CBS News, The Washington Post, Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr, and local TV station owner and media executive DuJuan McCoy.
The Thumbs Down Awards is NABJ’s public call out to people and institutions whose actions it considers “at odds” with the organization’s goals of diversity, equity, fairness and press freedom.
In her speech at the convention’s Salute to Excellence Awards on Saturday, NABJ President Errin Haines said that “If NABJ is going to be serious about defending Black journalists and defending journalism itself, then sometimes we have to say their names. And so tonight we did.”
The decision to include Smith rang out within the convention halls and social media, drawing immediate coverage from blogs and mainstream news. Smith, who has worked with NABJ in the past, responded, promising to make his own case for why the organization is failing Black communities.
Capital B spoke to Haines about the choice to include Smith, why she hopes to talk to him about ways to move forward, and what NABJ will look like under her leadership. This interview has been edited for clarity and length.
Capital B: NABJ gave out five Thumbs Down Awards this year, and that’s a record. Why five?
Errin Haines: The thumbs down award is not a new award. I know a lot of people are finding it now because of the headlines that we made with our announcement, but this is an award that we’ve given for years — trying to hold institutions and public figures accountable whenever their actions are harmful to Black journalists. That is the intent of the award. We don’t take it lightly when we decide to bestow these awards upon people. And it’s not about whether we personally like or dislike somebody.
Let’s discuss the choice that has caused quite a stir, the inclusion of Stephen A. Smith, a very prominent and influential Black voice in the media. NABJ called out what it describes as his “recurring public pattern of disparaging commentary directed at prominent Black women across politics, sports, and media.” What went into that choice, and why do you think his inclusion set off a frenzy?
We certainly heard from folks across Black America who have been concerned about the kinds of things he said about Black women in sports, entertainment, media — whether we’re talking about Vice President Kamala Harris when she ran for president … or Rep. Jasmine Crockett when she was running for the Texas Senate this year.
He was also involved in a public spat with veteran, independent journalist Joy-Ann Reid. These things are illustrative of a pattern we felt was harmful. Yes, Stephen A. Smith is somebody that speaks publicly and has an opinion that is valuable as a prominent voice in this country, but what does it mean when that voice and that platform are being used in a way that diminishes the public voice and presence of Black women in our society?
He is somebody who certainly has been in NABJ and has done so much good for so many Black journalists who respect him and look forward to seeing him every year at our convention. I hope that that’s something that can continue. I thought it was appropriate to call this out, but also to extend an invitation to think about how we move differently going forward. I hope that he and I can have that conversation.
Smith stands out amongst the other recipients because it’s about his own commentary, and not about decisions within an institution that directly impact press freedom, Black journalists, or newsroom employment. Talk a bit about why NABJ sees that as deserving of the same level of accountability.
The award itself is about holding institutions and public figures accountable when their actions are harmful, not just to Black journalism, but to Black communities as well.
We know that for better or for worse, influential voices can become part of the permission structure for how Black women are treated, which is why what he says matters. What he’s saying doesn’t exist in a vacuum because when powerful Black women are repeatedly framed in ways that diminish their credibility or question their competence, that can help normalize a broader culture of disrespect.
In your speech, you said, “The goal is not permanent condemnation — the goal is progress. But progress does not happen without pressure.” What would progress look like from those five recipients?
We’re calling people in for conversations about what real accountability looks like, what needs to change, and what these individuals and institutions might be willing to do to signal they are committed to real change. I know that’s not something that necessarily happens overnight.
It also doesn’t happen without us coming to the table together and listening to each other. [Understanding] how this award landed with them to start, and asking what they think accountability looks like, what they would be willing to do to show that they are accountable. What does it look like for us to be having a broader conversation about attacks on Black women who are public figures, who are in the media, in journalism, because there are a lot of people that need to do better as it pertains to that topic, right?
What does it mean to show a real commitment to press freedom, to diversity in hiring — not just in hiring, but in the retention and the continued opportunities to advance in our profession?
As leader of NABJ, I think that it is my responsibility to call on people to do better in the spirit of our founders who started this organization 51 years ago.
What do you say to people who criticize the choice to include Smith?
The pattern speaks for itself, and it is a pattern we felt compelled to address because of what that kind of rhetoric can enable and normalize, particularly when it comes to powerful Black women. This recognition was not about one comment or one moment. It was about a broader pattern and the responsibility that comes with having a significant platform. Our hope is that this leads to meaningful dialogue and meaningful change — not just as it pertains to Stephen, but for anyone with a platform who is disrespecting, diminishing, or undermining Black women.
You also included The Washington Post, CBS, FCC chairman Brendan Carr, and DuJuan McCoy. When you look at those four together, what concerns you most?
We’re seeing the erosion of representation of Black journalists in newsrooms across the country. The cuts that come with media consolidation really disproportionately impact us.
Disruption should not equate to our disappearance. And too often that is what has been happening. We spoke to the Post last year about that, and yet we still saw cuts that have reduced Black expertise across opinion, across international news, across local reporting, across sports. Those decisions aren’t just about shrinking the newsroom — they really do have an impact on coverage.
[CEO of WISH-TV and Circle City Broadcasting] DuJuan McCoy was another individual that we called out. We heard directly from our members about the allegations of mistreatment of Black journalists at Wish-TV, a local television station in Indianapolis.
What’s happening in our industry is getting a lot more attention at the national level, but local Black journalists are also under attack in local markets across this country. It was important to send a message that we are also watching in those places, too.
CBS News was another entity we recognized. It was very discouraging this year to see the elimination of their race and culture unit. What does that mean in terms of CBS’ standard and reputation for having editorial independence and being able to pursue stories without interference? When news organizations are eliminating the people and the infrastructure needed to cover Black communities, when they are weakening editorial independence, that really hurts the American public’s right to know. You’re losing representation, but you’re also losing accountability.
And I think lastly, under Brendan Carr’s leadership, the Federal Communications Commission increasingly used its regulatory authority to pressure news organizations, to challenge broadcasters in ways that threaten editorial independence, and that creates a chilling effect in journalism that we find unacceptable. The anti-DEI sentiment that is literally codified on executive orders from this administration is something we absolutely reject. [Diversity and inclusion] are values that are American values and they are additive, not only to journalism but to our democracy.
If you look at the comments related to the Thumbs Down Awards, you’ll see many alluding to this being a shift for NABJ because of your leadership. One commenter dubbed it “Errin season.” What do you want NABJ to be under your leadership that it wasn’t before?
I love NABJ. This is the institution that raised me. This is my 26th convention. I ran for this office because I felt like it was such a consequential moment for journalism and democracy.
The newsroom contraction, the workplace inequities, the widespread mis- and disinformation — we’re trying to push back against that. This retreat from really long-standing commitments to diversity that came in part because of the gains that we have pushed for over the 51 years since NABJ has existed.
I had four priorities that I actually see as very much connected: defending press freedom, defending Black journalists, shoring up our infrastructure and bringing that into the 21st century, and preparing the organization and our profession for the future.
Advocacy was the defining focus of my first year. I wanted to make our voice consistent, visible, and consequential. I wanted us to respond every single time journalists were targeted.
Your first convention as president was held in Atlanta — your hometown and the seat of such important Black history, power, and media. What did you hope attendees left Atlanta feeling about NABJ, and the role it will play in this moment when the press is under such attack?
I wanted them to leave feeling powerful and empowered. Atlanta is a place that can give you that as a Black person, and certainly as a Black journalist. I grew up seeing Black people delivering the news each and every single day. And that is why I knew it was something I wanted to do, it was something I knew I could do because there are people like me doing important things all across the city. I think folks are [leaving the convention] going back to their newsrooms with their backs a little straighter, with their heads held a little bit higher, and recommitted and recharged and absolutely ready to do the work that’s part of the great American story.
