I learned to drive in my teens and have always owned a car since. As such, I have had my share of flat tires. Most of those flat tires were due to road debris puncturing my tire. Once, it was due to a malfunctioning valve stem. Though the most embarrassing instance was when I misjudged a turn and hit a median. All, save that last one, were ones that I could not anticipate.
That said, flat tires are generally pretty rare. Naturally, we won’t be able to avoid all flat tires, but we should not be getting them regularly. If you are getting them routinely, then there’s something wrong. You may be driving on surfaces that have a disproportionately high number of debris, like construction sites. Vandals may be targeting your car and tampering with your tires. You may have colossally poor driving habits. Or you may routinely ignore those pesky “Danger extreme tire damage” signs.
While none wants to deal with the unexpected consequences of a flat tire, the flat tire itself is not really the problem. The problem is the nail, the vandal, or questionable driving habits. The flat tire is merely the symptom.
Root Cause Analysis
There’s a concept among software developers called root cause analysis. The goal is to determine what is really causing the problem (the root cause) and fix it, not the symptom. The idea is that if you fix the root cause of the problem, then you and others wouldn’t need to deal with the symptoms. Let’s go back to the flat tires. If you routinely drive through a construction site, can everyone keep sharp debris off the ground? If it’s vandalism, can the police catch and charge the criminals? The best long-term solution is to fix the cause of the problem, not the symptom.
However, it takes discipline to appropriately root cause a problem. Programmers often face the dilemma of getting something working today or fixing it appropriately and taking more time and attention. Many pick the former. When we get a flat tire, most focus on patching or replacing it; we spend minimal time obsessing over what flattened the tire or how we may avoid this going forward. We simply want to get to our next destination.
As you might imagine, root cause analysis may easily be applied to many problems outside of software development, like our flat tire dilemma.
Disproportionate racial diversity
As we start to untangle the makeup of our country, we observe how we landed here. It’s only natural to look at the diversity demographics in any sufficiently large population. For instance, if 12.5% of our population (1 in 8) is black, why have only 1 of our 46 US Presidents been black? That said, when I talk about racial diversity, I speak to gender, sexual orientation, transgender, neurodiversity, etc. For better or worse, racial diversity is easier to talk about because it’s easier to detect (many gay people are still not out) and tougher to rationalize (‘women are not tough enough to be firefighters’).
First, naming one counterexample does not dispel racism. Pointing out that Oprah Winfrey made her fortune or that Barak Obama served as president does not dispel racism. When 1/8 of our population is composed of black citizens, then we would naturally expect roughly 1/8 of our millionaires and presidents to be black. They’re not. Simply because a few managed to overcome the obstacles, doesn’t mean that obstacles no longer exist. People do not generally win the lottery jackpot; naming one counterexample does not nullify that fact.
Second, one counterargument to racism is, “Most players in the NBA are black. Is the NBA racist against white players?” This counterpoint is interesting, but it’s not the clincher that many believe it to be. To extend the root cause analysis principle, having skewed diversity numbers is merely the symptom. Just because your smoke detector starts to beep (symptom), doesn’t mean that your house is burning down (problem); you may simply be cooking bacon.
However, the answer to that is more nuanced, more than I could fit in 140 characters on Twitter. Can we demonstrate a biased selection process, or lack of opportunity in the NBA towards white players?
Defining language and standards
In order to have a productive conversation about bias (all forms), I’ll outline the language and standards for that discussion:
- Everyone exhibits racial bias to some degree; none of us are immune.
- Simply because you have a racial bias doesn’t mean that you’re aware of that bias, nor does it mean that you do it with malicious intent.
- A minority demographic may still be biased towards their own people. Many studies suggest this, but it’s also in a Netflix series 100 Humans (episode 4). Naming a black police chief is not a panacea for addressing racism; we still need to observe behavior.
- Much like making one stupid mistake doesn’t necessarily make you an idiot. Similarly, exhibiting racial bias doesn’t necessarily make you a racist; that is a function of intent, degree, and frequency of this bias.
Unfortunately, the word ‘racist’ has become an incredibly charged word. One side weaponizes it to stigmatize the opposition; the other side continues to deny it even in the most obvious cases. Let’s just stop on both fronts.
When Amy Cooper (better known as the ‘Central Park Karen’) called police on a black bird watcher (Christian Cooper), Franklin Templeton (her employer) chose to terminate her employment. I found it appropriate; people have certainly been fired for far less. However, they put out a tweet with the assertion that (emphasis mine), “We do not tolerate racism of any kind at Franklin Templeton.” 🤔
I’m skeptical that all types of racism are grounds for dismissal at Franklin Templeton, or anywhere for that matter. I’m Asian. People have implied that I’m smart (or dedicated) for merely being Asian. Some have remarked on “how good my English is”. Others have asked, “Where are you really from?” All are subtle forms of racism. Are they all really firing offenses?
Biased selection process
Let’s go through a mental exercise. Jot down all the qualifications for a job position for a candidate in your workforce. If you can think of someone who exemplifies that role, you may use them as a template. Simply write down everything you can imagine. Finished? I imagine (or hope) neither race, gender, nor level of wealth is listed among those qualifications. Assuming that’s the case, then neither race, gender, or affluency should factor into the employment (or promotion) selection, nor should it, because it would be illegal.
Do I believe that most intentionally discriminate? I do not. For instance, I think there are very few people who will consciously assert that Bob is a better candidate than Sally or DeShawn because he’s a white man versus a woman or a black man. However, studies indicate that this bias exists. That said, it is profoundly naïve to believe that simply because you don’t intend to discriminate, you don’t actually discriminate. A viable way to minimize this is to anonymize the process as much as possible. For instance, a former colleague and his company use ‘TC’ (for ‘the candidate’) for all interview feedback and discussion.
Fewer opportunities
Another element that points to unfairness is the lack of access. For instance, fewer than half of the schools in the US offer calculus, and students of color are disproportionately affected. Upon discussion, many pushed back; they asserted that all study materials were freely available online and hence accessible to everyone. Though it didn’t occur to them that not everyone has internet access, and this too disproportionately affects both rural areas and the poor, which are disproportionately people of color.
I remember hearing an account where an adult observed a young child at a bus stop for hours in the cold. They eventually approach that child out of concern that they missed their bus. They came to discover that this child was merely doing their homework. Lacking internet access at home, they stand out in the cold pretending to wait for the bus, all while using public wi-fi from a nearby business.
Let’s reflect on everything that we accomplish with online access. This may range from doing homework, to renewing our tabs, to scheduling a covid vaccine. Would we find these tasks more difficult to accomplish without internet access? They’re not necessarily impossible, but they’re more difficult. Less access translates to fewer opportunities.
Is the NBA indeed racist?
The racial diversity in any one population is simply a tool that we can use. We need to assess whether disproportionate numbers (symptom) point to a bigger problem (root cause), much like a smoke detector alerts you of a potential fire. Let’s close the loop and go back to the original question. I have an opinion, but I don’t have a definitive answer. While I’m curious, it’s because I don’t really watch nor play basketball.
First, let’s contemplate the possibility of bias in the selection process. The NBA goes through drafts to select its players. The teams’ general managers may disproportionately select black players over other comparable players. Similarly, coaches (both professional and college) may give black players more playing time over other comparable players. The real question is… given two players (one black and one white) with the same stats, is there any reason to believe that the black player will be selected more frequently?
Next, we can ponder if white kids have less access to a basketball or a court. This will eventually translate into having more players at a professional level. A basketball is less than $30; this can’t be the obstacle. However, is there a trend where disproportionately white schools and neighborhoods do not have basketball courts?
There is no evidence (or studies) that suggest that, given two comparable players, basketball (college or professional) is more likely to pick the black player over other races. Similarly, basketball courts are uniformly accessible to young players independent of race.
That said, even if the diversity numbers are lopsided, in the absence of any more information, I have no reason to believe that the NBA is racist. However, this doesn’t mean that other groups with skewed racial diversity should get a free pass; they all need to be assessed.