How Editors Judge What Job Applicants Bring 2 The Table

Oh, for sure. I initially brought it up as a sidebar.
They certainly are two differently phases of the process. Perhaps, I confused the issue.

 

I don't see much use for the essay portion of this, but it's probably no more time consuming than the section critique I'd ask applicants to do.

As for story ideas, I'd hope anyone applying for a job would enter an interview prepared for that question. That just seems basic.

 

And yet, you'd find that, once I'm in a job, I quibble over very, very little in terms of workload demands or time requirements.

These requirements are not for the mundane stuff. They're asking for enterprise story ideas -- something I consider a strong suit for me -- that, when done in the manner they're suggesting and the manner in which they should be done, that would typically take much longer than two hours to come up with, research, and write, particularly if you have not worked on the beat already.

I might accept this requirement if it were for one such idea and the work involved. But four, without a strong sense that I'm the one to be hired? No way. Not with the clips I have that would already prove I have what they want in terms of creativity and reporting skills.

They're not asking for the essay or the story ideas/research and, essentially, the writing of the four stories. They're asking for both/all of it, supposedly from a slew of candidates.

Just about all this is going to do is slow down the selection process considerably -- unless the field has already been whittled down to two or three already, and they're attempting to make that last tough call by making comparisons of this stuff. But that doesn't appear to be the case.

 

The greatest sting of all, in this circumstance, would be for someone to submit a
top-drawer idea . . . NOT be hired . . . and then see the story executed in the publication in question.

Said editor would need to don asbestos gloves to read my letter to the Editor . . .
and the topic would be aired on this board -- and many others -- within approximately seventeen seconds.

 

I'm not sure where you got the notion they're asking candidates to <i>write</i> four enterprise stories. They want story ideas, with a list of potential sources for those ideas. Is it a bit much to ask in the initial stages of a job search? Probably. But a handful of folks here are blowing it way out of proportion.

 

I've been through several interview processes, both where I did and didn't get the job. At one shop, I did personal interviews with nine people in one day. As in sit-down and be grilled interviews. And I was fine with that.

I've never done it, but I'd be fine with being brought in and sent out to do a story or two. And I'd even be willing to pay my own way to an interview if I really wanted the job and the paper couldn't or wouldn't do it.

But to apparently not even read my clips and send me back the request to do an essay, etc? I guess my past experience and best stories aren't worth anything to you. And that's what turned me off.

 

lono, not sure I could pass your test. I know absolutely ZIP about the Ramones, other than they appeared on the Simpsons. And I've never been a fan of Bushmills or Jameson's, although from a literary perspective, I'd say Bushmills.

 

Yes, it's a bit much.

If they're asking for enterprise ideas -- the best ones people can find/come up with -- and asking for the sources, and an explanation of why you'd want those sources, that entails going into your analysis of the situation, what you'd ask the source, and what they'd likely offer in terms of information and perspective.

If you do that with several sources per story, I'd call that, pretty much researching, sourcing and writing the stories. Or all but that, if I am, indeed, reading too much into things.

I don't mean to blow it out of proportion. I guess I just think these requirements are out of proportion, too. As I wrote in my first post, it just strikes me as poor management.

And that always bothers me. I sense that the paper may be/is trying to get a really good-quality candidate, and I would give them credit for that.

I just think they may be cutting off their noses to spite their own faces by making this more complicated than it needs to be to gain that same end. I hate to see that, and would hate for people to have to go through that, unnecessarily.

But you're right in that I've said enough on the subject, so OK, I'll shut up now.

 

Ugh.

Big Green, I agree with you. No matter how bad off I was, I would hope I had too much self-respect to grovel for a crappy Gannett job.

But be aware that there are many people (including, probably, a younger version of myself) that are happy to do so.

 

I can see where some of these requirements are coming from to an extent. If I were hiring for a more experienced reporter, I'd like to see evidence that the clips I have aren't heavily edited, and that the work located therein really is the reporter without said heavy editing.

I'd also like to see a sense that a reporter I hire can think for himself or herself. Questions such as developing an enterprise story idea and listing sources gives me an idea of the thought process behind developing such a story. I want someone who can show initiative and can generate better story ideas than I can assign.

At my first journalism job, I was initially the third person when the company was going to hire two. The managing editor explicitly told me where I was in the pecking order and also e-mailed me detailed feedback for future interviews. Then he called me a couple of days later and sent me the reporting test, which was to write a story based on information he'd sent. It had to be done in an hour, so that took up my entire lunch break. A couple of hours later, I had the job offer.

And lono, no way in Hell I could ever pass your test. I'm pretty much uninterested in grunge rock.

 

That's the one thing I think the folks in Springfield certainly will achieve with this method -- they know they'll get someone who <i>really</i> wants that job, because anyone who is lukewarm to it won't jump through those hoops.

 

Agreed. One part of the ad that got me was this: "Too many clips from applicants thus far have been soft features or game stories. Our readers deserve more. How can you prove that you can do the work required?"
My reaction: A) File those clips in the trash can; B) My clips, resume, cover letter and references should provide a clue as to whether I can do the job.