privileged sportswriters

I didn't take a good path to get where I am. I put WORK into it and persisted through a lot.

Sports writers can take whatever path they want and I am sure they will be fine. There could be a person in BFE studying journalism and end up with a SI job tomorrow because of some god-forbid reason. When I see his/her byline, I will wonder what I should have done to get that job.

It may come down to connections. It may come down to access. It ALL comes down to work and putting that work in to succeed. You get out of it what you put into it.

 

Really? It's who you know? I knew no one either at or affiliated with my current paper before applying, or at any other job I've ever had in this business. Maybe talent, or a lack thereof in your case, is why you had trouble landing a job.

Appreciate the slam at copy editors, though. That will endear you to a sizeable portion of SportsJournalists.com.

 

My path:

 

Did you get to the middle yet?

 

I've been middling for years.

 

I hope you don't really believe that. Or worse, expect that. If you do, you're going to be severely disappointed. I put a lot of time and effort into my work. Not because I expect to get everything I deserve, but because I was taught to to work hard, plain and simple. Sometimes I end up screwing myself over, and often I've not gotten what I thought I deserved. But that's life. It hasn't deterred me one bit. And, ultimately, that is why I've been able to stay employed and move forward in my career. Do I wish I was at a bigger paper? Yes. Do I think that reflects badly on me. No; I know better. Do I think I'll eventually get what I'm looking for? I don't know. Will I ever stop trying? No.

 

Then you're lucky.

And I don't think it was a slam at copy editors, plural.

 

Slam at copy editors? All I said is congratulations to being the best journalist or copy editor in your part of the nation. How is that a 'slam?' I also believe the word is sizable, but that's beside the point.

The more I learn in this business, it's who you know. Those people who I talk to say it wasn't their talent that completely got them the job at which they are now, but it was who they knew. It was who they knew that got them in contact with who they needed.

Speaking of slams, I enjoy your slam toward me saying maybe I don't have the talent. You really zinged me. Only if I didn't have high self-esteem.

 

Same here, Pallister. Change that answer to the second to last question to "yes" and we would have the same answer.

 

"Journalist or copy editor." As though they aren't the same thing.

And you have a lot more to learn about just about everything, as you've shown countless times on this site. But don't let that stop you. It never does.

The only reason I even posted on this thread was because of your assertion that your way was the only way -- an argument you often seem to make.

Carry on.

 

I'll agree with Rump in that what you put into it is what you get out of it. If you sit around, become complacent with your beat, don't feel like standing out, think, "Hey, I'm just going to dog it today," then you're not going to advance. If you bust your ass, make the calls, make the connections, dig a bit, come to work enthused and let it show, it will pay off in the long run.

I find it hard to believe anyone would ever doubt that, because the people who get the promotions and find the better papers are not those who show up to work at 4:59 and lay out the pages the same way each time, or the reporters who stand next to the other gaggle of reporters at an availability session and mooch off their work.

I would also say that who you know would get you a better recommendation than what you know, but it can't help to have both. To knock off a few college football clips for Joe Sullivan or Lynn Hoppes would do a lot better than the guy submitting prep volleyball gamers for his small-circulation weekly. That's not a slam at either party - it's just realistic.

 

SC,

Trust me, he didn't mean it as "copy editors aren't journalists," he meant it as "writers" and "copy editors." The dig wasn't across the board, but quite directed.