1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Slate's Jack Shafer: Don't let writers go on TV

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by wicked, Sep 8, 2010.

  1. Joe Williams

    Joe Williams Well-Known Member

    I'll assume I'm one of the folks you're asking. Obviously Dick Whitman wouldn't object to any side work or hours shifted to pursue it.

    I don't think of myself as approving or disapproving. I just have my opinion on this stuff, which is that regular, demanding freelance writing could be as distracting and time-stealing as regular broadcast work. Occasional stuff, regardless of medium, seems less likely to sap the newspaper job as main priority. And yes, this is with full acknowledgement that every situation and everybody is different.

    Bravo to those who can serve 2-3 masters and still give 100 percent to the day job. It's hard and a lot of folks who claim they do are just saying that to avoid admitting to shortcuts.

    Tracy, your work ethic (or should I say work immersion) is pretty widely known. Others will cheat their newspapers, though, and I'm sure you've seen some of that. To me, if you're part of a dying industry and you're also cheating it, then you're part of the problem.

    As for Dick's view of changes in our priorities as we go through adulthood, I don't dispute that at all. It's still wrong to direct your energies away from the job that put you in position to do outside stuff, while still taking 100 percent of the check (and whatever portion of your family's livelihood) it provides.

    I don't give a crap about "selling out" journalism; I never used that term at all, Dick. But I wouldn't want an employee in any field to give a little less on the job and, in fact, give a little more to a theoretical competitor, while expecting the same status and compensation as before. Especially if I put the person in the position that attracts the outside work.

    If the bosses have no problem with it, then it's fine in that specific, micro situation, I suppose. But to deny that the corner-cutting goes on is dishonest. And to ignore that it hurts your department and your product is bad management.
     
  2. There are no bigger rubes in this business than those who swallow the "higher calling" bullshit. I do this for myself. I give my employer my best effort and they give me a paycheck in return. I take personal pride in what I produce, but when push comes to shove journalism is just a job. No more and no less.
     
  3. Joe Williams, my question really wasn't designed for any particular poster. It was merely a philosophical question about whether there is a difference in the mind of posters between a newspaper writer who does free-lance for a magazine as opposed to a newspaper writer who does free-lance for a radio/tv outlet. Point being in both cases, aren't the free-lance gigs capitalizing on the knowledge and credibility that the writer earned with the newspaper?
     
  4. Twoback

    Twoback Active Member

    I have never sworn on this board.
    Your post is such absolute garbage, such regrettable tripe, I had to restrain myself from calling it what it truly is.
    But then again, maybe I can:
    It's jealousy. That's what this all comes back to. Those of us who can go on TV or radio and make an extra buck -- it hacks off those who can't. I've always suspected it, but your post makes it clear.
    This whole argument is supposed to be about those who would take shortcuts in their journalism day job, but you just proved it's not about that. Because you admitted it's OK if you spend hundreds of hours over the course of a year writing a book, but if you do a TV hit that takes you an hour or a radio show that takes up maybe 3 hours a day, that's bad.
    Jealousy.
    Fine. I'm not going to apologize for the modest amount of broadcast freelance I've been able to do over the years.
    And if I ever got the chance to do more, I wouldn't apologize for that, either.
     
  5. Joe Williams

    Joe Williams Well-Known Member

    Mine isn't jealousy, Twoback. If someone gives honest day's work to the newspaper, I don't care what they do with their other hours (as long as they're not competing with, undermining or scooping their own paper). Don't care what outside medium they pursue, books, broadcast, whatever.

    Newspaper bosses just need to hold their people accountable, rather than getting all moist that someone on staff does radio or TV. Like some wimpy cuckold getting a thrill because his wife can step out with a local stud, or just being too chicken to say something. (Or something like that.)
     
  6. JayFarrar

    JayFarrar Well-Known Member

    I give 40 hours of work to my paper and that's all.

    I freelance as much as I can and for anyone who will pay me. If my paper wants me to be exclusive, pay me more.
     
  7. SportsDude

    SportsDude Active Member

    Part of what makes this rough, from a journalistic standpoint, is how these spots have changed. One of the perennial political writer/talking-heads wrote an article about this a while back. He talked about how writers used to be put on television to talk about what they were writing, then it moved into discussing current events, then the next thing he knew, he was opposite some think-tank asshole, whose first statement is to say what a biased hack and sellout he is.

    He started noticing how the writers were always being paired against think-tank people or political cronies, so he asked one of his bookers at CNN what the deal was, He was told it was because journalists or writers - even if it was one on the left or one on the right paired against each other - agreed too much and it was never "interesting."
     
  8. friend of the friendless

    friend of the friendless Active Member

    Mr Back,

    Obviously you'tre too busy doing your freelance broadcast gigs to read closely enough.

    No one begrudges books because they're not seen as competing media for newspapers. Anyone who uses the former argument is self-serving. Period. No higher calling or anything. It's simply that you shouldn't partner up with your employers' main competitor for readers and advertising dollars. Which broadcast is and books aren't.

    YHS, etc
     
  9. Twoback

    Twoback Active Member

    It's like saying newspapers should never advertise on TV because it's putting money in the competition's pocket.
    Or vice versa.
    If a columnist has a radio show, it's a 3-hour free commercial for the paper where he writes.
    And you find that somehow to be destructive?
     
  10. friend of the friendless

    friend of the friendless Active Member

    Mr Back,

    How much reporting are you doing (for your regular paycheque) if you can squeeze in a three-hr radio show into your usual working day? I imagine that there's a couple of hrs of prep work for said radio show.

    I don't see a three-hour radio show as a commercial for the paper. I don't see it at all. If you're brought in by a broadcaster to do a hit because you reported something in your paper exclusively, good for you. That might sell a paper or two or get someone onto the website to take a peek. But a three-hr radio show? The more you do it the less effect it will have. Zero. No incremental benefit whatsoever. Is Mike Lupica selling papers on The Reporters? He's selling Mike Lupica. If your employer has some sort of integration with the broadcaster it makes sense. Otherwise, no.

    YHS, etc
     
  11. Twoback

    Twoback Active Member

    Have never had a radio show. Don't know the answer. I do know that it's quite possible to work an 11-hour day, as I do that on average even without broadcast freelance added in.
    So if the columnist is working 8 hours on his column and 3 hours on radio, is he shorting his employer?
     
  12. Azrael

    Azrael Well-Known Member

    Walter Winchell thinks everyone on this thread is a chump, including Jack Shafer.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page