The U-Wire Top 100 Young Journalists

I know one of them... And I could not be happier for him...

 

Yeah, by the looks of it, most of them picked the right school and thrived there with the best resources college newspapers offer. What were the chances of the editors of the Daily Texan, the Daily Trojan and the Harvard Crimson being overlooked without a Top 100, anyway? Zilch, zippo, nada.

Now the idea that this list might be useful to hiring editors, well, I suppose it's no different than Wall Street firms lavishing attention on the recruiting of Harvard MBAs, except for one thing. For a medium that's supposedly in need of reinvention, the list did not dig very deep or think very creatively. Does anyone else think it odd that at a time when editors are forcing people to produce multimedia content, in this Top 100, "online" is not only segregated into its own category but merits only eight of the 100 picks?

 

What, he's too lazy to add "wich" to the word sandwich?

Damn.

Maybe the Plain-Dealer can hire him.

 

I actually know someone on the list (didn't think I would), and I couldn't be more proud of her.

 

I'm eight years out of J-school, yet I know one of the top 100 because our alumni have a connection to the current sports department through our fantasy baseball league (to give you an idea, this guy gives us a connection from 1994-present through the people we have in the league). So I feel really good about this guy carrying on our legacy, which currently includes people from ESPN.com to my humble BCS beat writing position and beyond.
Nice job, and you know who you are.

 

they have a section for tv news readers? really?

 

To echo Oz's sentiment, Andrew, if you're still checkin' in:

 

Be that as it may, I'd like to think that in this age of digital cameras, he could come up with a better, more professional picture of himself for what seems to be a fairly prestigious honor ...

 

I'd love for you to back that up with some statistics.

 

We don't need more young, fresh faces. We need good writers. I hate when I see new sports writers more into free game admission and hob-knobing than they are into reporting. This leads to them churning out work littered with generalizations or garbage aimed at impressing co-workers or colleagues -- instead of striving to serve the reader and better themselves. Infuriating.

I don't gladhand and I don't brownnose -- I do good work. Any inclusion on a top 100 list would be great; I love winning IPA or APSE awards and who doesn't? But I consider myself an above average writer and above average page designer, yet I have few aspirations to move beyond my current spot at a modestly sized Illinois newspaper (unless it's not up to me).

When a parent pulls me aside and says they love how I put the kids first, or a football players thanks me for coverage of his team, then lists be damned. That's all I need.

So now I'm rambling and not sure of my initial point -- other than to say: take awards and accolades at face value; never be satisfied; and work hard. Period.

 

Very well said.

 

An excellent point that is often lost in these threads.

Talent does not simply "get discovered" as is usually said here. There are many other variables, including timing, being available when that perfect gig comes up, who you know, ability to conduct yourself in a friendly manner and get along with co-workers and sources, being in the right place at the right time to get that breaking news clip or heartrending feature that stands out largely due to subject matter (maybe more than the actual writing), etc.

And of course, a little bit of luck. Put yourself in position in these ways, and your talent will be noticed. Just being talented isn't enough.

Also, when I see a list like this, and hear about young people honing their writing skills with an eye to becoming a great print journalist, I really dislike the negativity that is my first reaction. I never know whether to congratulate them on their drive and ambition, or tell them to enjoy the print world while it lasts, and set themselves up for the future in wiser, more stable ways. There are only so many great Web writing gigs out there.

In any event, I know a couple of the youngsters on this list. Not well, but I read them pretty often. And they are excellent.

But at the same time, I'd be curious as to the entire process. People get nominated, then chosen. Do they choose based on the quality of recommendation letter? Do they do a thorough read of their work, or do they chose first, then say "OK, send clips for us to link to?" Or are the linked clips the best work sent in by those who nominate?