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!

Time Inc. judging writers based on advertsiers

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by Evil ... Thy name is Orville Redenbacher!!, Aug 18, 2014.

  1. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/18/time-inc-writers-advertisers_n_5688270.html
  2. DanOregon

    DanOregon Well-Known Member

    I looked at the chart and was trying to figure out the writers by the "scores." Not sure if the "writer-editor" was a general term for the sheets sake or the specific title. If it's senior writers I'd guess King for 2 and Gary Smith for 5.
  3. Joe Williams

    Joe Williams Well-Known Member

    Disappointed there's no "average clicks per piece" category.
  4. DanOregon

    DanOregon Well-Known Member

    I'm guessing the "Hot Clicks" staffer doesn't have to worry about making the mortgage payments.
  5. Double Down

    Double Down Well-Known Member

    King is so No. 1 or 10, people.
  6. LongTimeListener

    LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

    Verducci got a 700 percent raise.
  7. MileHigh

    MileHigh Moderator Staff Member

    This isn't isolated.
  8. Small Town Guy

    Small Town Guy Well-Known Member

    I'd say Andre Laguerre is spinning in his grave but his body first stopped by the bar for a drink or 10 to dull the pain.

    Reminds me of this bit from The Franchise, talking about when the magazine was in danger of going under until they came up with a new advertising strategy that promoted SI as one of the newsweeklies instead of leisure. From then on, it basically started raking in money.

    From a Time exec: "The advertising success is also due in part to the fact that as an editorial entity, it became something that people applauded. Laguerre was doing his job brilliantly. I felt that he was doing everything he could do as an editor to make it a success. It was not up to him to do the other."
  9. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    Exactly how does someone assigned to do an NHL story, for instance, create advertiser friendly copy? Also, once you start pimping out your copy, the reporters turned hookers are going to be tempted to go into business for themselves, and create kickback friendly copy.
  10. Schottey

    Schottey Member

    Read the last paragraph of the OP again and realize the mental gymnastics Gawker took you through.

    Being "advertiser friendly" is one metric among many. It's not the deciding score, nor is it the only quality being ranked. There is no proof that anyone was fired because they weren't "advertiser friendly," and (for all Gawker or any of us know) could've been the most advertiser-friendly shill on the planet but got fired because he wasn't a good writer or because he wasn't motivated.

    Gawker—as they are wont to do—takes a premise, then shoehorns in a loosely verified fact and does about 30 backflips trying to gin up anger insinuated that someone (if only "in part") got fired because Time INC isn't as journalistically pure and morally right as the good people at Gawker...you know, the ones that whore out plenty of clickbait (per internal memos from Denton, Daulerio and such) and are being sued by their former interns.

    Truth be told: charts like that are just a visual representation of the exact kind of qualities every single editor around the country is looking at—yes, even whether or not content is appealing to advertisers—it's just out in front of us on this chart whether than up in someone's head. If one actually takes a step back from the Gawker-engendered rage, this isn't nearly the juicy scoop they want it to be.

    Much like I said in the SoE thread...that the business-side of journalism exists doesn't mean everyone immediately throws ethics out the window. Time/SI has likely been using this or something like this for a long time and has produced plenty of fantastic work—advertiser friendly or not.
  11. Alma

    Alma Well-Known Member

    This is a reasonable post. I don't like that SI/Time would even include that category, but this is reasonable.

    Gawker's ethics, of course, are never in question.
  12. boundforboston

    boundforboston Well-Known Member

    Something I also wondered. Would you have to mention the type of stick the player used to shoot the game-winning goal?
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page