Is what we do demeaning?

[zeke12]

I'll post something more thoughtful later, but for now, let's all take it down one notch and cut the noob some slack. Please.

I know there are times I've felt like what I was doing at any one time was utterly pointless, and there were times I interviewed HS kids who were surely looking at me going "Why the **** are you here..."

That said, numerous people have given the correct answers. You're there for the readers and you're there for yourself.

 

[hockeybeat]

If you can't "make a connection" with the people you cover, I can only offer this bit of advice: Work harder. Make an effort to talk to people on a personal level.

It's not tough. People want to talk. You have to ask the right questions.

 

[Dangerous_K]

In any profession you'll encounter people who are huge assholes. It's just a fact. It doesn't matter if you're a hedge fund manager or a burger flipper. You can't control how others are going to act, so you've just got to deal.

Anytime a coach acts like the question I asked was retarded, an athlete big leagues me, or an SID...well, acts like an SID, I keep in mind I could be covering little league.

 

[In Cold Blood]

I don't think I'll ever find this job demeaning. Sure, there are some hoops to jump through. Sure, some coaches and SIDs and athletes are total pricks. Sure, the corporate side of newspapers blows donkey balls.

But I get paid to write all day long. On top of that, I get paid to write about sports.

What more could i ask for?

 

[STLIrish]

Pulitzer,

Not long ago, you started a thread mulling a switch to news side. If you find interviewing pedestal-bound college athletes demeaning (and I can see how you might), that may be a decent switch for you. Calling the families of murder victims and fatal accidents will ground you in the real world pretty fast.
I think I know what you're trying to say with this thread. But don't expect a lot of sympathy around here.

 

[Frank_Ridgeway]

I was 16 when I started interviewing athletes and 22 when I stopped, for the most part. I had some peculiar assignments -- including interviewing professional wrestlers five or six years before it became a campy "in" thing, when it was just regarded as entertainment for morons -- but I didn't really think it was demeaning until I started covering MLB. When they went on strike in 1981, I realized how much I disliked dealing with some of those people and I asked to work the desk.

It was a bad team with some sour players who took it out on us, and I was just inexperienced enough to believe that this was a sucky way to make a living, having to put up with bull**** from some cretin so I could write down his every mangled word in a notebook. I had made it to a good beat and I didn't enjoy it much, so I didn't see much point in doing it any longer. But since then I've worked with a number of people who covered sports for 30-40 years and managed to do it without losing their dignity or class -- or maybe they acquired progressively more dignity and class as they went along, I don't know. I suppose you're only demeaned if you let yourself be demeaned. I'm not sure it would be any better covering the White House, but I think I landed that beat a few years too soon.

 

[Barsuk]

I was 16 when I started interviewing athletes and 22 when I stopped, for the most part. I had some peculiar assignments -- including interviewing professional wrestlers five or six years before it became a campy "in" thing, when it was just regarded as entertainment for morons -- but I didn't really think it was demeaning until I started covering MLB. When they went on strike in 1981, I realized how much I disliked dealing with some of those people and I asked to work the desk.

It was a bad team with some sour players who took it out on us, and I was just inexperienced enough to believe that this was a sucky way to make a living, having to put up with bull**** from some cretin so I could write down his every mangled word in a notebook. I had made it to a good beat and I didn't enjoy it much, so I didn't see much point in doing it any longer. But since then I've worked with a number of people who covered sports for 30-40 years and managed to do it without losing their dignity or class -- or maybe they acquired progressively more dignity and class as they went along, I don't know. I suppose you're only demeaned if you let yourself be demeaned. I'm not sure it would be any better covering the White House, but I think I landed that beat a few years too soon.

I was about to shut down the computer and go to bed until I saw Frank had posted here, and I had to read his wise words first. We might as well lock all the threads after he posts, because he generally nails it as well as it's going to be nailed.

Well said, Frank.

 

[waynew]

Pulitzerwannabe, I could be wrong but the job might not be a good fit for you. i agree with one of the other posts in encouraging you -- if you aren't liking the job and aren't liking the money, or lack of money, do think about getting out.

It's not for everyone.

And you are dead-on about the jr. high antics of the posters on this board.

Two ways to think about career work: Are you working around like-minded people, are you around the people (co-workers, but also people you come into contact with and work with)? If not, you might not be in the right field.

Another way is to think about it is if you want to be in what is, by its design, an adversarial role or want to be more in a team, working with others toward something role. Being a journalist is being in an adversarial role. More so for news, less for sports of course. Nothing wrong with that. It's good we have such folks doing such work of course. But it's not for everyone.

The stuff about "any job is what you make it" is pablum. Some jobs aren't a good fit. You asked if anyone was feeling discouraged. I had my ups and downs as a reporter. I finally. It was a great move. Nights and weekends off and now I make about 5 times the amount of money I used to make. At the same time, I'm glad my foundation is made up of journalism experience -- good foundation for lots of careers.

So there are some thoughts for you. I have no idea if anything hits a cord but there you go

 

[boots]

I think Pulitzer has a right to feel as he does. He's a professional yet he watches others make more money and not put up with half the egos and other crap.
Perhaps its time to look at another line of work. One that will pay him more money and feel less demeaning. Let's face it, there aren't too many places outside of journalism hiring guys with a work history of interviewing naked or half-naked athletes.
He's at a crossroad. If you've never been there, you're lucky.

 

[amraeder]

The best advice I can give you is to try to turn the recroder off after you've got what you need and shoot the **** with the people you cover for a bit. Can't happen every time, but when you have the time.
After I got what I needed from practice today, I just talked with local football coach for maybe 20 minutes about this that and the next thing. Got him to open up about the problems his team's been having, bash his quarterback, talk about the coaching situation at a near-by school and about the methods of cheating on a college test.
None of it was for print, it's kind of an odd variety, but it's stuff we both enjoyed talking about and it helps build up the relationships.
He's not the only coach or player I deal with that I feel I have a really good connection with and it's talks like this that help.

Hope that helps you.

 

[Pulitzer Wannabe]

I actually do LOVE journalism. I think the problem is I don't always feel like what I do IS journalism. I appreciate HockeyBeat and amraeder's thoughts about me trying to connect more with the people I cover, but it's not set up that way. It's regimented - boom, boom, boom. It's like a quote assembly machine for everybody, and there's little way around it.

I'm not trying to be a downer or be argumentative. Just trying to give some context.

 

[STLIrish]

I actually do LOVE journalism. I think the problem is I don't always feel like what I do IS journalism. I appreciate HockeyBeat and amraeder's thoughts about me trying to connect more with the people I cover, but it's not set up that way. It's regimented - boom, boom, boom. It's like a quote assembly machine for everybody, and there's little way around it.

I'm not trying to be a downer or be argumentative. Just trying to give some context.

Pulitzer. Try news-side for a bit. Seriously. Not politics or business (at least not state/national politics or big business. They're quote factories, too.) But a cops beat, or GA, or education, or social services or health care. Somewhere you can write stories about real people facing real problems. People who haven't been "media trained" and are often honored to talk to you. Instead of talking to, as Boots put-it, half-naked athletes, on their schedule.

 

[farmerjerome]

I don't think that what we do is demeaning, I know it. :D

Everyone on this board pretty much knows that I'm okay making a complete ass out of myself. Honestly, that's how I deal with the job. Coaches in my area think I'm a total idiot until they see the finished product.

I'm okay with that, as long as it gets the job done and it keeps me sane.

At least you're not in retail.

 

[Tom Petty]

i think PW put a bit of his heart into his initial post and then a buncha folks responded in a knee-jerk manner. i can understand what he's getting at even if i haven't experienced the same thing.

but, the older i get, the less important the subjects we cover become. throw in a douchebag SID and a ***** quarterback on a beat, and ****, maybe i'm making the same post if i'm a writer in his position.

there's nothing wrong with questioning what we do ... and i don't think we should bitchslap folks who do as much. we can have a little empathy at times, can't we?

and, btw, i still think waynew is an idiot. the jr. high antics remark was juvenile and uncalled for.

 

[boots]

i think PW put a bit of his heart into his initial post and then a buncha folks responded in a knee-jerk manner. i can understand what he's getting at even if i haven't experienced the same thing.

but, the older i get, the less important the subjects we cover become. throw in a douchebag SID and a ***** quarterback on a beat, and ****, maybe i'm making the same post if i'm a writer in his position.

there's nothing wrong with questioning what we do ... and i don't think we should bitchslap folks who do as much. we can have a little empathy at times, can't we?

and, btw, i still think waynew is an idiot. the jr. high antics remark was juvenile and uncalled for.

Many of the remarks made were juvenile and uncalled for. Pulitzer has lost his zeal for the business and that's understandable. He has an important decision to make.
But instead of wishing him well, the usual clowns, and they know who and what they are, belittle him and think it's funny.
As a whole, the cynical and cliquish behavior by many along here is what you find on any beat, be pro, college or prep.

 

[Tom Petty]

i think PW put a bit of his heart into his initial post and then a buncha folks responded in a knee-jerk manner. i can understand what he's getting at even if i haven't experienced the same thing.

but, the older i get, the less important the subjects we cover become. throw in a douchebag SID and a ***** quarterback on a beat, and ****, maybe i'm making the same post if i'm a writer in his position.

there's nothing wrong with questioning what we do ... and i don't think we should bitchslap folks who do as much. we can have a little empathy at times, can't we?

and, btw, i still think waynew is an idiot. the jr. high antics remark was juvenile and uncalled for.

Many of the remarks made were juvenile and uncalled for. Pulitzer has lost his zeal for the business and that's understandable. He has an important decision to make.
But instead of wishing him well, the usual clowns, and they know who and what they are, belittle him and think it's funny.
As a whole, the cynical and cliquish behavior by many along here is what you find on any beat, be pro, college or prep.

boots, i don't think it had anything to do with cliquish behavior. i think a lotta folks in our business "suck it up" on a daily basis and expect others to do as much without giving honest feedback about how they feel concerning certain subjects.

 

[SixToe]

Not everything we do is journalism, so your feelings are valid.

Slinging a shovel isn't as fun as watching the construction from under the supervisor's hat. Both jobs have to be done, though.

When you do get to practice what you consider journalism, enjoy it. Try to do it more often. Seek ways to get better with it if you have someone in the office who can help.

As for connecting with the people you cover, do you ever just call to talk or go by to visit without the intent of digging for a story or looking for quotes? Is there ever time for you to just hang out with someone, and do you take advantage of it?

Some beats or sources provide better avenues to do these things. Others don't and you have to pick and choose your spots on those.


Take a look at yourself, your situation, your goals and what you want to do with your future. Self-assessment isn't a bad thing. It may be time for a change, a complete career overhaul or a few personal changes that could make a difference.

Good luck.

 

[boots]

i think PW put a bit of his heart into his initial post and then a buncha folks responded in a knee-jerk manner. i can understand what he's getting at even if i haven't experienced the same thing.

but, the older i get, the less important the subjects we cover become. throw in a douchebag SID and a ***** quarterback on a beat, and ****, maybe i'm making the same post if i'm a writer in his position.

there's nothing wrong with questioning what we do ... and i don't think we should bitchslap folks who do as much. we can have a little empathy at times, can't we?

and, btw, i still think waynew is an idiot. the jr. high antics remark was juvenile and uncalled for.

Many of the remarks made were juvenile and uncalled for. Pulitzer has lost his zeal for the business and that's understandable. He has an important decision to make.
But instead of wishing him well, the usual clowns, and they know who and what they are, belittle him and think it's funny.
As a whole, the cynical and cliquish behavior by many along here is what you find on any beat, be pro, college or prep.

boots, i don't think it had anything to do with cliquish behavior. i think a lotta folks in our business "suck it up" on a daily basis and expect others to do as much without giving honest feedback about how they feel concerning certain subjects.

I see your point but the cliquish, herd mentality, behavior permeates the business and this message board. There was no excuse for people jumping on Pulitzer because he feels that it might be time to leave the business. This isn't a gang and at times, I too wonder if it's a profession or an existence.
Many of the people who post here aren't making great money. They're struggling. Many of them are writing about people whose lives are arguably more glamorous than their own. After a while, that takes a toll. Unless you're a vegtable, you begin to examine your life and your goals. You ask yourself are the long hours and crappy pay worth it.

 

[Tom Petty]

i think PW put a bit of his heart into his initial post and then a buncha folks responded in a knee-jerk manner. i can understand what he's getting at even if i haven't experienced the same thing.

but, the older i get, the less important the subjects we cover become. throw in a douchebag SID and a ***** quarterback on a beat, and ****, maybe i'm making the same post if i'm a writer in his position.

there's nothing wrong with questioning what we do ... and i don't think we should bitchslap folks who do as much. we can have a little empathy at times, can't we?

and, btw, i still think waynew is an idiot. the jr. high antics remark was juvenile and uncalled for.

Many of the remarks made were juvenile and uncalled for. Pulitzer has lost his zeal for the business and that's understandable. He has an important decision to make.
But instead of wishing him well, the usual clowns, and they know who and what they are, belittle him and think it's funny.
As a whole, the cynical and cliquish behavior by many along here is what you find on any beat, be pro, college or prep.

boots, i don't think it had anything to do with cliquish behavior. i think a lotta folks in our business "suck it up" on a daily basis and expect others to do as much without giving honest feedback about how they feel concerning certain subjects.

I see your point but the cliquish, herd mentality, behavior permeates the business and this message board. There was no excuse for people jumping on Pulitzer because he feels that it might be time to leave the business. This isn't a gang and at times, I too wonder if it's a profession or an existence.
Many of the people who post here aren't making great money. They're struggling. Many of them are writing about people whose lives are arguably more glamorous than their own. After a while, that takes a toll. Unless you're a vegtable, you begin to examine your life and your goals. You ask yourself are the long hours and crappy pay worth it.

boots - i've moved up the food chain, from job to job, for several years ... far away from everything i grew accustomed to while growing up. and to be honest, i'm glad we are gangish. some of my best friends are in this profession, and, in the end, they are some of the only folks i can rely on besides mrs. petty and the heartbreakers. no matter what paper i go to, i have a good idea at least one person will have my back, and i don't think that can be said for every profession.

maybe PW should have waited awhile before he posted such a "deep" post. i think i might have drawn a different response if i had posted the same thing.

not all of us are bad, and we do tend to be loyal as hell.

 

[boots]

The time is right for him. Burnout happens. But what's sad is that the guy came on here looking for answers and got ****ted on.