What do editors look for when hiring editors?

[Write-brained]

I'm not looking to become an editor right now, but I've been wondering about this while thinking back on former and current editors.

There seemed to be very few common denominators:

As many had an eye for the written word as those who didn't. Very, very few could make a decision quickly. Many were personable, but more had little personality. Most were seasoned veterans, but not all. Very few were even among the best reporter/writer in the newsroom.

The only common trait 99 percent of them shared was a penchant for kissing up and not questioning decisions that come down from the top.

What do you think? And I'd sure like to hear from editors who've hired editors.

Maybe I'm a little biased, but I don't think I'm too off base. A lot of senior editors sure like to hire people who kiss their ass.

 

[jfs1000]

Little harsh.

I think editors are more political because unlike writers who a lot of time work from home and off hours, these guys have an office politic to navigate. Also, we are always questioning uthority while doing our job. Our editors are supposed to keep us grounded and on the ball.

What's the saying? Those that can't do, edit?

LOL, just kidding guys.

 

[Frank_Ridgeway]

The only common trait 99 percent of them shared was a penchant for kissing up and not questioning decisions that come down from the top.

I don't know if I'd put it that high, but it's pretty bad.

 

[fishwrapper]

You guys are so jaded.
Past working relationship -- at some level -- is No. 1.

 

[Ace]

You all are crazy ... damn, I'm outta chapstick.

 

[EE94]

The only common trait 99 percent of them shared was a penchant for kissing up and not questioning decisions that come down from the top.

I don't know if I'd put it that high, but it's pretty bad.

this **** drives me ****ing crazy.
Good editors take more **** from above then any writer would, or realizes.

Most editors bust their ass to dilute the bull**** that often comes from upper management.

Do you know how many times some UM type will try to direct coverage?

The UM types are generally business types that wouldn't know a story from a hole in the wall, but they're also mostly Type-A personalities that don't respond to "No, that's a stupid idea."

Good editors spend a lot of energy reworking such suggestions into somethign plausible and selling it back to Type-A so he doesn't "lose face"

(Imagine the dynamic of you, Joe Reporter - in the "superior" role, asking a PR person (in the editor role) for somethign and being told that's a ****ing stupid idea and no, PR guy won't do that. How are you going to respond?)

As romantic as it is to lower staff to imagine themselves telling "the man" to shove it up their ass, it just doesn't work that way.

One day you'll grow up and realize that.

 

[Frank_Ridgeway]

Let me get this straight, EE: You don't believe there are vastly more suckups in such roles than there used to be?

 

[Ace]

There are plenty who aren't fawning suckups but who simply accept whatever their boss says without argument.

Many times I have seen the big bossman wonder how the hell something happened and the SE says that's what you wanted.

 

[EE94]

Let me get this straight, EE: You don't believe there are vastly more suckups in such roles than there used to be?

I doubt the ratio of suckups to strong editors has changed much, and perhaps because I've worked at large organizations most of my career I've seen a better quality of editor.

being an editor, I'd like to think I'm not a suckup.

But I know which battles to fight and which to surrender.

I think that makes me pragmatic, and experienced.

Those battles I do surrender, I make sure the staff that must carry out the orders know my feelings on it and I take the time to explain why its necessary.

It doesn't always make the staff happy, but I think it helps them understand a modern work environment.

 

[forever_town]

If my publisher walked in and told me I could hire an AME or a news editor, after I picked myself up off the floor and after I questioned his sudden change of tune, what I'd look for is someone who can think independently, someone who isn't afraid to suggest ways of improving what we do, someone who isn't afraid to tell me I'm wrong, and someone who's a team player.

In short, the same things I look for in a reporter, only someone with better people management skills than a fresh out of college reporter.

 

[pallister]

I think the problem is the "modern work environment."

 

[Ace]

Let me get this straight, EE: You don't believe there are vastly more suckups in such roles than there used to be?

I doubt the ratio of suckups to strong editors has changed much, and perhaps because I've worked at large organizations most of my career I've seen a better quality of editor.

being an editor, I'd like to think I'm not a suckup.

But I know which battles to fight and which to surrender.

I think that makes me pragmatic, and experienced.

Those battles I do surrender, I make sure the staff that must carry out the orders know my feelings on it and I take the time to explain why its necessary.

It doesn't always make the staff happy, but I think it helps them understand a modern work environment.

The management playbook on that would be to act as if the idea you don't agree with but are instituting anyway is your own and not to pass the buck.

 

[fishwrapper]

This is the typical "us vs. them" debate.
"No, our job is tougher."
"No. Our parents whine at us."
"But, we..."

The best editors -- like humans -- are confident, competent dwellers conscious of the needs of others.

 

[Frank_Ridgeway]

There were more straight shooters in the biz 20 years ago. Books like "When MBAs Rule The Newsroom" and James Squires' "Read All About It" illustrated the cultural shift in the '90s. Or, shall we say, the "modern work environment." Barf.

 

[Grimace]

Don't forget the ability to go to an hour morning meeting, hour afternoon meeting and two-hour lunch, AND still finding time to play golf on Fridays and show up at the big events for the free food.

 

[EE94]

Let me get this straight, EE: You don't believe there are vastly more suckups in such roles than there used to be?

I doubt the ratio of suckups to strong editors has changed much, and perhaps because I've worked at large organizations most of my career I've seen a better quality of editor.

being an editor, I'd like to think I'm not a suckup.

But I know which battles to fight and which to surrender.

I think that makes me pragmatic, and experienced.

Those battles I do surrender, I make sure the staff that must carry out the orders know my feelings on it and I take the time to explain why its necessary.

It doesn't always make the staff happy, but I think it helps them understand a modern work environment.

The management playbook on that would be to act as if the idea you don't agree with but are instituting anyway is your own and not to pass the buck.

It wasn't passing the buck. It was sharing the reality.
There were some assignments I had to pass on that my staff just knew wasn't of my choosing. I wasn't about to bull**** them with some military mantra or Just do It.
What I would say was, "I understand why you think this is stupid, but I need you to do it and here's why.

I found the appreciated the candor.

 

[Ace]

Let me get this straight, EE: You don't believe there are vastly more suckups in such roles than there used to be?

I doubt the ratio of suckups to strong editors has changed much, and perhaps because I've worked at large organizations most of my career I've seen a better quality of editor.

being an editor, I'd like to think I'm not a suckup.

But I know which battles to fight and which to surrender.

I think that makes me pragmatic, and experienced.

Those battles I do surrender, I make sure the staff that must carry out the orders know my feelings on it and I take the time to explain why its necessary.

It doesn't always make the staff happy, but I think it helps them understand a modern work environment.

The management playbook on that would be to act as if the idea you don't agree with but are instituting anyway is your own and not to pass the buck.

It wasn't passing the buck. It was sharing the reality.
There were some assignments I had to pass on that my staff just knew wasn't of my choosing. I wasn't about to bull**** them with some military mantra or Just do It.
What I would say was, "I understand why you think this is stupid, but I need you to do it and here's why.

I found the appreciated the candor.

I'm sure they did. Just pointing out that most manager training types would not approve.

 

[EE94]

Let me get this straight, EE: You don't believe there are vastly more suckups in such roles than there used to be?

I doubt the ratio of suckups to strong editors has changed much, and perhaps because I've worked at large organizations most of my career I've seen a better quality of editor.

being an editor, I'd like to think I'm not a suckup.

But I know which battles to fight and which to surrender.

I think that makes me pragmatic, and experienced.

Those battles I do surrender, I make sure the staff that must carry out the orders know my feelings on it and I take the time to explain why its necessary.

It doesn't always make the staff happy, but I think it helps them understand a modern work environment.

The management playbook on that would be to act as if the idea you don't agree with but are instituting anyway is your own and not to pass the buck.

It wasn't passing the buck. It was sharing the reality.
There were some assignments I had to pass on that my staff just knew wasn't of my choosing. I wasn't about to bull**** them with some military mantra or Just do It.
What I would say was, "I understand why you think this is stupid, but I need you to do it and here's why.

I found the appreciated the candor.

I'm sure they did. Just pointing out that most manager training types would not approve.

Why I always liked Tom Hanks' character in Saving Private Ryan.
He tells his squad the assignment is bull****, but it's about the greater good - If saving Ryan means we get to go home, then we do it.
(or soemthing like that)

 

[Frank_Ridgeway]

EE, who in their right mind is going to put their heart into work that their boss says is bull**** before they even start? If you have neither the guts to tell your boss it's a bad idea nor the creativity to turn it into something of value that will challenge the people who have to do it, do everyone a favor and step down.

 

[jps]

Let me get this straight, EE: You don't believe there are vastly more suckups in such roles than there used to be?

I doubt the ratio of suckups to strong editors has changed much, and perhaps because I've worked at large organizations most of my career I've seen a better quality of editor.

being an editor, I'd like to think I'm not a suckup.

But I know which battles to fight and which to surrender.

I think that makes me pragmatic, and experienced.

Those battles I do surrender, I make sure the staff that must carry out the orders know my feelings on it and I take the time to explain why its necessary.

It doesn't always make the staff happy, but I think it helps them understand a modern work environment.

The management playbook on that would be to act as if the idea you don't agree with but are instituting anyway is your own and not to pass the buck.

It wasn't passing the buck. It was sharing the reality.
There were some assignments I had to pass on that my staff just knew wasn't of my choosing. I wasn't about to bull**** them with some military mantra or Just do It.
What I would say was, "I understand why you think this is stupid, but I need you to do it and here's why.

I found the appreciated the candor.

I'm sure they did. Just pointing out that most manager training types would not approve.

Yet I follow the same method with my staff. It is appreciated and makes the department a much more cohesive unit.

In fact, with certain edicts, UM has told me to go ahead and say, look, this is coming from above and we've gotta do it. That doesn't mean it gets blown off or gets done half-assed -- it's just fair to let yhour department know the whys sometimes.