What do you know about your operation?

[JayFarrar]

Point
http://pressthink.org/2014/12/when-to-quit-your-journalism-job/

Counterpoint
http://gawker.com/do-not-listen-to-the-crazy-man-telling-you-to-quit-your-1674046932

I do my best to avoid the Jay Rosen/Jeff Jarvis thoughts on journalism but nothing he said I really disagree with. If you work in the newsroom, you should know some pretty basic things about your operation. It will make a you a better employee and a better reporter or copy editor or photographer or whatever.

Why this is such a hard concept to grasp baffles me.

 

[jr/shotglass]

I understand that it may baffle you, but if I have to follow each of Jay Rosen's points there, that's when I'LL get out of the business.

 

[Walter Lippmann]

Who are some of Jay Rosen's students who are going to eat current journalists' lunch?

 

[JayFarrar]

I understand that it may baffle you, but if I have to follow each of Jay Rosen's points there, that's when I'LL get out of the business.

I'm a writer and don't need to know why it is important to make deadlines or hit my copy length. All I have to know is how to write.

Step 1: Write
Step 2: ?
Step 3: Profits

Why should I bother to learn Step 2? That's why we have magical underpants gnomes and they'll take care of it.

 

[jr/shotglass]

Jay, making deadlines and hitting copy length is part of your job description. That's different from what Rosen's talking about.

It's like this. When friends out of the business, or people who were in the business and are now out of it, ask me how it's going, I tell them, "As long as I don't look past my computer screen, everything's great." And it's true. I work with a great bunch of people. Three days out of four, I'm working on a live edition, and the fourth day is Sunday advance, which was always part of the job anyway.

A long time ago, I realized the safest route for my sanity in this profession is to divide things into two piles -- in my control and out of my control. So I worry about hitting my page times. I worry about doing good work. I don't worry when advertising doesn't sell a single ad for a 72-page football tab.

When we went from a daily to a three-day, I didn't say a word of complaint. And if we go from a three-day to no paper at all, I'll keep my mouth shut then, too. Out of my control.

That's the short version about my "incuriosity." And like I said, if it pisses off some faux intellectuals (not you) -- hey, just an added perk.

 

[JayFarrar]

There's lot of writers out there, both young and old, who don't give a flying **** about deadlines and copy length because that's the desk's job and **** those guys anyway, all they are going to do is edit errors into my perfect copy anyway, so if I'm late, or write 300 words more than I was assigned, that's on them, not me.

If you've worked at a place that hasn't happened, you'd be the first person to work there. So what happens is the SE or ME or someone in authority sits the writer down and tells them why those things are important. And sometimes that message gets received and sometimes it doesn't.

All Rosen is saying, to me, is that you should have an idea as to how the business side works and that it isn't magical underpants gnomes. And, not for nothing, I'd freak the **** out if we had a 72-page football tab that didn't have a single ad in it. At my place that would either mean, the tab wouldn't run and that copy would be folded into the section or it would run a bare bone 12 pages or something and call it a night.

I understand the notion of dividing things into piles of things I can do and things I don't control, but that doesn't mean checking out entirely. It is how talented people stay in the same job for decades instead of advancing in their organizations.

 

[jr/shotglass]

I can see your side of it. I'm happy and sane with this end.

There's also the argument that advancement may not be in the front of everyone's mind. Somebody's still the foot soldiers, and if you don't have some foot soldiers who understand their job, you're in trouble then, too.

If I wanted to be on the executive end, I would have pursued that long ago. I like think-tank meetings less than I like Spam.

There's lot of writers out there, both young and old, who don't give a flying **** about deadlines and copy length because that's the desk's job and **** those guys anyway, all they are going to do is edit errors into my perfect copy anyway, so if I'm late, or write 300 words more than I was assigned, that's on them, not me.

And those are the people who have the problem.

 

[LongTimeListener]

This is a case where "begs the question" would be relevant, because there's a huge gap in logic here.

Anyone who is paying attention to the business side of journalism would know enough to get out of journalism.

Those snowflakes in Jay Rosen's class who would eat the lunch of current journalists? If they know so little about the world, that lunch is going to be all the eat. They're going to starve.

 

[The Big Ragu]

It goes beyond what your specific job is or isn't. You are part of something bigger than your writing and editing job. I can't understand why anyone wouldn't at least have the curiosity to understand how what they spend their day doing fits into the bigger picture. ... let alone trying to hone in on doing their job in a way that develops readership and makes for better ad sales.

You are selling a product. It's that simple.

You are part of a business that involves many different jobs. As a writer or an editor, it doesn't mean you need to spend your day doing circulation work or ad sales work. But we're simply taking about understanding the relationships between the things, and how they can best work together to create the strongest business possible.

When all of those things -- editorial, readership, ads -- are aligned right, it makes the most salable product. I have heard it described as a three-legged stool. You need a product that speaks to the audience that is part of the strategy. If you get that part wrong, you are never going to develop that audience, or if you already have it, you will lose it. The ability to sell ads depends on that audience, which is why the ability to sell ads depends on editorial that is tailored properly. Take away any of the three legs and you have a stool that is wobbly, at best.

I agree with most of what he wrote -- and the fact that he lives in an ivory tower really doesn't speak to whether what he wrote is right or wrong.

 

[Walter Lippmann]

Is it desirable to be a journalist when trying to emulate BuzzFeed is considered a worthy objective? Sure, you might be able to eat, but there also is something to be said for those who desire to create quality work instead of pandering for clicks.

 

[Meatie Pie]

It's easier to just avoid considering ideas or topics of consequence. Easier to never seek to achieve.

Never have to ponder falling short of one's goals that way. Never have to wonder what tomorrow might bring when you just live day by day.

Rosen made some good points, and some points that weren't so good. Nolan's rebuttal was fine.

But at this point, there is no debate on two topics.
- If you remain in newspapers, you are on borrowed time, professionally
- Journalism will survive and thrive. The trick is making money in it.

 

[Baron Scicluna]

So someone should forget about the roof over their head and the food on the table and leave their job because they don't understand why corporate chooses to do what they want to do? What about those who change their business model every six months?

 

[Baron Scicluna]

Rosen also said that nothing has been invented to take the place of The Editor. So then, what are all,those Audience Engagement Coaches at Gannett?

 

[Editude]

My job is knowing my operation: I have much more of a macro view than a micro one at this point. And it's an operation subject to many of the ongoing industry issues while having some of its own. Each day remains an opportunity to screw it up while also finding small victories. Twas always thus, and always thus will be. Until it isn't.

 

[Frank_Ridgeway]

My dad was a newspaper advertising salesman and manager. Understanding how and why he did what he did made me think twice before bitching about some things, but I don't think it really helped me in my career, not even when I was a glass office. A couple jobs ago when we finally got pagination and would be dealing directly with the pressmen, I bought a college text on how to operate presses so I wouldn't ask them to do the impossible. But the book was way beyond my ability to understand it.

It's good to know how it works, because it shows we care and it helps when interacting with other departments, so long as you don't think you know more about their jobs than they do. Beyond that, I can't say that anyplace I've worked has figured out the magic formula, and a couple places I've freelanced for -- and online is all they do -- are barely alive now. I don't really trust people who say they know what they are doing because I have yet to meet anyone who did. I have to think that if the academics knew how to make money online from news, they would be out making billions.