[QUOTE=dalej42]
How much effort do the people who write the editorials actually put into their work? Do they try to write controversial pieces just to encourage a lot of reader outrage?
[/QUOTE]
I never worked directly with anyone in the editorial department, but I know they took their work seriously. I don’t think any of the editorials I ever saw were particularly outrageous or controversial in their positions. Some newspapers are more opinionated than others, though.
[QUOTE=BuzzSaw101]
Did you know it was coming or did you feel pretty safe and it was a major shock?
[/QUOTE]
I had some idea it was coming, though I was still surprised that I was chosen. The night before, the editors were all there fairly late and were having meetings until around 9 p.m. or so. Buyouts were offered about a month earlier, and we were told that layoffs would be necessary if they didn’t get enough takers. Since the buyout package was the same they’d offered twice in the last 18 months, there weren’t many.
I was a little shocked when I got the phone call, since I was probably one of the cheapest employees in our department - only two years into the position from college, and no benefits, since my wife and I get better health coverage through her work than the packages offered by McClatchy. But I’d discussed the possibility with my wife the night before and I wasn’t totally blown away.
[QUOTE=NinetyWt]
I am curious about the change in the way reporters cover the news, since the days when my mom was a reporter… So, is this actually the story?
[/QUOTE]
It is true that reporters aren’t supposed to give sources any access to the whole story before it’s published. It’s certainly okay for reporters to review the sources’ quotes with them and make sure they’re accurate. I can say that I’ve been quoted a few times myself for various stories and I’ve never felt that my voice or viewpoint was truly represented in the story. A lot of interviews get whittled down from 45-minute conversations to one or two sentences, and oftentimes, they aren’t the sentences the sources thought would get used. But if you feel you’re consistently being misrepresented by reporters, you should speak with their editors or news directors and address your concerns. It’s certainly possible that the reporters don’t understand your subject well enough to represent you or your organization accurately, and you’re well within your rights to try and rectify that. And, of course, some reporters are just not very good at their jobs.
[QUOTE=MissGypsy]
What led you to doing page design? Was that your goal, or did you just happen into it?
[/QUOTE]
I took a layout and design class as part of my journalism requirement in college and found I was actually fairly good at it. The following semester, I got the opportunity to become the editor of my college paper, and I redesigned the paper as part of an advanced layout independent study. My portfolio was good enough to get me a visual journalism summer fellowship at the Poynter Institute, and eventually this job.
Frankly, one reason I decided to use my design skills rather than my reporting clips to get a job was because at that time, it was a lot easier to get a design job in newspapers than to become a reporter. The pay was better, too. Of course, there aren’t any jobs at all now.
[QUOTE=Dosipede]
How was the mood after the first round of layoffs? Did the rumors and gallows humor run rampant? Did the company offer buyouts before the second round, as they did around here? If so, are you kicking yourself now for not taking it? What did the staff look like before the layoffs, as far as numbers and workload? How does it look after? How did you get into the newspaper business? Do you plan on staying in print journalism, or are you exploring options? Are you willing to relocate to stay in the industry?
[/QUOTE]
The mood in the newsroom has been gloomy for about a year now. And ever since I got there, there’s been a hiring freeze in effect, and we lost a lot of people through attrition. I’m not sure of the exact numbers, but I think the newsroom is down to around 220 people now. I think the paper’s a little top-heavy on editors now - we didn’t lose any metro editors, photo editors or business editors in this round of layoffs, for example. All worker bees.
The severance package is actually the same as the buyout, which is six weeks’ pay for me. So it’s not completely inhumane. I’m not sure I’d want to work in newspapers again, frankly. It would feel like jumping off one sinking ship onto another. I don’t know if there’s a plan, at McClatchy or elsewhere, to staunch the bleeding, and I’d hate to go through this again in six months or a year at another paper. I’m looking to relocate.
[QUOTE=Leaper]
In the great debate over whether the “mainstream media” is biased one way or the other, one part of the argument keeps coming to the forefront: Conservatives: The reporters are all liberal! And they keep inserting their biases into their reporting! Liberals: That’s not true! Even if it were, the newspaper owners are all conservative! They’re the big influence, not the reporters! Where do you fall in this debate? And in a related question, how much influence does a Rupert Murdoch actually exert on the papers he owns?
[/QUOTE]
I’ve known both liberal and conservative reporters, section editors and copy editors. I don’t think it’s a matter of reporters sitting down and saying, “Okay, so I’d really like to see universal healthcare, so I’m going to find sources and quotes that will try to put a positive spin on that.” And most newspapers get complaints from both sides of the aisle, often on the same stories, about the obvious and horrifying bias in the other direction. I think if there’s a bias in reporting, it’s toward lazy writing. It’s much easier to skim the obvious of a subject and crank out 20 inches than to dig deep, beyond preconceived notions, and write a story that no one would have predicted. But as newspapers and news organizations cut back on people and resources, fewer and fewer reporters will have time for that kind of reporting, and the news will get shallower.
I can’t speak for Rupert Murdoch, but at least at McClatchy, I never heard of anyone at Corporate pushing any agenda whatsoever. All they wanted was their money. (Apparently, quite a bit more than The Star could make. Amazing how incurring over a billion dollars in debt to buy Knight-Ridder made that clear.)