| Back to Home > Bulletin Board > Media Issues > Topic: Unbelievable!!!! |
Topic: Unbelievable!!!!
| Author | Message |
| dribbledrive1 | Posted – 10/26/2007 12:26:48 PM | show profile That's all well put. It's really putting a squeeze on the middle. People at the highest end -- who use, say, design as a competitive advantage -- will pay because they see the value in it. What's happened, though, is a huge separation between that top level and the next level. It's not as gradual as it used to be, but a quick fall. Partly, this is a result of software improvements, so less competent people can do a decent job in design. As a writer, I have to constantly assess the marketplace and shift as what people are willing to pay for changes. --I think the real issue here is the broader one that many of us are working in professions that used to operate a certain way and pay a certain amount, but things in the media industry have changed a lot because of various factors that seem out of our control, and that can be frustrating, scary and demoralizing.-- |
| Aratinga | Posted – 10/27/2007 12:12:02 PM | show profile I did the nonprofit thing in DC for almost 20 years. I also recently landed a great job in New York after being here all of 6 weeks, and it was a job I interviewed for less than a week after I arrived. In the meantime, I interviewed at 6 or 7 other places, got callbacks to almost all of them, and turned down a few. Lemme tellya, the for-profit world doesn't pay much better than the non-profit world. Anyone who is expecting a jump of more than about $10-$15K from one to the other for the same work is dreaming. PUBLISHING does not pay well. That said, the for-profit world is more portable and offers more opportunity for career growth if the company is managed well. The non-profit world offers more benefits (usually far more vacation and sick leave) and flexibility in terms of things like "flex-time," commuter reimbursement programs, and so on. Again, PUBLISHING does not pay well. CD, you've been grumbling about this for the nine months I've been reading these boards, and many times you've said you're getting out of the business. Why don't you just go into freelance (if you haven't already)? Seriously. The reality is the field just does not pay well if you are on staff. That's all there is to it. You're not going to find a six-figure income working for someone else in publishing unless you are a high-level director, a vice president, or another executive type, or unless you are a glam editor (and celebrity in your own right). The other alternative is to go into business for yourself. I'm not flaming you. Just saying, you are not going to get rich in publishing if you are on the creative side of it. That's reality. |
| Aratinga | Posted – 10/27/2007 12:26:03 PM | show profile Oh, and CD? The Washington Monthly is known far more for its words than it's prettiness. Maybe you've never heard of it and therefore couldn't give a rat's patootie about it, but for a "hoity-toity" journalist, having the Washington Monthly on the resume is QUITE an accomplishment and one that garners a lot of respect. And frankly, I think Wired sucks. Just my opinion. I think it's ugly, cluttered, and boring. |
| ConfidentDesigner | Posted – 10/27/2007 12:35:33 PM | show profile Might be a feather in a JOURNALIST'S cap but doesn't do squat for an art director. Oh, and by the way, I AM freelancing now. Just wanted to point out at $25K for an experienced art director is below poverty-level and hardly a living wage. How can that be right? I don't know. Since you're such an expert, perhaps you can explain that to us. I complain about this issue because it's obviously egregious and permeates the entire industry. It's not getting better. In fact, it's getting worse. Besides, last I checked it's a free country and we've got uh, FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS, just like you journalists do. |
| Aratinga | Posted – 10/28/2007 11:25:43 AM | show profile And in the US of A, which is a capitalist nation, a publication like the Washington Monthly is free to offer what it deems the position is worth. Maybe it offers diddly for an art director because that's what it deems art is worth. Like I said, it's not known for its prettiness. It's known for its journalism. In other words, if it means art means diddly to the WM, and the WM means diddly for an art director in terms of portfolio, then why are you so upset? Because it "permeates?" You miss the whole point, then. Oh, and? It does not "permeate." When it comes to publishing, I will maintain two things: 1. The cream rises to the top. As with any other profession, top talent gets top pay. Always has been that way, always will be that way. Perhaps "top pay" in publishing is not "top pay" in, say, neurosurgery, but again, publishing will never make a "creative" rich. 2. People get what they accept. If you (in the general) don't, can't, or won't negotiate for what you feel you are worth, then that's your own fault because every employer who has contacted me since I've been in NY (some unsolicited) has been willing to negotiate. They toss out a number and say, "We were hoping to pay [lower than I would accept]," and I say, "Tell me more about the job and benefits." They tell me more about the job and benefits and I say, "To me, that's worth about [higher than they would accept.]" They go up, I come down, and eventually, they come into a range that BOTH parties know is fair. And if they are trying to pay a senior editor, say, $50K (less than I was making as an associate at a non-profit) and they won't budge, then I say, "Thanks, but that represents a paycut for me" and--and here's the important part--I WALK AWAY AND DON'T LOOK BACK. If you think $25K is low--and hell yeah, it IS disgustingly low for that position--then DON'T APPLY. If no one applies, then power to the people. Just don't blame me or anyone else for there being no solidarity among the workers. If some kid out of school thinks it's fair, they'll apply and probably get the job. And then folks like you complain when really, that job had nothing to do with you in the first place. |
| annabel | Posted – 10/28/2007 7:54:00 PM | show profile Yes, you complain about the Washington Monthly and don't do much about your own severance payment. What's wrong with that picture? Does your situation permeate? |
| annabel | Posted – 10/28/2007 7:54:07 PM | show profile Yes, you complain about the Washington Monthly and don't do much about your own severance payment. What's wrong with that picture? Does your situation permeate? |
| ConfidentDesigner | Posted – 10/28/2007 8:53:51 PM | show profile annabel- Something is INDEED being down about the sev. package. I have been ordered to not talk about it. What's this got to do with this topic anyway? |
| ConfidentDesigner | Posted – 10/28/2007 8:54:50 PM | show profile why are you repeating yourself? why are you repeating yourself? |
