| Back to Home > Bulletin Board > Media Issues > Topic: Age Discrimination |
Topic: Age Discrimination
| Author | Message |
| astrahook | Posted – 12/7/2007 5:08:37 PM | show profile because si hasn't been relevant in 15 years. They've got a branded name and a swimsuit issue. Its as boring as they come and judging by their advertising: beer, viagra, and chewing tobacco, their readers reflect that as well |
| ConfidentDesigner | Posted – 12/7/2007 5:10:58 PM | show profile I've never even cracked a cover of an SI so I've no idea. Not my idea of good subject matter. Rather read SKI. |
| granitegirl | Posted – 12/7/2007 6:46:24 PM | show profile I wouldn't agree that SI's downfall started 15 years ago, but it was pretty much a landslide after Time Inc hired the editor of US Weekly for the top job there. And now you read (?) it and you can SOOOO tell. |
| Sam Waynewright | Posted – 12/20/2007 9:02:15 AM | show profile Age Discrimination I've arrived a bit late to this party but would just like to add a comment that the comic George Carlin (now MY age is showing!) said about age discrimination about 20 years ago. He said, of all the "ism" -- ageism, racism, sexism -- ageism is the most sad and the most ridiculous, simply because is we are lucky enough NOT to die young, eventually "we" will become "them" and find ourselves being the next victims. He said, if we had any brains, when we were young we would pass for and pass strict laws to protect against discrimination against someone simply because they are not 25, and thus (to use Carlin's words) "make sure our nest is padded for the coming winter seasons." The problem every time some wunderkid gets promoted to be in some managerial post, he or she, immediately assumes that he or she got their because of their simple brilliance, when in fact it is often simply too to the fact that they cost less then someone far more experienced. But unless we all as a culture, and as a society and as a country, start realizing that coporate big business holds no loyality to anyone or anything, except next year's quarterly earnings, everyone of us -- not matter how talented or hard working we are -- will have to spend the whole of our carreer once we pass 25 looking over our shoulders at the 25 year old human resources officer, wondering if this will be the year that we are suddenly tossed aside because the company needs to "cut costs." |
| ConfidentDesigner | Posted – 12/20/2007 12:05:24 PM | show profile And this is exactly why I am on my own now. It's much harder than schlepping to an office every day and collecting a paycheck every two weeks but I've got the satisfaction that some dopey, head-up-his-as* senior manager who has no clue will never again have the opportunity to fire me! There is something quite cathartic about that scenario. |
| dribbledrive1 | Posted – 12/20/2007 3:13:42 PM | show profile No. The real issue is when you are 25 you never think you will ever be older than 37 or so -- you will somehow magically freeze at that age. And, to be fair, often wunderkinds do get promoted because of their skill. That's the flipside of this that people sometimes forget -- just because someone is older and more experienced doesn't mean they are better. --He said, if we had any brains, when we were young we would pass for and pass strict laws to protect against discrimination against someone simply because they are not 25, and thus (to use Carlin's words) "make sure our nest is padded for the coming winter seasons." The problem every time some wunderkid gets promoted to be in some managerial post, he or she, immediately assumes that he or she got their because of their simple brilliance, when in fact it is often simply too to the fact that they cost less then someone far more experienced.-- |
| ConfidentDesigner | Posted – 12/20/2007 8:51:59 PM | show profile dribble- Not sure what you're getting at but... the last paragraph of your entry about sums up how most of us feel so...I "guess" you're on our side. |
| dribbledrive1 | Posted – 12/21/2007 12:39:36 AM | show profile I'm really not on anyone's side. But I was disagreeing with the jab that inferred that young people can never be better than more inexperienced ones and young people are only ever selected because of cost, --dribble- Not sure what you're getting at but... the last paragraph of your entry about sums up how most of us feel so...I "guess" you're on our side.-- |
| ConfidentDesigner | Posted – 12/21/2007 10:20:55 AM | show profile " young people can never be better than more inexperienced ones and young people are only ever selected because of cost" Huh??? Dribbbbblllle... |
| noname1234 | Posted – 12/21/2007 11:53:50 AM | show profile ConfidentDesigner -- do you think that it's not possible that a younger person can ever be better at a given job than an older person can be? More experience -- i.e., more years spent in professional pursuits -- doesn't always translate into superior performance at every job than someone with less professional experience. It can, but it's definitely not a given. |
| ConfidentDesigner | Posted – 12/21/2007 12:43:19 PM | show profile I was commenting on the contradictory statement of dribbles: "young people can never be better than more inexperienced ones" makes no sense. |
| dribbledrive1 | Posted – 12/21/2007 2:04:26 PM | show profile It was a type. I made "more experienced ones" --I was commenting on the contradictory statement of dribbles: "young people can never be better than more inexperienced ones" makes no sense.-- |
| granitegirl | Posted – 12/21/2007 5:49:24 PM | show profile Look, I have worked at many many different publications and many many MANY different forums (magazines, national, regional, newspapers, national, local) and I can tell you in every single work situation the young are promoted quickly because of one or two bang up jobs. Then the promotions STOP unless the work gets better and better. As far as mentoring, experiencing, work ethic, and straight up professionalism and the "sense" of what "works" in journalism --did I mention ethics and the conscience of most publications?--sorry, hands down, hands down, it's the OLDER WORKERS WITH THE EXPERIENCE WHO RULE. Name me one wonderkind who hasn't crashed and burned. One recent wonderkind, say, an eighties or ninties wunderkind. They have their one big story, their three big bylines, their year of glory, and they get lazy and mentally fat. Those who have waited, who have honed skills over years, who have seen the changes in journalism (and BTW the Internet isn't the ONLY "BIG CHANGE IN MEDIA" in the past several decades--they are the best workers and the best workers to model. Hands down. I would never model my work or my work ethic from anyone born before 1960. Sorry. But true. |
| granitegirl | Posted – 12/21/2007 5:51:46 PM | show profile wait I meant AFTER 1960. |
| granitegirl | Posted – 12/21/2007 5:52:05 PM | show profile wait I meant AFTER 1960. |
| ConfidentDesigner | Posted – 12/22/2007 1:36:19 PM | show profile Now I'm REALLY confused! I don't think drinking and posting in here should be aloud;) |
| Sam Waynewright | Posted – 12/23/2007 11:45:23 PM | show profile Age Discrimination "Now I'm REALLY confused! I don't think drinking and posting in here should be aloud;) Is it okay if we did it very quietly then, Confident Designer? Pass the Eggnog, please.... |
