| Back to Home > Bulletin Board > Media Issues > Topic: A Bud By Any Other Name |
Topic: A Bud By Any Other Name
| Author | Message |
| mamakind | Posted – 12/2/2008 5:00:26 PM | show profile | email poster I've recently relocated back to my hometown for my kids and had to give up a full-time Senior Editor position that I held for several years. In fact, I've been lucky enough to have fairly steady writing/editorial work for the past 9 years. I stumbled into a particular genre, mastered it and built up a loyal global fan base who will no doubt continue to support me when my book comes out next year. Now I'd like to explore editorial in some other genres-- any genre -- besides the one I've lived in for almost a decade. I really like magazine work and I know I can apply all this experience to just about any type of publication. My issue is this: they're all pot publications and potential employers can't seem to get over it. Some of these mags [e.g. High Times] have been around forever and are very well established and I'm sorry, but no matter the matter, what I do as an editor is the same for an editor of any other publication of similar size and circulation. Do you assume that editors at Playboy don't work, but really just sit around jerking off all day at the office? Even if they did, if they manage to put out a quality mag, does it matter? I've applied at gardening magazines, thinking that my extensive experience with technical cultivation copy would be a natural match. Nada. I've applied at business magazines geared toward the all-important 18-35 crowd, thinking that that's been EXACTLY my readership for all of these years. I wrote about and featured young entrepreneurs every issue... I just called them growers, seed sellers, smoke shop & dispensary owners, glass blowers, dealers, etc... . Nuthin'. Not even a, "No thank you. You're not what we're looking for." I didn't go to journalism school because I didn't need to. My mother is a writer and I had a handle on the biz from a very early age. Or so I thought. I grew up thinking that any full-time job writing/editing (that actually pays) is a blessing from the Journalism Fairies and that I should thank my lucky stars to work for Pipefitting Monthly or Teen Angst Weekly or Trout! or whatever. I've been relocated twice across the country for work and neither position was offered based on the amount of ganja I consume. I even used a nom de plume for both writing and editorial (also for branding purposes), so I my real name could escape the obscuring smoke. The only difference between the magazines I've worked with and the ones I've applied to work with is that the industry parties were a tad smellier, if not more fun. Is it that I haven't gone to Journalism school or because of the herb? Because a decade of experience tells me it's not the quality of the product. |
| recovering_jersey_girl | Posted – 12/2/2008 6:05:50 PM | show profile I wouldn't give up just yet...I've worked on-staff before with two different people (one man, one woman) who had come from porn magazine backgrounds (and nothing as classy or well-established as Playboy, either). And this was at a pretty dry B2B publisher. Good luck and keep pounding the pavement...I suspect it's the economy behind your protracted job search, not your skills or the nature of your clips. |
| freetrialer | Posted – 12/2/2008 7:26:53 PM | show profile you wrote - "I just called them growers, seed sellers, smoke shop & dispensary owners, glass blowers, dealers, etc... " I am not inclined to hire a pot smoker, and would be especially turned off by someone who called pot, supplies, etc., by anything other than what they are. I will not support the efforts of anyone who supports an industry that causes so much death - you should learn about the drug gangs of Mexico, growing pot in our national parks and slitting people's throats and throwing bodies on the ground at grade schools. Your euphemisms, etc., are how pot smokers avoid dealing with the reality of what they cause and are part of. I also wouldn't hire anyone who wrote stuff like this - which strikes me exactly as something a pothead would say/think: "so I my real name could escape the obscuring smoke. " I'm sure it's just a typo on your part, but it sounds like the addled words of a pot smoker. I hope you'll let us know how things turn out for you once you realize I'm right and give up using and writing about the stuff - (unless you're writing to describe the horrors wraught by the drug trade). Thanks, FT |
| noname1234 | Posted – 12/2/2008 7:55:04 PM | show profile I think Freetrialer's extreme, judgmental attitude is in the minority in the publishing world. While I haven't worked with anyone who wrote for pro-pot publications, I have worked with several people who worked at porn mags. Sometimes we laughed about it, but we certainly didn't hold it against them. There are plenty of slightly edgier but mainstream publications out there that would probably appreciate the sardonic, anti-authoritarian tone you may have developed over the last decade. |
| Astera | Posted – 12/2/2008 9:27:19 PM | show profile I, too, think freetrialer is in the minority. Just because you wrote about pot doesn't mean you're a user. Oh, and by the way, freetrialer, it's "wrought," not "wraught." I wouldn't be so quick to infer drug abuse from a typo. Anyway, mamakind, I've been looking for full-time work for a while myself, and I've been getting very few responses. It's frustrating to feel like you're sending stuff out into the void, but I think the lack of response is mainly just because the economy is terrible right now and so few people are hiring. I did have a bit of luck with a direct mail package I created and set out to smaller, local publications. That's netted me one freelance project so far--better than nothing. Just keep applying and send your most relevant clips. Best of luck! ------ www.adventuresofastera.blogspot.com |
| candylilacs | Posted – 12/2/2008 9:28:05 PM | show profile I don't know... and A Note To All Potsmokers I live in the Bay Area where A LOT of people puff some bud, but I don't. I'm boring, I guess, or I just never understood the big deal about it. So, yeah, being the cool hipster I am, I tend to roll my eyes if people talk about it more than once casually. If you're pitching a story, then pitch the story and don't go into your past publishing history with High Times. Chances are if your stuff is good they will work with you. The only problem I can see is that if you're pitching anything related to THC, or if you're making offhand comments about it (if you are, stop, you're smoking too much weed.) I agree with the poster that it has more to do with the economy and comfort with current stables of freelancers. That said . . . NOTE TO ALL POTSMOKERS: Please quit talking about how much you smoke, or how cool it is. It makes you sound 14. Thanks for listening. ------ Dealing with being laid off, so you don't have to! www.laidoffjournal.com |
| questoo1 | Posted – 12/2/2008 9:40:09 PM | show profile I think its just a function of a crappy job market. I can't think of a company I've worked at where the majority of the staff did not smoke, and fairly often at that. |
| candylilacs | Posted – 12/2/2008 9:56:01 PM | show profile Yeah, I think potsmokers tend to think everyone else smokes, too, which is why they talk about it constantly. ------ Dealing with being laid off, so you don't have to! www.laidoffjournal.com |
| mamakind | Posted – 12/2/2008 10:01:10 PM | show profile | email poster Just Say Know Wow! Are you ever off, freetrialer. It's typical of someone ignorant of what the War on Drugs is really about. The reason you have Mexican drug lord activity is BECAUSE it's illegal. Making a fairly benign, non-toxic substance that's been used for thousands of years illegal makes it a commodity on the black market. If it's legal, it has no more worth to the criminal element than any other plant you buy at Walmart. Your own gov chose to make money running cocaine, heroin and hashish from South America and Asia. I suggest you do some research. "American Drug War: The Last White Hope" is an excellent doc on the subject. Remember alcohol prohibition? Thanks to that, we saw a rise of organized crime and government corruption previously unseen. Alcohol kills more Americans every year than Iraq & Afghanistan combined. What would happen if they made tobacco illegal (which kills countless victims)? The price of smokes would skyrocket, it would become even more attractive to rebellious youth and you'll have taken what is essentially a health issue and made it one for law enforcement. The Swiss, not bound by the US-driven UN treaty disallowing any UN country to legalize, are finally coming to their senses and legalizing RIGHT NOW. The Swiss aren't known for their addled minds. Cannabis was only made illegal in the US 80 yrs ago. Up until then, you could buy cannabis tincture in a local pharmacy. Both Washington & Jefferson grew hemp and smoked "Indian Hemp"-- marijuana. It was illegal for farmers NOT to grow cannabis, especially during the World Wars. All ropes & rigging were made from hemp (the word "canvas" comes from "cannabis"), including for Columbus' ships. Betsy Ross' original stars n' stripes was made from hemp. The WoD has cost TRILLIONS of dollars and has made the US put more of it's citizens in jail than any other nation. Prohibition was started through racism, both in Canada and the US. Even your own Drug Czar is backing Mexico's current attempt at legalization. He, too, has recognized the corruption and violence that follows placing an entire industry into the hands of criminals. The War on Sex is no different. Prohibition is wrong and counterproductive. If you think that you could find an industry--any industry-- that isn't rife with cannabis use, think again. ESPECIALLY publishing. It's enormously hypocritical to discount the cannabis user as being addled or unmotivated. I take it you've never been to a publishing industry event; the only group who are bigger lushes than writers & editors are politicians & lawyers. If the American people took the same attitude toward hiring as you, Obama would not be President-Elect, as an admitted cannabis user (and a few other substances, I might add). Speaking of whom, Obama has already vocally committed to ending Federal raids on State-sanctioned medical marijuana communities. Furthermore, nowhere in my post did I say that I smoked marijuana. That's something you assumed. I said I worked for cannabis-related publications. I've never been in a band, either-- does that mean I can't write for Rolling Stone? My mother has a screenplay in production for the Space Channel, but she's never been in space as far as I know. I'm lucky I've worked in this industry. While the rest of the mags are tanking in this shitty economy, cannabis-related rags will shine. You see, because backwards people like you have upheld Prohibition and pot is worth so much on the black market, more people will grow weed to keep their houses and feed their kids. As Senior Editor at SKUNK Magazine, I saw more freelancers from various non-pot publications (Rolling Stone, New Yorker, Atlantic Monthly, Radar, Spin...) pitched to me this year than ever before. While Big Pharma keeps the price of prescriptions out of reach of the sick, they'll turn to natural, non-toxic medicines used for millennia that can be grown in their back yard. While Big Oil squeezes everyone by the balls & wallet, people will turn to alternatives. Good thing anything made with petroleum can be made with cannabis. While corn & cotton require a Monsanto's worth of pesticides and both deplete the soil, cannabis is sturdy, requiring no chemicals to grow and it replenishes; it sucks the radiation and heavy metals right out of the soil. MOST Americans support the use of medical marijuana and MOST don't give a damn what happens in the privacy of other adults' homes. I dare you to find evidence otherwise. Canada has more tokers per capita than any country and has a 92% approval rate for medicinal cannabis use. Yet our education, health care, lower crime rate and economic solidity kicks American ass. Time, National Geo, The New Yorker, etc. ALL have run pieces in support of ending prohibition. |
| mamakind | Posted – 12/2/2008 10:02:07 PM | show profile | email poster That said... Don't confuse the medium with the message. What difference does it make what the subject matter is (if you're judging me on the quality & execution of my work, rather than the message it conveys, as would be appropriate for HR)? One last thing: are you seriously using a conversational forum posting as evidence of my lack of clarity & editorial skills? I hope you find work soon, because you have far too much time on your hands, buddy. |
| mamakind | Posted – 12/2/2008 10:22:26 PM | show profile | email poster AND... I don't talk about pot all the time. I just give them my CV, which is entirely made up of cannabis-related publications and organizations. It's like if someone worked only with music publications for years and then they're told, "That's great that you have all that experience, just don't put it on your CV or tell anyone about it." Obviously, if I'm simply pitching as a writer, it's not an issue. But if I'm applying for an editorial position, they generally want to take a boo at my editorial experience and portfolio of work. If they ask for hard copies and pdfs, there are only cannabis magazines to offer. I'm actually a little shocked by some of your responses. So strange! I guess I can't apply for that position at Maxim, because I look horrible in a bikini... |
| candylilacs | Posted – 12/2/2008 10:31:29 PM | show profile If you applying for editorial staff...hey, you're going to get some prejudice about it. Is it the end of your career? No. Is it a really, really crappy economy? Yes. Are they laying everyone off? Yes. So, they can afford to be nards and pick and choose who they want. Just yesterday my boss at my permalance told me I had better do as he wants or "In this economy I don't think I'll have a hard time finding your replacement." That's who's doing the hiring, mamakind. ------ Dealing with being laid off, so you don't have to! www.laidoffjournal.com |
| bones | Posted – 12/3/2008 10:12:19 AM | show profile | email poster Do some freelancing. You'll probably have the best luck with edgy, youthful, voice-y publications at first, and then once you get some clips from those places, keep broadening your beat--as a freelancer and eventually for staff gigs. |
| freetrialer | Posted – 12/3/2008 10:29:04 AM | show profile mamakind, thanks for the laffs .. you wrote (among other things): "I hope you find work soon, because you have far too much time on your hands, buddy." That's so typical of a pot smoker - a cheap insult, an incorrect inference, passive-aggressiveness, andy hypocrisy all rolled into one sentence. (I have more work than I know what to do with, and your posts are 3x longer than anyone else's on this thread - which might indicate plenty of time on your hands.) So many pot smokers claim to be mellowed by it but really it just sublimates your anger. And ugh, yes, pot smokers overestimate the incidence of pot smoking in society. "Everybody's doing it" is a nice rationale to keep avoiding reality - which is what you're doing when you smoke pot. What is it about reality that's not good enough for you? Pot is not "fairly benign" when consumed daily - as it often is. More tar than a pack of cigarettes. It clouds your judgement. Stoned drivers are dangerous. Pot smoke stinks. Pot smokers have uneasy relationships with their suppliers or customers - pseudo-friendships that dry up the second a source goes dry. I'm no fan of the drug wars ... I would just prefer if people would stop using it, and I won't do anything to promote the career of someone who does. |
| freetrialer | Posted – 12/3/2008 10:30:43 AM | show profile mamakind, thanks for the laffs .. you wrote (among other things): "I hope you find work soon, because you have far too much time on your hands, buddy." That's so typical of a pot smoker - a cheap insult, an incorrect inference, passive-aggressiveness, andy hypocrisy all rolled into one sentence. (I have more work than I know what to do with, and your posts are 3x longer than anyone else's on this thread - which might indicate plenty of time on your hands.) So many pot smokers claim to be mellowed by it but really it just sublimates your anger. And ugh, yes, pot smokers overestimate the incidence of pot smoking in society. "Everybody's doing it" is a nice rationale to keep avoiding reality - which is what you're doing when you smoke pot. What is it about reality that's not good enough for you? Pot is not "fairly benign" when consumed daily - as it often is. More tar than a pack of cigarettes. It clouds your judgement. Stoned drivers are dangerous. Pot smoke stinks. Pot smokers have uneasy relationships with their suppliers or customers - pseudo-friendships that dry up the second a source goes dry. I'm no fan of the drug wars ... I would just prefer if people would stop using it, and I won't do anything to promote the career of someone who does. |
| WordyBird | Posted – 12/3/2008 11:04:48 AM | show profile Okay, so we've established that you won't be working for Freetrialer. Moving right along, I can say that I have worked with a well-respected health and science editor who started at High Times, so clearly Freetrialer's opinions are not necessarily those of all editors everywhere. I don't know how old you are, but at my age (42) most of the people who hire me are Baby Boomers who came of age in the 60s and early 70s. Let's just say I know very few of them who didn't at least dabble in experimentation and therefore either don't really care or know better than to throw stones. (Hell, some of them crack jokes about how much better the writing is when the author is under the influence.) So, maybe you shouldn't be aiming for magazines aimed at 18- to 35-year-olds. Maybe you should consider magazines for the next bracket, which are more likely to be run and edited by Boomers. Also, I'd stay away from publications or companies in traditionally conservative fields, like finance, business, and law. Ditto most corporate gigs. For one thing, they'll make you take a drug test. For another, they're loaded with neo-cons and people who think like Freetrialer. Instead (and bear with me, folks who have heard my spiel a million times), look for publications put out by causes you believe in, the more liberal the better. Volunteer if you have to. I can't imagine any small, local non-profits turning down pro-bono editorial work. Small time, maybe, but it will give you something non-pot-related to show prospective employers. Ditto freelance stories or a blog about something completely unrelated to your background. Hope this helps. Me, I wouldn't give a flying fart in a windstorm. Too bad I'm not in a position to hire you for anything. |
| mad fingers | Posted – 12/3/2008 11:27:17 AM | show profile Similar boat... I often wonder if it's my background in porn that holds me back, or just, as many have said, the lousy economy. I can't undo my past, nor do I choose to hide it. Even though it was at an adult mag, I moved up the ranks from Associate Editor (my first job in publishing after a career switch) to Editor in Chief in the span of four years. I think that speaks for itself. Living in the Bible Belt, however, where permanent publishing gigs are few and far between, I'm sure my blue beginnings have gotten my resume 86'd more than once. That said, the economy sux and print journalism is undergoing a major change that is going to have repercussions for everyone in the industry. Keep the faith. Freelance as much as you can. |
| RockinRonD | Posted – 12/3/2008 11:38:48 AM | show profile | email poster Grass is always Greener Damn if this hasn't been one damned entertaining thread. I wonder if it would have been even more interesting had I read it all after smoking a bowl (I actually gave up pot smoking in 1975 but have NEVER judged anyone who still partakes and would NEVER disparage his qualifications for a job if they did. And WordyBird is absolutely correct about Baby Boomers and their collective attitude about weed). |
| chucho | Posted – 12/3/2008 12:18:43 PM | show profile >> I will not support the efforts of anyone who supports an industry that causes so much death - you should learn about the drug gangs of Mexico, << Are you FARKING NUTS? I'm not a "toker" (though I have smoked pot at social gatherings, excuse me for "sounding 14" saying that), but that's the most ridiculous statement I've read here in a long time, including in the "Current Events" section. Mexican drug gang violence has nothing to do with marijuana -- it's fueled by cocaine and it's derivatives. Most marijuana smoked in America today is produced domestically, often indoors. Nobody is slitting throats in the countryside over pot. And whatever subsidiary smugling of marijuana that does go on (it's not the 70s anymore and nobody is smoking "Acapulco Gold" -- a lot of pot comes from low-key harvesters in places like Vancouver and Oregon or from in-state local producers. I've known a few, and none of them owned so much as a hand gun. One I know is a graphic designer with a wife that runs and art gallery -- outstanding citizens.) Yes, absolutely, cocaine, heroin, meth, etc. are dangerous substances that are fueling murderous exploits -- but keep weed out of it. By your logic alcohol should be banned because more people die from alcohol-related incidents than anything caused by a plant that can be produced the same way you grow heirloom tomatoes. If more people were half as self-righteous about Americans killing non-combatants in its little interventions it gets into about every 15 years (or, as we like to call human beings slaughtered by cluster bombs and bunker busters: "collateral damage") then we wouldn't be getting into these interventions. Because, at the end of the day, the 60,000 people even the White House admits have been killed in Iraq is far greater than any death caused by marijuana. I don't like hippies. I don't like hanging out with stoners. But more annoying: prissy squares that have bought the "Blood on the Pavement" propaganda from the moral majority. Pul-eeZ. |
| chucho | Posted – 12/3/2008 12:28:27 PM | show profile Oh, and I second the notion that if pot were legalized today, tomorrow you would have even less justification to blame people who smoke pot for the murderous acts of COCAINE AND METH cartels. To the OP: Yes, you have to be concerned about being stigmatized, as some commenter have more than adequately shown. The people who comment here are the kind of people who interview you or who offer feedback to editors about potential hires. So there you go. A gardening magazine? Good lord. I can only imagine the editorial staff at a gardening magazine being, like, TOTALLY against people "taking marijuana" and totally into the Barry McCaffrey/Just Say No propaganda that's done little more than fuel military expansion and aid to Colombia for such wonderful programs as crop eradication -- where the US pays the Colombian military to spray glyphosate all over pristine rain forests from and poor farmers' subsistence crops (not to mention the respiratory problems it gives the native children who breath in that sticky substance that drifts into their villages). Sorry for the screed, but, hey, I'm done. |
| Louisewasnothalfbad | Posted – 12/3/2008 12:58:59 PM | show profile While the pot stuff might be a turnoff, I think it's the lack of diversity. Don't you have ANY other clips? Can you get some, asap? Gardening mags do tend to be somewhat conservative, and the demographic skews older. Maybe you're trying too hard to sell yourself as an expert on the young folks, and editors typically want young writers for that audience. |
| mamakind | Posted – 12/3/2008 1:25:01 PM | show profile | email poster Apparently, Freetrialer was chewin' one too many Zolofts this morning. No need to double-post, Sir. We're all colleagues and comrades. Again, I'd like to point out that never once did I say that I smoke pot. I said I worked for pot-related organizations. But I can convince the reader that not only do I smoke pot, but absolutely everyone on staff, the printer, the distributor and the guy who delivers our water are all Tommy Chong-esque weed-monkeys. It's called GOOD WRITING. Our Art Director, for example, would rather have a pen inserted into his eyeball than smoke grass. Guess what? They don't all bake cookies at Martha Stewart Living, either (at least not approaching a close). The Hunter Thompsons of the world are (fortunately for them, unfortunately for us) few and far between. Thanks to everyone else, especially WordyBird. Sound advice, indeed. It's actually a misconception that it's mostly 18-35`ers that buy cannabis-related magazines and books (even my EiC hadn't totally got a hold of that concept), it's the growing legion of Boomers. One of the last issues I worked on was a "Retro Isssue" and it sold out of every store it was in, from Barnes & Noble in New York to Elvie's Smoke Shop in Kokomo. It seems that the Boomers are desperate for a chance to look back to simpler days, when Goa was the generation's Daytona Beach and your lid of Punta Roja came with a Andrew Annenberg-designed T-shirt. Sorry, I'm waxing nostalgic on your behalf (I'm 33, if you must know). I really didn't intend for this to be a grand discussion on the pros & cons of Prohibition and you'll have to pardon any fuel I add to the fire. When you wave a banner for so long, it's hard to put it down; the rhetoric is so comfortably familiar. So really, this post isn't about smoke. It's about those of us who have worked in "activist media" so long we become pigeonholed and those who work with taboo content in general (porn is a prime example). The work I am consistently getting right now is all from counterculture/alternative media sources, so maybe I'll stick with what I know and what pays, for the time being. On another note: Do you think that going back to school and getting a degree in Journalism, Communications, Broadcasting--- whatever---might help my chances at breaking the straight barrier? Am I too overqualified? Really, as much as I love writing, I'd like to go back into print editorial. |
| Suet | Posted – 12/3/2008 1:39:09 PM | show profile just wondering why people would work on subject matters they aren't involved in or actively oppose - e.g., drugs, the adult entertainment industry, or for that matter, a publication that puts forth political views that are opposite your own. what drives someone to do that? great pay? the only thing available? a whim? a dare? mind control? |
| questoo1 | Posted – 12/3/2008 2:33:15 PM | show profile my guess is the pay check...If you worked for say an equestrian magazine(s) for a decade, or cat fancy, or some other niche, do you think you'd be having the same issue? My guess is most likely (thats simply a guess as i've always worked in general interest type pubs) |
| mamakind | Posted – 12/3/2008 3:08:41 PM | show profile | email poster why? Because: a) It's work. If steady, paying, full-time work were so prevalent, I'm sure we'd have lost many staff. Again, mags like High Times (which wasn't really about pot per se at all when it first came out; it was about counterculture in general) have been around for decades and don't look too shabby on the CV. b) I oppose Prohibition in all it's forms, so it's something I can get behind, no matter what is being prohibited. I believe what adults do with their bodies is sacrosanct, whether it's sex, drugs, abortion or Pilates. I can't speak for everyone on staff who doesn't partake, but you don't have to be gay to support gay rights, right? Also, I use a nom de plume for everything that has to do with cannabis, as do most who work in the industry. That's not because I'm ashamed, it's for branding and so I can keep the pot and non-pot work separate. People in the pot world know who I am on every continent. I've built a good rep and a following. Unfortunately, the pot world isn't enough. Canadian Pizza Magazine is hiring (I'm not kidding--check out JeffGaulin.com) in Ontario. Could I do that job, even though tomato sauce gives me gut rot? Of course! Do I need to be Italian? I doubt it. Is production and editorial any different for this mag than any other of similar size and circulation? I really doubt it. WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES THE SUBJECT MATTER MAKE? It's editorial snobbery. Such is life, I suppose. A mag is a mag is a mag and if there's an audience who will buy it, then someone will create a publication to match and if that mag is done well, then kudos to the staff, regardless. |
