![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
NYC Television Production Company is looking for a Vice President New Business Development. See the next featured job.
Synapse Group Inc. is looking for a Assistant Manager/Manager, Publisher Relations. See the next featured job.
Condé Nast Publications is looking for a Editorial Archives Assistant (Library). See all other great jobs at our Job Board.
Wednesday Dec 21, 2005
The Plight of the Underpaid JournoDaniel Gross makes a lot of interesting points and assumptions in yesterday's Slate article, "Are Journalists Underpaid?" He starts with Jennifer Steinhauer's Sunday Times article about creative types being priced out of the city and frets about the same thing happening to the poor journos of our fair city: "The journalists who write these stories about people who can't afford to live in New York can't afford to live in New York, either." What I found most interesting in this article were his musings on the New York journalist's sense of entitlement: the "status-income disequilibrium" of David Brooks' Bobo, in the journo's low-earning/high-prestige position (compared to, say, a lawyer); the "excruciating choices" presented by public or private schools and the stiff requirements of co-op boards; the "types of lives many journalists wish to lead -- and think they're entitled to lead by virtue of their education and positions." Gross does not cite actual journalists in this article (save for inventing a hypothetical editor at the WSJ wed to a hypothetical NYT reporter) so it's difficult to separate out the facts (cuts at Time Warner; voluntary buyouts at the NYT; Steinhauer's worry over the NYT's "belly-up" health care fund for Newspaper Guild members) from the assumptions (journalists expect to lead lifestyles commensurate with those of the well-to-do people on whom they report; journalists "like comfort and access, but we don't want to work all that hard"; journalists find it "anathema" to work for clients). "Salaries that barely pierce six figures certainly aren't insulting to most Americans. But everything is relative," writes Gross. Permit me to muse on relativity for a moment. I am somewhat new to these journalistic parts, having been a practicing attorney at a midtown law firm prior to enlisting as an intrepid blogger. When I left law, I heard two things: how lucky I was, and how brave. Lucky, because I was leaving a job that many of my peers found soulless and draining; brave, because I was leaving a financially secure career for one that was, shall we say, a mite less predictable (NB I think that "brave" and "clueless" are not actually the same thing, but that is another story). The point is, the non-monetary benefits of working as a journalist must be taken into account: interesting work, engaging topics, Google-able bylines. As Gross says, it's all relative, but it's ALL relative, all part of the equation, all part of the choice. I also raise a brow at Gross' point about the education of a journalist: these days, it's more likely that a journalist will enter the workplace armed with an undergraduate bachelor's degree (plus, no doubt, a rigorous self-prescribed curriculum of New Yorkers and ASME "Best Of" books). By contrast, lawyers, i-bankers etc. generally must clear the bar of an additional degree. Does that make lawyers smarter or better? Nope (see your intrepid blogger for evidence). But generally speaking, it leads to a higher average income, because the industry in question is lucrative enough to support that extra barrier to entry. Gross ends his article with the proposition that, really, begins each journalist's career: choice. "Writers unhappy with their wages can always switch fields, seek other jobs, or leave." But it's disingenuous not to acknowledge the choices that lead to a journalism career in the first place. But what do I know! Lacking children to send to private school or a down payment for a co-op, I give you the Romenesko letters page: this non-New Yorker isn't sympathetic ("Not being able to afford $25,000 for private school for your fourth grader, it must be tough") but this guy is, and is: Pulitzer-winning NYT reporter David Cay Johnston, who re-crunches the numbers, points out that the NYT's salaries are non-merit based and thus dependent on the savvy of union negotiators, and reminds the top brass that if you want quality, you gotta pay for it. P.S. Fishbowl would not be insulted by a six-figure salary.
Email This Post |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||