Mediabistro Logo Mediabistro Logo
  • Jobs
    Search Creative Jobs Hot Jobs Remote Media Jobs Create Job Alerts
    Job Categories
    Creative & Design Marketing & Communications Operations & Strategy Production Sales & Business Development Writing & Editing
    Quick Links
    Search All Jobs Remote Jobs Create Job Alerts
  • Career Resources
    Career Advice & Articles Media Industry News Media Career Interviews Creative Tools Resume Writing Services Interview Coaching Job Market Insights Member Profiles
  • Mediabistro Membership
    Membership Overview How to Pitch (Premium Tool) Editorial Calendars (Premium Access) Courses & Training Programs Membership FAQ
  • Log In
Post Jobs
Mediabistro Logo Mediabistro Logo
Search Creative Jobs Hot Jobs Remote Media Jobs Create Job Alerts
Job Categories
Creative & Design Marketing & Communications Operations & Strategy Production Sales & Business Development Writing & Editing
Quick Links
Search All Jobs Remote Jobs Create Job Alerts
Career Advice & Articles Media Industry News Media Career Interviews Creative Tools Resume Writing Services Interview Coaching Job Market Insights Member Profiles
Membership Overview How to Pitch (Premium Tool) Editorial Calendars (Premium Access) Courses & Training Programs Membership FAQ
Log In
Post Jobs
Log In | Sign Up

Follow Us!

Mediabistro Archive

Sia Michel on Her First Year Running Spin and What Comes Next

After a successful debut year as editor in chief, she's raising Spin's rate base and thinking bigger.

mediabistro interview
By Mediabistro Archives
8 min read • Originally published May 21, 2003 / Updated April 21, 2026
By Mediabistro Archives
8 min read • Originally published May 21, 2003 / Updated April 21, 2026
Archive Interview: This interview was originally published by Mediabistro in the early 2000s. It is republished here as part of the Mediabistro archive.

In February 2002, Spin magazine tapped the then-35-year-old Sia Michel to be its new editor-in-chief, capping off her nearly meteoric rise at the notoriously snarky rock title: She’d started there as an assistant editor just five years earlier, literally working out of a storage closet. But Michel is also no stranger to quick success: She won the 1999 ASCAP Deems Taylor Award for Excellence for her reporting on the death of hip-hop star Notorious B.I.G., and she’d previously picked up the 1995 California Newspaper Association Award for Reporting and the 1995 Best of the West Feature Writing Award.

A graduate of the University of Pennsylvania, Michel started her career at the student newspaper there, The Daily Pennsylvanian, and she worked as music editor of SF Weekly and at the startup magazine The Web, which covered the internet culture, before joining Spin. Since taking the reins last year, she’s worked to freshen the magazine, giving it a more consistent tone and a sharper look. Her efforts seem to be paying off: Effective with the July issue, and for the first time since 1998, Spin will raise its rate base, to 550,000. mediabistro.com recently checked in with Michel, to talk about her magazine, her job responsibilities, and rock ‘n’ rollers’ sleazy moments.

Born: May 17, 1967
Hometown: Erie, Pennsylvania
First section of the Sunday Times: Week in Review

What are the responsibilities of the editor-in-chief of Spin?
I’m responsible for everything from the cover and the cover lines to who we’re going to write about in the issue and what the other stories are going to be. I sign off on every single piece. I come up with a lineup and then, once the copy comes in, read everything in the magazine and top edit it. I work a lot with the businesspeople and on other kinds of branding things, like when we do something with MTV, for instance, or any of the live events that we sponsor. But, really, overall, I shape the vision of the magazine.

Where did you learn your craft?
I started out as an intern at SF Weekly in San Francisco. I was writing about film and theater, and then I moved more and more in a musical direction. I became the music intern, and eventually I was writing cover stories about a wide variety of topics, but I was also their music editor. I was also freelancing for all kinds of different music magazines, and I caught Spin‘s attention and started getting a lot of work from them, then they offered me a job. I started out as an assistant editor, literally working in a supply closet. They had to move mops and stuff out to put my desk in there, and it was so small that if I moved my chair back a little bit I’d hit the back of my head on the wall behind my desk. And then, over time, I was promoted to associate editor, senior editor, and so on, until I became editor-in-chief.

What goals did you have when you began your tenure as editor-in-chief?
I wanted to focus more on what bands we put on our covers, to make sure the cover choices more consistently embodied our musical mission—which is to be the home for good, innovative, important, forward-looking music. A couple years ago, when the music industry and the rock scene went into free fall, there were very few cover options for a magazine our size. Spin experimented with putting more mainstream acts like Matchbox 20 and Creed on the cover, and they not only tanked on the newsstand, they confused our readership. Even though we had great music inside, our readers didn’t want to walk around with a music magazine with Kid Rock on the cover.

We received a lot of feedback from readers complaining about how fucked up the music industry was, and we responded by highlighting bands that were new and exciting and creating great music without necessarily receiving national coverage. And over the past year, we’ve had a slew of great bands on the cover, including the first U.S. covers for the White Stripes and the Strokes. Those covers sold as much as any superstar covers we’ve done. But we were lucky, too, because rock became really fun and interesting again, while our competitors are mainly putting trashy, half-dressed divas on the cover.

How else has the magazine changed during the past year?
When I came in, one of my mandates was to freshen up the magazine and determine what direction we should be going in, because of all the changes in the musical landscape and everything that was going on in the music industry and magazine business. One of the first things I did was hire this amazing design director, Arem Duplessis, who really gave us a different look for our covers. We freshened up the design, the photography, and the sections. He does a lot of creative things with the features and takes a lot of risks. We added a new section called “My Life in Music” [in which musicians reminisce about albums that influenced their sound], and Chuck Klosterman, a great writer I hired about a year ago, contributes a column. He wrote this great memo about heavy metal called “Sex, Drugs, and Cocoa Puffs,” and he provides an exciting, fresh voice and funny, smart, interesting ideas that translate into great, compulsively readable stuff. Also, we redid the reviews section recently, and we’re reviewing many more records than we did before. We’re still selective about what albums we do review, though. I just don’t think our readers need to hear about every single Todd Rundgren reissue that comes out.

Your June 2003 cover, featuring Sid Vicious and Nancy Spungen, is a guide to “75 Sleazy Moments in Rock.” In October 2000, Spin did a similar cover, “The 100 Sleaziest Moments in Rock,” featuring David Lee Roth. Are “Sleazy Moments in Rock” becoming Spin‘s “50 Most Beautiful People”?
We did the “100 Sleaziest Moments in Rock” two years ago, and it was very popular then, but it was more about some of the classic examples of rock ‘n’ roll debauchery rather than the bad behavior exhibited by today’s crop of pop stars. It just seemed like the ’70s were the most decadent time in rock, and our 2000 sleaze issue focused mostly on that period. We thought it would be fun to do a more current issue with people like J.Lo and Marilyn Manson. There’s so much happening right now, and it seems like we’re living in another crazy, decadent time for bad behavior from pop stars. But I’m not sure that it will become an annual issue.

One issue that will become an annual event is the “Next Big Things” issue, which featured Dashboard Confessional on the cover this year. It runs down a list of 50 bands that are coming out this year that our readers are going to be excited about. Another issue that is bound to become an annual tradition is the “Ultimate List” issue, which this year had Eminem on the cover. We got the greatest response ever to that issue, and a lot of readers said it was fun and funny, something that you’d want to keep around for future reference.

How do you keep that a 17-year-old institution like Spin fresh and vital?
Any youth-culture magazine should constantly be evolving to cater to the pace of its audience and its competition. One cool, new thing that helps us communicate with our readers is online file sharing. In the past, we’d cover underground records and worry about whether our readers around the country would ever get an opportunity to hear those records. Now kids can hear it instantly by going online. One new band, the Yeah Yeah Yeahs, is really big in New York right now, but how does a kid from Oklahoma get to hear them? Thanks to file sharing, anyone can go online and listen to these new bands, and that’s been really great for us.

Ultimately, I want to keep the magazine as entertaining as possible. I want Spin to be the music magazine that has a soul. We have a great group of writers and editors who are passionate about music, who are constantly looking for new music and going out there, discovering new bands and having a great time at shows. I want our writers to pour the energy from those shows into the magazine. We have one assistant editor, Sarah Lewitinn, who goes out every single night and see bands. We need people like that experiencing culture and capturing their experiences in the magazine.

If you were just breaking into music journalism today, where would you start?
I would start at an alternative paper somewhere, to work closely with an editor and learn the ropes that way. When there was such an explosion of web outlets for young writers, lots of stuff would go up online, but a lot of it was unedited, and you’re going to grow a lot slower as a writer without the guidance of a good editor. A lot of young writers coming from the online world would not want to change something about their stories, and they couldn’t see why it wasn’t working, or why it wasn’t smooth enough, and why it didn’t feature enough original ideas.

Growing up, Spin or Rolling Stone?
I’ve been reading Spin ever since the very first issue, which came out when I was a teenager and had Madonna on the cover. Somebody gave it to me, and I read it and was really excited about it, because at the time, the only magazine that was covering the kind of music that I listened to was Rolling Stone. But I didn’t feel a connection to Rolling Stone, it was too mainstream for me. I was interested in a lot of bands that I’d only heard about, and there was no Internet at the time, so if it wasn’t covered in your music magazine, you had no way to get any information about it whatsoever, unless you joined a fan club or something like that. I feel like Spin‘s always stayed true in terms of its musical vision, in terms of being a champion of music that is innovative and important and interesting and fun. Spin‘s always been a magazine for people who have strong opinions about music.

Rossiter Drake is an editorial intern at mediabistro.com.

Topics:

Mediabistro Archive
Weekly Drop Media Newsletter

Washington Post Cuts 100 Jobs as Publishing’s 40% Decline Continues

Plus: local news as proving ground, the jobs that aren't coming back, and why sticking around still matters

mediabistro weekly drop media newsletter
Miles icon
By Matt Charney
@mattcharney
Matt Charney is a talent acquisition analyst, journalist, and marketing leader with nearly two decades of experience at the intersection of recruiting, HR technology, and media. He has held editorial and content leadership roles at ERE Media, Recruiting Daily, and Recruiter.com, and served as Chief Content Officer at Allegis Global Solutions. As Principal Analyst at Kyle & Co, he covers HR tech funding, M&A, and market strategy. Matt currently serves as Executive Editor at Mediabistro, where he leads editorial, partnerships, and multimedia content for the creative professionals who power the media industry. He holds a degree in Writing for Screen and Television from the University of Southern California.
11 min read • Originally published April 2, 2026 / Updated April 21, 2026
Miles icon
By Matt Charney
@mattcharney
Matt Charney is a talent acquisition analyst, journalist, and marketing leader with nearly two decades of experience at the intersection of recruiting, HR technology, and media. He has held editorial and content leadership roles at ERE Media, Recruiting Daily, and Recruiter.com, and served as Chief Content Officer at Allegis Global Solutions. As Principal Analyst at Kyle & Co, he covers HR tech funding, M&A, and market strategy. Matt currently serves as Executive Editor at Mediabistro, where he leads editorial, partnerships, and multimedia content for the creative professionals who power the media industry. He holds a degree in Writing for Screen and Television from the University of Southern California.
11 min read • Originally published April 2, 2026 / Updated April 21, 2026

The Editorial Control Edition

There was a time, not so long ago, when being an editor was more than a job – it was a career, one with a familiar ladder and a proven path to work your way up, which you could, with a little passion and a ton of sweat equity.

You started out as a junior editor, if you were lucky enough to land one of the handful of highly competitive openings at a publishing company.

You spent a lot of time learning the house style, suffered through the traditional mix of petty errands and ritualistic hazing from people who dutifully double-spaced sentences, and got shown the ropes by dubious “mentors” who reeked of correction fluid and cheap gin, even first thing in the morning.

If you somehow survived your coworkers, deadlines and office politics, and managed not to unintentionally piss off the wrong person (no easy task in publishing), then you slowly gained authority, stability, and maybe, if you were a glutton for punishment, then you’d get a door with your name on it – or a perfunctory thanks in the “acknowledgments” page from an author whose work you guided from ideation to ISBN number.

That career ladder, and any semblance of stability in publishing, is as long gone as galley proofs and broadsides.

Today, software has replaced slush piles; getting your foot in the door requires more industry connections than your average acquisitions editor, and that familiar career ladder is a perpetual WIP that never gets to galleys.

Here’s the publishing paradox: editorial work has never been more important, and editorial jobs have never been more disposable.

Trust is ephemeral, attention is fragmented, and AI has become a ubiquitous and omniscient beta reader for pretty much every publication.

Faced with the most disruption the industry has seen since Gutenberg printed his first Bible, publishers and imprints responded by cutting those experienced editors en masse.

Gone are the professional arbiters of judgment, coherence, and taste, replaced by freelance beta readers and DIY self-publishing shops, ready to turn any middling manuscript and a pile of money into an “Amazon bestseller.”

The few remnants of the publishing industry, meanwhile, are slowly but surely splitting at the seams. On one side, you’ve got the big, legacy imprints that are still trying to cost-cut their way back to profitability while trying desperately (if futilely) to return to relevance, and regain some modicum of the prestige that’s long ago left traditional publishing.

On the other hand, you’ve got smaller, niche, and nonprofit outlets breaking rules and conventions to offset the decline in book sales, using mechanisms like memberships, monetized newsletters, podcasts, and community-driven models that more closely hew to how the masses consume mass media today.

Editors can feel caught in the middle of this growing divide, staring down endemic, but profound, professional and existential crises.

The past is history; the future is unclear. And if you’re in this business, you’re probably worried about how to beat the odds and stick around. It’s a perilous existence.

Let’s be honest: the data is clear, and it’s not encouraging. Since the late 1990s, when the Internet was still in its infancy, employment in the American publishing industry has dropped by a staggering 40%, from an estimated 91,000 jobs to around 55,000 today, according to a recent Publishers Weekly analysis.

At the same time, the Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that editor roles will grow at an average annual rate of 1% over the next decade. That’s a rounding error away from what’s effectively an industry-wide hiring freeze.

For those few publishing professionals left, it can feel like every day requires running faster and pushing harder simply to stay in the same place. That’s more or less true.

But the good news is that for those of us who have managed to carve editorial careers, even in the face of steep cutbacks and shrinking headcounts, this is a working draft that’s hurdling through predictable plot points, working its way to a resolution that hasn’t been written yet.

And until the ending is finally written, there will always be room for experienced editors to push the narrative arc to a satisfying, if improbable, payoff.

Better get to those galleys.

But in the meantime, here’s your weekly look at the top news and trends in media careers, along with some…

Hot Jobs of the Week on Mediabistro

This week’s featured job listings prove the point: employers want media leaders who can bridge editorial instinct with revenue strategy.

Washington Post Layoffs: Tenure Dies in Darkness

While Amazon’s leaked memo confirming 16,000 job cuts dominated the headlines documenting the ongoing war between Jeff Bezos and the proletariat, the staff at the Washington Post is similarly bracing for significant newsroom layoffs.

Reporting suggests that WaPo plans on cutting around 100 news jobs, or around 10% of its staff; the paper already announced it was axing its coverage of the upcoming Winter Olympics and World Cup in what’s widely anticipated to be a complete shutdown of its sports desk; other coverage areas, particularly metro beats and foreign bureaus, are also expected to see steep cuts.

Reporting in The Guardian on Washington Post staffers fearing major cuts paints what should be a familiar picture to most publishing professionals: widespread anxiety, confusion, and existential angst amongst staffers, while leadership refuses to comment, beyond the obligatory objections that the problems are structural, not editorial, right before decimating wide swaths of their editorial teams.

Additional reporting captures the internal mood more thoroughly. The widespread sentiment seems to be that strong reporting and impeccable journalism can’t overcome weak business results or a lack of clarity.

No amount of Pulitzer or George Polk wins can ever beat a spreadsheet when the owner is trying to cut costs. And unfortunately, even with the world’s richest man writing the checks, mastheads matter less than margins.

It’s a story so familiar these days that it’s almost a cliché. Just like Jeff Bezos’s ongoing method performance as a Bond villain.

Career Reality Check:

If your relative job security depends on a single legacy brand with a billionaire owner and a vague “digital vision” in lieu of a solid plan for a successful pivot into the future, assume that volatility is about the only thing that’s guaranteed.

When news jobs have approximately the same shelf life as a news cycle, it’s imperative to continually build new skills, enhanced visibility, and a professional portfolio that transcends a single role or position.

There is no ladder left to climb; instead, it’s about doing everything to avoid falling off entirely. It’s a long drop, and the masthead is anything but a safety net, even for the most venerable and prestigious of publications – or publishing professionals.

Editor Vs Machine: The Ultimate Showdown

In publishing, like in so much else these days, the conversation about AI has moved from think pieces and abstract theory to professional reality, and, increasingly, core editorial competency. The question is no longer whether or not AI should be a core component of editorial workflows. Rather, it’s about practical concerns such as who controls the LLMs, who audits the output, and who’s ultimately responsible (and accountable) when the algorithms fail or fall apart.

This shift was recently documented in an eye-opening report from Publishers Weekly, which noted that roughly 63% of publishing companies surveyed currently use AI in some editorial capacity, a number projected to grow significantly in 2026 (and beyond).

Most professional editors, of course, remain a bit unsettled by the rise of the machines, and justifiably so; after all, hallucinations are hard to fact-check, and reporting that happens behind a black box is the antithesis of journalistic standards. But the trend line is clear – the utilization curve has already bent in the direction of inevitability.

The future implications of AI adoption in publishing and editing seem to be following a familiar playbook, with plenty of precedents from other industries and job functions. As Publishers Weekly reports, AI isn’t replacing human editors, at least not entirely.

Instead, it’s fundamentally being used as a force multiplier to reshape and optimize workflows, redistributing tasks and redefining jobs for maximum efficiency and productivity. AI is also pushing media professionals into roles that look less like traditional editorial gigs. Instead of supervising the ideation and output of the work, AI is transforming editorial oversight into a combination of a system designer, a quality-control coordinator, and an algorithmic ombudsman.

Career Reality Check:

Editors who refuse to engage with or adopt AI risk following print journalism down the same road of impending obsolescence as moveable type or carbon copies.

Editors who understand how to deploy and optimize AI, how to design processes that maximize its output while constraining its impact, and who can balance its limitations with its potential, will remain not only relevant, but in demand – the operational core of future newsrooms and publishing models.

This isn’t about prompt engineering. It’s about editorial quality, and most importantly, editorial accountability. Ultimately, even in the age of algorithmic overload, editorial oversight and outcomes are still the ultimate responsibility of professional editors – and AI will never replace human intuition where it matters the most.

The Future of Publishing is Local

While national media properties and newsrooms continue to consolidate, contract, or close down entirely, local and niche outlets have been more successful in reinventing themselves and pivoting towards profitability, or at least, sustainability.

Editor & Publisher recently highlighted how local news has experimented with several models that are quietly working: public media collaborations, university partnerships, community-funded newsrooms, membership-driven revenue models, and other initiatives that prioritize trust over scale and reputation over circulation.

None of this looks like the Big 4 (broadcast) or Big 5 (publishing) prestige pipeline, but it does look like local and niche media outlets have instead become the proving grounds for the future of the entire industry, and the training grounds for the next generation of editorial and business leaders actively shaping it.

All news is local. But in this case, the implications are pretty much universal.

Career Reality Check:

Local and niche publishers lack the kind of resources or reach that national imprints or prestige publishers have long enjoyed, which may ultimately prove to be a competitive advantage in an era of austerity and belt-tightening.

The role of an editor in these environments is far more entrepreneurial and less segmented; local news requires staff to straddle a wide breadth of responsibilities, ranging from reporting to revenue, and from ad sales to audience engagement – and everything in between.

It’s that type of hybrid experience that the broader industry is quickly adopting: larger institutions and legacy publications increasingly demand this sort of agility and adaptability from their editorial staff, but limited training and traditional hierarchies keep staff within large institutions from gaining the broad exposure and experience that come with it.

This reinforces the idea that not only is the industry being disrupted, but the core tools and skills required for a successful, relatively stable media career are being disrupted as well.

And for an industry where getting your foot in the door has always proven notoriously difficult, and climbing the ladder even harder, this represents an unprecedented opportunity for the next generation of media professionals to emerge today – and lead the industry tomorrow, too.

The Jobs That Disappeared Are Not Coming Back

 

Long-term employment data doesn’t put a positive spin on the state of the publishing industry, and as much as editors embrace a good comeback story, in this business, it’s looking increasingly unlikely.

That’s what makes the numbers so uncomfortable; 40% of jobs eliminated isn’t a shift in consumer preferences, or a circulation problem, or even an example of increased audience fragmentation – all oft-cited villains in the publishing industry narrative.

None, however, is the true culprit for the decline in news and editorial jobs – the truth is far less glamorous. What we’re experiencing is a reallocation of labor that both precedes and transcends the rise of AI and the decline of print and prestige publishing.

As the industry consolidated, so too did the number of positions, with many deemed redundant or unnecessary, particularly as automation compressed workflows and the shift to digital required far less labor than its print predecessors.

Cost pressures and corporate buyouts pushed many jobs from salaried staff to an ad hoc, freelancer model and project-based or contract roles that are ubiquitous at most publishers, of course, don’t show up in employment numbers, further exacerbating what’s already a somewhat grim and extremely depressing jobs picture within publishing.

Data from Revelio Labs on editors and publishers confirms this stasis. Pay has increased, reinforcing the appearance of the status quo even as it’s been entirely disrupted. Growth is much more managed, driven more by business than editorial needs; job openings, when they do occur, happen because someone retires, burns out, or leaves the industry entirely.

Net new jobs, or newly created roles, are largely a thing of the past. Few, if any, editors are staffing up or expanding coverage or capabilities – in fact, the data is trending solidly in the opposite direction.

But here’s the interesting part. Revelio data also shows a fairly dramatic increase in tenure within the news and publishing industries, as experienced professionals realize that there’s no real incentive to jump – and likely, nowhere obvious to go if they were to make a move.

When headcount growth and mobility slow down, pressure increases. Work piles up, expectations and responsibilities expand, cost and budget pressures mount, and, eventually, something has to give. That’s why the shakeup the industry is experiencing feels so inevitable.

Publishing today isn’t a growth industry; fewer people are tasked with doing more work, revenues have replaced reporting as a primary area of focus, margins are tightening, and accountability (and risk) is more concentrated.

Any future headcount growth won’t look like a hiring boom – just like another redistribution of labor throughout an industry that’s experienced this phenomenon countless times. Somehow, against all odds, this industry has managed to survive – and thrive – countless revolutions.

And if this business survived the rise of radio, television, cable news, the Internet, social media, and Amazon, it can survive the rise of AI.

TL;DR

If you’re still here, still editing, still publishing, still trying to make sense of this industry in 2026, you’re not doing it wrong. Your timing just sucks, since we’re in the middle of an unprecedented reset across our industry.

The editor of the future isn’t just a guardian of grammar rules or arbiter of the written word. They’re also a systems thinker who knows what both leadership and readers want, can negotiate working with both humans and algorithms simultaneously, and understands that credibility isn’t pretense in publishing – it’s the ultimate career asset.

So, if you’re reading this while updating your resume, forcing yourself to post some trite nonsense on LinkedIn, are juggling a bunch of freelance balls, are learning new tools or skills, or maybe just quietly freaking out, here’s the bottom line:

If you’re updating your resume this week, lead with AI workflow experience. It’s what hiring managers are scanning for.

While all this is exhausting (and a little depressing), and even though the industry sometimes makes it hard to believe in itself and its future, at the end of the day, editing still matters.

Speaking of, apologies for all the typos,

Matt Charney

Topics:

Weekly Drop Media Newsletter
Career Transition

Reporting Jobs in Journalism: The Inside Scoop on a Career Behind the Byline

reporting jobs
By Mediabistro Education
3 min read • Originally published October 24, 2023 / Updated April 21, 2026
By Mediabistro Education
3 min read • Originally published October 24, 2023 / Updated April 21, 2026

If you’ve got an ear finely tuned to the whispers of a city, an insatiable curiosity that borders on nosy, and a knack for telling stories that make people stop and think, then you, my friend, are cut out for a reporting job in journalism. Let’s deep-dive into the nitty-gritty of this fast-paced profession.

I think journalism gets measured by the quality of information it presents, not the drama or the pyrotechnics associated with us. – Bob Woodward

What Exactly Does a Reporter Do?

Reporters are the field agents of journalism, always on the prowl for news and crafting stories that serve the public good. Whether you’re working for a newspaper, a TV station, or an online outlet, you’ll be the magician turning mundane press releases into headline news, weaving together in-depth features, and sometimes even exposing scandals. “Journalists educate the public about events and issues and how they affect their lives… They spend a lot of time in the field, conducting interviews and investigating stories,” from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The landscape is incredibly dynamic. Imagine one moment you’re tucked into a city council meeting, notebook in hand, and the next you’re out interviewing a community hero. It’s like a box of chocolates; each day serves something different.

Required Skills for Reporting Jobs, Anyone?

The ideal reporter is adventurous, intensely curious, and armed with a healthy dose of skepticism—because, let’s face it, not everyone you meet will tell you the truth. Rock-solid research skills are given, and the savvy reporter knows how to tap into social media for leads and contacts. Adapting to different topics, tones, and sometimes even other mediums is a must. Oh, and let’s not forget, you have to write compellingly.

Flexibility and Resilience

In this line of work, flexibility isn’t just an excellent quality; it’s a requirement. You’ll often find yourself tweaking your approach to align with different subject matters or editorial guidelines. And let’s talk resilience. Deadlines are unforgiving and stressful, sources can be fickle, and yes, criticism is part of the job. That’s journalism for you.

Do Reporters Have Uniform Job Responsibilities?

Well, not exactly. The essence of reporting—staying on top of current events, digging deep, and relaying information—remains the same across the board. However, the subject matter can vary wildly. One reporter might specialize in politics, while another dives into lifestyle and entertainment. The roles can even be more specific when working for large news agencies covering specialized beats like cybersecurity or the electric vehicle industry.

Who’s the Boss?

Hierarchies vary based on where you’re employed. You might find yourself reporting to an Editor, a News Director, or even directly to an audience if you’re freelancing.

Side Hustles and Sibling Jobs

Feature writers, columnists, and even some content creators are doing work similar to reporting, just framed differently. Dabbling in these areas can add flair to your stories or offer a fresh challenge.

The Evolving Landscape of Journalism

  • Data-Driven Stories: The rise of big data is arming reporters with tools to craft more in-depth and factual stories.
  • Multimedia Reporting: If you’re just writing, you’re behind the times. Video, podcasts, and interactive elements are the new norms.
  • Ethics and Responsibility: In an era rife with fake news, ethical reporting is not just a catchphrase; it’s a solemn responsibility.
  • Global Audience: The internet has blown the doors off traditional geographic boundaries, so understanding how to communicate to a diverse audience is key.

Breaking into Reporting Jobs

You might find that a journalism degree gives you a leg up, but it’s not strictly necessary. A solid portfolio showcasing your skill and passion for storytelling will get you through the door. Freelancing can offer a path to accumulating those crucial bylines.

So, are you ready to chase stories, dig deep, and make your mark in journalism? Your byline awaits.

Check out open reporting positions and other media jobs on Mediabistro’s job board.

Topics:

Career Transition
Be Inspired

One Creator With 34,000 Followers Generated 100 Million LinkedIn Impressions Last Year. Most Media Companies Can’t Come Close.

Three creators with proven reach explain what publishers keep getting wrong and how to fix it with a newsroom you already have.

linkedin playbook for building post impressions and traffic
Miles icon
By Miles Jennings
@milesworks
Miles Jennings is CEO of Mediabistro and its parent CognoGroup. He previously founded and led Recruiter.com through its NASDAQ listing, executing more than 10 acquisitions over nearly a decade as CEO and COO.
15 min read • Originally published March 30, 2026 / Updated April 21, 2026
Miles icon
By Miles Jennings
@milesworks
Miles Jennings is CEO of Mediabistro and its parent CognoGroup. He previously founded and led Recruiter.com through its NASDAQ listing, executing more than 10 acquisitions over nearly a decade as CEO and COO.
15 min read • Originally published March 30, 2026 / Updated April 21, 2026

A creator with 34,000 LinkedIn followers generated over 100 million impressions in 2025. The average media company page, backed by a full newsroom, didn’t come close. The gap isn’t about resources or content quality. It’s structural, and it starts with how LinkedIn’s algorithm decides who to trust.

Media companies have something most LinkedIn creators don’t: newsrooms full of original reporting, deep industry expertise, and brand recognition built over decades. So why do individual creators routinely outperform major publishers on a platform built for professionals?

Because LinkedIn was designed that way.

LinkedIn’s algorithm in 2026 is built to reward credibility signals from real people, not logos. Personal profiles generate far more engagement than company pages. The platform’s AI-driven feed evaluates your work history, your credentials, your consistency on a topic, and the quality of the conversations your content sparks. A polished brand page with no human trust signal is playing the game on hard mode from the start.

We asked three LinkedIn creators with proven, outsized organic reach to diagnose what publishers keep getting wrong and to lay out, in specific tactical detail, what they should do instead. Between them, they’ve generated well over 100 million impressions, worked directly with LinkedIn’s creator programs, and consulted for startups and brands on social strategy.

Their answers were practical and pointed toward consensus, making their advice harder to ignore.

The Diagnosis Every Creator Gave Independently

All three sources landed on the same core problem without coordinating.

Gigi Robinson, founder of Hosts of Influence and the Creator Etiquette podcast, is a creator who generated over 100 million impressions from a LinkedIn following of just 34,000 in 2025 and called it a missed “transformation” opportunity.

“One of the biggest missed opportunities I see with media companies on LinkedIn is that they treat the platform as a distribution channel instead of a transformation channel,” Robinson said. “They already have the hardest part solved, which is original reporting and access to information, but they often fail to translate that into platform-native content. Simply reposting headlines or linking out to articles doesn’t work on LinkedIn because the platform rewards perspective, not just information.”

Jennifer Dwork, co-founder and CEO of Bummed and a former TV producer at Bloomberg and CNBC, offered an even blunter version. “Most media companies treat LinkedIn as a corporate channel, for PR and hiring, rather than a storytelling platform,” Dwork said. “As a result, the content loses emotional connection. The more polished and designed the post, the less it tends to resonate. Posts featuring real people or reposted from employees’ accounts outperform because they feel human.” Her diagnosis in four words: media companies “post headlines, not humans.”

Gabby Beckford, a Creator Economy Expert, a four-year LinkedIn Top Voice, and three-time LinkedIn Creator Partner who has generated over 2.2 million impressions in the past year, explained why the algorithm itself punishes this behavior.

“LinkedIn’s algorithm rewards credibility signals, not just content signals,” Beckford said. “What that means in practice: the platform looks at your work history, credentials, and consistency in posting on a topic, and uses those factors to decide how widely to distribute a given post.” She said she learned the importance of a complete profile while working with LinkedIn on their first influencer campaign together.

The problem, Beckford said, is that most social teams are “optimizing the post but ignoring the profile. They’re posting from a brand page with no work history, no human expertise signal, no demonstrated track record on a topic. A journalist with a fully built-out profile posting the same story will outperform the company page almost every time because LinkedIn has many more signals to verify their credibility on a subject.”

How Robinson’s Format Strategy Compounds Reach

Robinson’s impression-to-follower ratio is extraordinary, and it isn’t accidental. She has been posting on LinkedIn since 2016 and joined the LinkedIn creators program in 2021. She posts four to seven times per week, but was emphatic that frequency is secondary to format strategy. “It’s not just about frequency, it’s about format strategy and narrative consistency,” she said.

“Video is my primary distribution driver because LinkedIn is heavily prioritizing it, especially when it’s tied to timely, relevant conversations,” Robinson said. “I use video for commentary, analysis, and thought leadership because it allows me to communicate nuance and build trust quickly. Carousels are reserved for more structured, educational content that people can save and revisit, such as frameworks or step-by-step breakdowns. Text posts are used more sparingly and are usually tied to personal reflections or storytelling moments that don’t require visuals. The key is that each format serves a specific role within a larger content ecosystem, rather than being used interchangeably.”

Robinson’s process for capitalizing on trending topics is where the strategy becomes especially replicable for publishers. “Every morning, I check LinkedIn News and scan for stories that intersect with my niche, which includes the creator economy, personal branding, AI, and digital marketing,” she said. “I am not looking for any trending topic. I am looking for the ones where I can add a unique, credible point of view. Once I identify a story, I quickly evaluate whether I have something meaningful to say based on my own experience. If I do, I move fast.”

She pulls key data points from the article, uses tools like ChatGPT to organize information and sharpen her angle, and records a video within hours. “Speed matters here, but clarity matters more. The goal is not to recap the news, it’s to interpret it. I position myself as the person explaining what this means for creators, founders, or marketers in real time. That’s what gets picked up by the LinkedIn algorithm, including the trending video tab, and that’s what drives outsized reach relative to follower count.”

For publishers who already have newsrooms producing original reporting daily, this should be the easiest play in the book. The reporting already exists. The missing step is the interpretation layer, someone on the team willing to say what the story means, not just what happened.

The Anatomy of a 190K-Impression Post

Beckford broke down two of her recent breakout posts, each hitting over 190,000 impressions with very different approaches. “Which tells you something important,” she said. “Format follows feeling, not formula.”

The first was about the Cloudflare outage earlier this year, posted in real time while it was still happening, with a practical take aimed at small business owners and creators: own your audience, diversify your platforms, email lists matter. “The hook was important because it was direct and situational: ‘Cloudflare is down globally right now,'” Beckford said. “It met people exactly where they were that morning, confusion and frustration, and gave them something useful.” LinkedIn’s news team picked it up as a trending story for the day, which gave it additional reach.

Her second breakout was a personal story about winning a scholarship at 17, not because she was the most qualified, but because only 12 people applied for 14 available slots. “The hook: ‘I was 17 when I learned how to get into the 1%,'” Beckford said. “It was a specific, true, human story that landed on a universal truth: showing up beats being perfect.”

Neither post followed the same formula, but both shared structural elements. “A first line that stops the scroll, a clear point of view, and a CTA that leads to a comment section I take the time to engage in,” she said. “LinkedIn’s own team has told me directly, comments are the metric that matters most. LinkedIn wants people to stay on the platform, and people stay where the conversations are.” Beckford also noted that she responded to comments on both posts, “which fed the algorithm and kept the post circulating for days.”

“It’s important to note that neither post had a link, a sell, nor was a press release,” she said. “Both were just me, talking like a human being with something to say.”

LinkedIn Is a Platform of Lurkers (and That’s Not a Bad Thing)

One of the most counterintuitive insights came from Beckford’s description of how LinkedIn audiences actually behave, and why low engagement rates mislead publishers about whether their content is working.

“People are on LinkedIn with a specific intention,” she said. LinkedIn users are most often on the platform because “they’re job hunting, looking for leads, or building their professional reputation. And because their colleagues and managers can see what they comment on or share, they’re way more passive in terms of engaging here than they’d be on Instagram or X.” She called LinkedIn “a platform of lurkers,” but said that’s not a red flag. “That’s just the nature of the audience.”

The passivity doesn’t mean content is underperforming. “I’ve built real connection and real inbound opportunities on posts that looked quiet on the surface,” Beckford said. “The impressions, the DMs, the people who bring it up in meetings, that’s the LinkedIn ROI that doesn’t show up in your engagement rate. Publishers need KPIs that actually reflect how this platform works, or they’ll keep underestimating it.”

Dwork reinforced this from the metrics side. “On LinkedIn, connection matters more than follower count,” she said. “Aside from looking for job opportunities, people use LinkedIn to connect with other humans. Impressions, engagement, and click-throughs are much better indicators of whether your content is resonating. People don’t want a feed full of corporate posts. They want content that feels relevant and human. You can also track which posts actually drive traffic to your articles to gauge what kind of content resonates on LinkedIn versus on other channels and optimize from there.”

Build Through People, Not Pages

If there was one consensus recommendation, it was this: your biggest asset on LinkedIn is your people, not your brand page.

“Build through individuals, 100%,” Beckford said. “I’ve lived both sides, and on social media, the human connection is always the strongest differentiator.” She described the algorithmic reason in structural terms: “LinkedIn’s algorithm is explicitly designed to amplify credible, authenticated expertise. A company page has no work history, no subject matter authority, no human trust signal. It’s much harder to build credibility to, especially for smaller companies. An editor who covers climate policy, with a complete profile and a consistent posting history on that topic? LinkedIn will push their content to other climate-focused professionals across the platform.”

Beckford laid out a specific operational model for making this work. “Identify three to five journalists or editors who are willing to post,” she said. “Give them a simple content framework: one take per story, written in first person, hook in the first line. Have someone on the social team lightly coach them without ghostwriting. Authenticity is the point. You can use the company page to amplify their posts, but the source of reach should be human profiles.” The company page becomes a hub, not a broadcast channel.

“Your biggest asset on LinkedIn isn’t your brand account. It’s your people,” Dwork said. She recommended that publishers show their commitment through action. “I would show employees that as a media company you are serious about highlighting the people who work there and their own experiences. Encourage employees to post, reshare their content, and highlight and reward the posts that drive the most engagement.”

Dwork also drew on her years producing at Bloomberg and CNBC to describe how the structure should work. “Start with clear editorial and brand guidelines, just like a newsroom, but don’t over-control it,” she said. “Similar to how editors, reporters, and anchors can infuse their own personality into a broadcast, the LinkedIn strategy should reflect that same diversity of voices.”

Who’s Actually Doing It Right

When asked to name publishers that are executing well on LinkedIn, Beckford started with a caveat that doubles as strategic advice. “Honestly, it depends on your KPIs, and I think that’s the first thing any publisher needs to get honest about,” she said. “Chasing a massive following on LinkedIn for its own sake is a mistake. LinkedIn is a niche community of professionals of every kind, and your social team should know exactly why they’re there and be dedicated to one clear goal, especially at the beginning and especially with a smaller team.”

With that framing, she named The Economist and TED Conferences. The Economist, she said, uses “short text that creates intrigue, simple, shareable images, and stories framed around what a professional can actually do with the information, not just what happened.” TED Conferences uses a variety of native formats (image carousels, surveys, video clips) to start conversations rather than broadcast content. “Both publishers treat LinkedIn like a conversation platform, not a headline aggregator,” Beckford said.

“But the more instructive examples are honestly the individual journalists inside organizations who post their own take and show up in the comments,” she added. “That’s where the LinkedIn magic is. The institutional voice doesn’t work on LinkedIn. The expert human voice does.”

LinkedIn Is Not Instagram With Text

Robinson, who cross-posts across TikTok, Instagram Reels, and LinkedIn, was emphatic that each platform demands its own approach. “When I work with startups, one of the first misconceptions I have to correct is that LinkedIn is not Instagram with text,” she said. “It is not an aesthetic-first platform, and it is not driven by trends in the same way TikTok or Instagram are. LinkedIn is a credibility platform.

The primary function of the content is to build trust, authority, and professional identity. That means the content needs to answer a question, provide insight, or shift perspective. Founders often underestimate how powerful this is. When done correctly, LinkedIn becomes a direct pipeline to inbound opportunities, whether that’s hiring, partnerships, press, or revenue.”

For Robinson, TikTok and LinkedIn are “complementary rather than competitive.” She described using TikTok as a rapid testing ground. “TikTok is where I test ideas quickly and see what resonates at scale,” Robinson said. “It’s a rapid feedback loop for storytelling, hooks, and concepts. Once I identify something that works, I adapt it for LinkedIn by adding more context, more structure, and more professional relevance.”

She creates most of her content off-platform using tools in the Adobe Suite, including Premiere Pro, Adobe Express, and Adobe Acrobat, and always tailors the framing and caption to the platform. “What works on TikTok as entertainment becomes, on LinkedIn, a piece of insight or analysis.”

Robinson also openly acknowledged the extent to which AI tools have become part of her workflow. “I use AI tools all the time in my workflow, especially on LinkedIn,” she said. “The tools I use are ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Microsoft Copilot, Fireflies, Otter AI, and Wispr Flow to help me write, transcribe, and generate a lot of the content I produce.” She also uses Zapier, Slack, and ClickUp to connect her systems. For publishers with stretched social teams, this is worth noting: the creators outperforming you are using AI to move faster while still bringing original perspective to every post.

Dwork offered a comparison between a startup and a publisher that illustrates the strategic difference. “For Bummed, LinkedIn is about trust, awareness, and partnerships, driven through my account and my co-founder’s,” she said. “As a new brand, we’re leveraging our existing networks to open doors we otherwise wouldn’t have access to, especially in the digital health space.”

Most media companies, she said, “default to repurposing content from other channels, and highlighting corporate initiatives. Instead, they should build a LinkedIn-specific content strategy that includes amplifying employee voices and optimizing for engagement.”

Cadence: Why Posting Daily Without a Strategy Hurts You

Robinson was direct about where the floor is. “For most media brands, the minimum viable cadence is two to three posts per week, but those posts need to be intentional and differentiated,” she said. “Posting daily without a clear strategy can actually hurt performance because it dilutes the signal of what the brand stands for. LinkedIn is not a platform where you can flood the feed and expect results. It’s a platform where consistency, clarity, and relevance compound over time. Every post should feel like it contributes to a broader narrative or expertise area, otherwise it becomes noise.”

Dwork agreed, and emphasized flexibility. A content strategy that commits to a set number of posts per week, she said, “should include flexibility if there is not a compelling LinkedIn post.” Skipping a day because you have nothing worth saying is a better strategy than posting filler to hit a quota.

The Vulnerability Line: How Personal Is Too Personal for a Professional Platform?

Dwork’s top-performing post was about navigating maternity leave while launching a startup, a deeply personal topic for a platform that people access under their professional identity. It’s the kind of post that makes social media managers at media companies nervous. Her framework for where to draw the line was clean and portable.

“If it’s personal and connects back to how you lead, build, or make decisions, it belongs on LinkedIn,” Dwork said. “If it doesn’t meaningfully tie to your work, it probably doesn’t. If you have to stretch to make the story relevant, it’s likely oversharing. If it’s something you wouldn’t want your boss to see, then it also doesn’t belong on LinkedIn.”

For media brands weighing whether to encourage their journalists and editors to share personal reflections alongside their reporting, this is a useful filter. The stories that resonate are the ones where personal experience illuminates a professional insight.

The 5-Hour-a-Week LinkedIn Playbook for Media Companies

For publishers running lean (one person, five hours a week dedicated to LinkedIn), Beckford offered two concrete paths, starting with a provocative first instruction: “Don’t touch the company page for the first month.”

Path one: the human route. Identify two or three journalists who already have LinkedIn profiles and some following. Spend an hour a week with each of them helping turn their existing reporting into a single first-person LinkedIn post. “Go beyond the article,” Beckford said. “Their actual take. What surprised them, what most people get wrong, what they’d tell a colleague over coffee, how it felt to write the piece.” The remaining two hours: engage. “Comment thoughtfully on posts in your coverage area. This builds the algorithm signal that your organization is a credible voice in a specific space.”

Path two: the LinkedIn newsletter route. “Unlike posts, every new connection automatically gets an invitation to subscribe,” Beckford said. “Your audience compounds structurally, not just algorithmically. And once someone subscribes, you have a direct line to them that doesn’t depend on any given post performing well that week.”

After 30 days of either approach, she said, “you’ll have more data, more traction, and a much clearer case for investing more resources.”

Then the closing shot: “The media companies that are winning on LinkedIn figured out that their journalists, their humans, are the content strategy. The ones still losing are the ones scheduling RSS feed posts from a brand page or reposting their press releases, and calling it a LinkedIn presence.”

What This All Adds Up To

Robinson summed up the overarching principle: “LinkedIn is not about attention for the sake of attention, but is about building credibility that compounds into real-world outcomes. The reason I’ve been able to translate impressions into brand partnerships, speaking opportunities, and consulting work is because the content is not just visible to the audience, it is useful and applicable. And in a saturated content landscape, usefulness is what wins community over and leads to higher conversions.”

The creators in this piece are proof that follower count is one of the least useful metrics on LinkedIn. Robinson generated 100M+ impressions in 2025 on 34K followers. Beckford hits 190K+ impressions on individual posts. Dwork generates meaningful business results from roughly 3,400 followers.

What they share is a strategic clarity that most media brands have yet to develop: they know exactly who they’re talking to, deliver a genuine perspective in every post, and treat the comment section as the whole point.

The playbook for media companies is sitting right in front of them. They have the reporting. They have the expertise. They have newsrooms full of credentialed professionals whose LinkedIn profiles carry exactly the kind of authority signals the algorithm is built to amplify. The only missing piece is permission: letting those humans show up as humans on a platform that was designed to reward exactly that.


 

A big thanks to our sources for this post for their expertise and their work with Mediabistro. Mediabistro regularly features media career interviews from top personalities in the industry. Gabby Beckford is a four-year LinkedIn Top Voice and three-time LinkedIn Creator Partner who generates 190K+ impressions on individual posts with 22,500 LinkedIn followers. Gigi Robinson is the founder of Hosts of Influence and generated over 100 million LinkedIn impressions in 2025. Jennifer Dwork is the co-founder and CEO of Bummed and a former TV producer at Bloomberg and CNBC. 

Topics:

Be Inspired
Mediabistro Archive

Joyce Rutter Kaye on Print Magazine’s Third Ellie Nod and Losing Designers to the Web

The Print editor on three General Excellence nominations in four years -- and losing the designers who build great magazines to the web.

mediabistro interview
By Mediabistro Archives
9 min read • Originally published April 30, 2007 / Updated April 21, 2026
By Mediabistro Archives
9 min read • Originally published April 30, 2007 / Updated April 21, 2026
Archive Interview: This interview was originally published by Mediabistro in the mid-2000s. It is republished here as part of the Mediabistro archive.

Leading up to the May 1, 2007 National Magazine Awards, mediabistro.com is publishing a special package of our popular interview series, “So What Do You Do?,” with daily interviews of selected nominees, ranging from well-known to obscure. Today, we chat with Print editor-in-chief Joyce Rutter Kaye.

See our other interviews with Ellie 2007 nominees: David Granger, Editor, Esquire?; Moisés Naím, Editor, Foreign Policy; Jay Stowe, Editor, Cincinnati; Ted Genoways, Editor, Virginia Quarterly Review; Mark Strauss, Editor, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists


Name: Joyce Rutter Kaye
Position: Editor, Print
Education, school: B.S., Magazine Journalism, S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications, Syracuse University
Hometown: Pittsburgh
First job: Lifeguard, Cloverleaf YMCA
Last 3: Managing editor, Print; Managing eitor, U&lc; Reporter, Advertising Age/Creativity
Birthdate: November 22, 1963 [the date John F. Kennedy was shot]
Marital status: Married, with two boys (12 and 7)
Favorite TV show: The Office
Last book read: The Country Life, by Rachel Cusk
Most interesting media story right now: How newspapers are grappling with the Internet
Guilty pleasure: The Real World — “all 18 seasons!”
2007 Nominations: One (General Excellence)


There are two things about Print that I think most people don’t know: One, that the magazine is 67 years old (wow!), and two, that it’s not just about, well, print. What’s the magazine’s history and how do you describe its focus?
The magazine began in 1940 as a quarterly trade journal for art directors working in publishing and advertising. The content was eclectic — there were instructive pieces on printing techniques and type legibility, but it also covered the woeful state of college yearbook design (“School Annual—Annual Problem!”) and the role of camp newspapers in boosting Army morale. The magazine used an amazing amount of tips-ins and inserts to illustrate pieces — there were wallpaper samples, etchings, even a menu from a 1941 beer tasting at the Waldorf.

Today, the magazine’s content is similarly diverse and quirky, but the field of graphic design is vastly broader, of course, and covers a wide range of media. Print‘s mission is to gather up all elements of visual culture — from political campaign graphics and video games to graffiti and YouTube — and examine what they say about all of us. Design reflects society, for better and for worse.

It seems like every business magazine and plenty of general-interest publications have these design and innovation sections now. How do you feel about the way design is covered in the mainstream media? Does it change your strategy as a design magazine?
The expanding media coverage gives us helpful insights into outside perceptions of the field, but doesn’t affect the way we cover design that much. More than anything, it helps lead people to look for more in-depth coverage of visual culture — fresh looks at established design and a peek into some fascinatingly obscure corners — and that’s what we provide.

Of course, we have to talk about the rise of design blogs. How do you see them fitting into the conversation? Are they competition? Have they greatly changed the strategy of the magazine?
They spread the word about design (and increasingly about Print content), too, so we’re happy about that. Blogs don’t especially affect our editorial strategy, since blogs are such a different beast than print — they’re great for quick reads and getting the dialogue going, whereas in a magazine like ours we can really plumb the depths and make a beautiful package that provides that unique pleasure you get from holding paper in your hands. We certainly pay attention to online interests when deciding which live features to add to our site, but mostly, we’re guided by our sense of what people want from Print, not what others are doing.

“It’s very gratifying to know that for now, and for generations to come, the experience people have in viewing and interacting with this memorial will be vastly improved because of the reporting we did.”



What stories or issues have you been most proud of during your time at Print?
The “Sex” issue (July 2004) — I think it was gutsy, thoughtful, and imaginative. The “Sustainability” issue (July 2005), because it delivered a lot of essential information to designers who are getting increasingly hungry for it. The “Vivid Word” (July 2006) for its ambitious coverage of the past, present and future of the print medium, and for its gorgeous cover by Marian Bantjes.

One of the stories I’m proudest of assigning was “Making the Cut” (January 2005), by Tom Vanderbilt, which explored why graphic designers don’t play a larger role in the designs of monuments and memorials. Although the look of the text is so fundamental to those structures, often the architect’s ego keeps him or her from involving those who really understand type. Vanderbilt cited the then-in-progress New Jersey State September 11 memorial as one example of a design plan that was defaulting to the standard Times New Roman. After the article ran, the architect, Frederic Schwartz, reconsidered his choice and consulted with Alexander Isley about alternatives. Alex recommended Bodoni, specifically ITC Bodoni 12 Book, a much more beautiful and appropriate choice, and they are now incorporating that into the design. It’s very gratifying to know that for now, and for generations to come, the experience people have in viewing and interacting with this memorial will be vastly improved because of the reporting we did.

Print‘s signature issue, the Regional Design Annual, really gives this nice picture of what U.S. graphic design looks like in these nice localized snapshots. But you’ve just released your 2007 New Visual Artists — 20 of the hottest new creatives under 30 — and I was surprised to see how truly international the list is. How is Print able to cover what’s coming out of tiny American communities and have this incredible global reach?
The Regional competition is well established after 27 years, so it’s definitely on designers’ radar. The New Visual Artists issue is an invitational — young artists are nominated by a group comprising design leaders and past NVA winners. Because we reach out to a high profile, international group from the get-go, we can ensure a great mix of talent. Inevitably, though, they all end up moving to Brooklyn!

The magazine underwent a huge redesign in 2005. What were the challenges of redesigning a design magazine? Any advice for magazines about to take the redesign plunge?
The redesign demanded that we radically update the magazine while keeping its authority and integrity intact. Abbott Miller was the perfect choice for the project because he’s as much a writer as a designer, and could clarify the book and project with the energy and vitality we were seeking. The redesign wasn’t done for cosmetic reasons alone, though — we had a number of editorial needs we wanted to address, such as building in places to cover emerging areas of design (graphic novels, comics, sustainability, and so on), and more places for design history, technology, book reviews, and design resources. I can’t stress enough the importance of fine-tuning editorial needs before starting a redesign.

Incidentally, the process of beginning the redesign took place exactly while I was beginning a major house renovation. I would meet with our contractor one day and move things around in our drawings, and then meet with Abbott the next and move things around in the book. Everything was in flux and up for grabs. It was strange and unsettling but liberating — like spring-cleaning your life.

What about your Web site redesign, which was more recently?
The Web redesign was really a launch, because our previous site wasn’t much more than a placeholder where people could subscribe and read really outdated information. The design of the printmag.com site was the result of a semester-long studio collaboration between Parsons MFA design and technology students (led by instructor Andrea Dezsö), our then-art director Stephanie Skirvin, and me, and resulted in a really clean prototype that followed our print redesign well. Over the next year, it was developed and refined in-house and finally launched. Like most smaller magazines that lack a Web staff, we’re learning as we go and trying to make the most of our limited resources. The biggest challenge is trying to update content constantly while knowing that ultimately the seven of us still have to put out 900 editorial pages a year on the alpha product. We’re really excited about the site’s potential as a magnet for the design community on the web, though, and we’ve had very positive feedback about it and our print redesign as well.

You’ve worked at three different publications that focus on visual culture. How did you stumble into covering this corner of the world?
I always wanted to be a writer, but also had a fascination with product marketing and package design — in college I would sit in the library and read about new product launches in Ad Age. After college, I moved to Manhattan and was amused to see that Rolling Rock, the local cheap swill of Western Pennsylvania, had acquired this import status in East Village bars. I wrote a short piece about that for Pittsburgh magazine, and on the basis of that clip (and another on Tofutti) landed a job at Ad Age. For me, it was the perfect blending of my interests in journalism and advertising. I stayed with the field because exploring and understanding the creative process is endlessly fascinating to me, and covering design as we do at Print allows me to be engaged with a huge range of topics, from politics to technology to street art. It’s a great place for a journalist to be.

What’s a typical day like for a Print editor-in-chief?
It could involve any of the following: line editing features and departments, planning future themes and articles, reviewing cover and layout directions, meeting with contributors, planning competition judgings, and having status meetings with the staff. Dealing with business-side issues related to circulation, advertising, marketing, Web traffic and budgets. Fielding story pitches, reading news sites, blogs and magazines, and reviewing portfolios in person and online. Maybe attending exhibition openings or talks. Then, going home to my other job as a mom.

For the third time in four years, Print‘s been nominated for an Ellie in the General Excellence category for circulation under 100,000 (and you won in 2005). You’re up against two other design magazines though — one of which you share an office with — which seems so unfair! How do you think you’re going to do?
I know it’s a cliché, but we are completely ecstatic just to be nominated, and I’m truly thrilled for the folks down the hall. The best part is that design journalism is getting this level of recognition. There’s clearly an increased overall level of engagement with design in the media and in the public, and a greater understanding of the role it plays in all of our lives. No matter what happens, design has scored big, and that makes me happy. But having said that, I’ll admit it’d be awesome to lug that statue offstage.

I would think as the editor of a design magazine that the pressure is on you to show up to the Ellies in something predictably glamorous. Any idea what you’ll be wearing?
Ha! Last time we were nominated, I went all-out and bought a rather expensive blouse trimmed in black tulle. I thought it was all sophisticated and French-looking, but my son took one look at me and said, “Mom, you look like a waitress.” Rather than make another fashion faux pas, I’m going the black-suit route. In our circ category, the wardrobe allowance has yet to make an appearance.



Alissa Walker is editor of mediabistro.com’s design blog

Topics:

Mediabistro Archive
LA

Best draft picks in San Francisco 49ers history

Best draft picks in San Francisco 49ers history
By Stacker Feed
2 min read • Published April 21, 2026
By Stacker Feed
2 min read • Published April 21, 2026

kovop // Shutterstock

Best draft picks in San Francisco 49ers history

Stacker compiled a list of the best draft picks in San Francisco 49ers history using career Weighted Approximate Value (wAV), a metric developed by Pro-Football-Reference.com to estimate career impact. The ranking also lists individual accolades such as Pro Bowl selections, First-Team All-Pro honors, and total years as a starter. Players were assigned to their originally drafted teams, excluding any draft-day trades. Data is as of April 2026.

#10. Roger Craig (1983, Round 2, Pick 49)
– Position: RB
– Career wAV: 95
– Pro Bowls: 4
– First-Team All-Pro: 1
– Games Played: 165
– Seasons as Starter: 9

#8. Alex Smith (2005, Round 1, Pick 1) (tie)
– Position: QB
– Career wAV: 98
– Pro Bowls: 3
– First-Team All-Pro: 0
– Games Played: 174
– Seasons as Starter: 14

#8. Lance Alworth (1962, Round 1, Pick 8) (tie)
– Position: FL
– Career wAV: 98
– Pro Bowls: 7
– First-Team All-Pro: 6
– Games Played: 136
– Seasons as Starter: 10

#7. John Brodie (1957, Round 1, Pick 3)
– Position: QB
– Career wAV: 99
– Pro Bowls: 2
– First-Team All-Pro: 1
– Games Played: 201
– Seasons as Starter: 12

#6. Ricky Watters (1991, Round 2, Pick 45)
– Position: RB
– Career wAV: 100
– Pro Bowls: 5
– First-Team All-Pro: 0
– Games Played: 144
– Seasons as Starter: 9

#5. Jimmy Johnson (1961, Round 1, Pick 6)
– Position: DB
– Career wAV: 103
– Pro Bowls: 5
– First-Team All-Pro: 3
– Games Played: 213
– Seasons as Starter: 16

#4. Terrell Owens (1996, Round 3, Pick 89)
– Position: WR
– Career wAV: 121
– Pro Bowls: 6
– First-Team All-Pro: 5
– Games Played: 219
– Seasons as Starter: 13

#3. Ronnie Lott (1981, Round 1, Pick 8)
– Position: DB
– Career wAV: 123
– Pro Bowls: 10
– First-Team All-Pro: 6
– Games Played: 192
– Seasons as Starter: 14

#2. Joe Montana (1979, Round 3, Pick 82)
– Position: QB
– Career wAV: 125
– Pro Bowls: 8
– First-Team All-Pro: 3
– Games Played: 192
– Seasons as Starter: 12

#1. Jerry Rice (1985, Round 1, Pick 16)
– Position: WR
– Career wAV: 160
– Pro Bowls: 13
– First-Team All-Pro: 10
– Games Played: 303
– Seasons as Starter: 18

Topics:

LA
NYC

Best draft picks in New York Giants history

Best draft picks in New York Giants history
By Stacker Feed
2 min read • Published April 21, 2026
By Stacker Feed
2 min read • Published April 21, 2026

zimmytws // Shutterstock

Best draft picks in New York Giants history

Stacker compiled a list of the best draft picks in New York Giants history using career Weighted Approximate Value (wAV), a metric developed by Pro-Football-Reference.com to estimate career impact. The ranking also lists individual accolades such as Pro Bowl selections, First-Team All-Pro honors, and total years as a starter. Players were assigned to their originally drafted teams, excluding any draft-day trades. Data is as of April 2026.

#10. Fred Dryer (1969, Round 1, Pick 13)
– Position: DE
– Career wAV: 80
– Pro Bowls: 1
– First-Team All-Pro: 0
– Games Played: 176
– Seasons as Starter: 11

#9. Jessie Armstead (1993, Round 8, Pick 207)
– Position: LB
– Career wAV: 81
– Pro Bowls: 5
– First-Team All-Pro: 1
– Games Played: 176
– Seasons as Starter: 8

#8. Phil Simms (1979, Round 1, Pick 7)
– Position: QB
– Career wAV: 91
– Pro Bowls: 2
– First-Team All-Pro: 0
– Games Played: 164
– Seasons as Starter: 11

#7. Harry Carson (1976, Round 4, Pick 105)
– Position: LB
– Career wAV: 95
– Pro Bowls: 9
– First-Team All-Pro: 0
– Games Played: 173
– Seasons as Starter: 13

#6. Buck Buchanan (1963, Round 19, Pick 265)
– Position: DT
– Career wAV: 96
– Pro Bowls: 8
– First-Team All-Pro: 4
– Games Played: 182
– Seasons as Starter: 13

#5. Don Maynard (1957, Round 9, Pick 109)
– Position: E
– Career wAV: 101
– Pro Bowls: 4
– First-Team All-Pro: 1
– Games Played: 186
– Seasons as Starter: 13

#4. Tiki Barber (1997, Round 2, Pick 36)
– Position: RB
– Career wAV: 103
– Pro Bowls: 3
– First-Team All-Pro: 1
– Games Played: 154
– Seasons as Starter: 7

#3. Michael Strahan (1993, Round 2, Pick 40)
– Position: DE
– Career wAV: 122
– Pro Bowls: 7
– First-Team All-Pro: 4
– Games Played: 216
– Seasons as Starter: 14

#2. Lawrence Taylor (1981, Round 1, Pick 2)
– Position: LB
– Career wAV: 146
– Pro Bowls: 10
– First-Team All-Pro: 8
– Games Played: 184
– Seasons as Starter: 13

#1. Philip Rivers (2004, Round 1, Pick 4)
– Position: QB
– Career wAV: 150
– Pro Bowls: 8
– First-Team All-Pro: 0
– Games Played: 247
– Seasons as Starter: 15

Topics:

NYC
NYC

Best draft picks in New York Jets history

Best draft picks in New York Jets history
By Stacker Feed
2 min read • Published April 21, 2026
By Stacker Feed
2 min read • Published April 21, 2026

zimmytws // Shutterstock

Best draft picks in New York Jets history

Stacker compiled a list of the best draft picks in New York Jets history using career Weighted Approximate Value (wAV), a metric developed by Pro-Football-Reference.com to estimate career impact. The ranking also lists individual accolades such as Pro Bowl selections, First-Team All-Pro honors, and total years as a starter. Players were assigned to their originally drafted teams, excluding any draft-day trades. Data is as of April 2026.

#10. Mark Gastineau (1979, Round 2, Pick 41)
– Position: DE
– Career wAV: 84
– Pro Bowls: 5
– First-Team All-Pro: 3
– Games Played: 137
– Seasons as Starter: 7

#8. Mo Lewis (1991, Round 3, Pick 63) (tie)
– Position: LB
– Career wAV: 90
– Pro Bowls: 3
– First-Team All-Pro: 1
– Games Played: 200
– Seasons as Starter: 13

#8. John Riggins (1971, Round 1, Pick 6) (tie)
– Position: RB
– Career wAV: 90
– Pro Bowls: 1
– First-Team All-Pro: 1
– Games Played: 175
– Seasons as Starter: 12

#7. John Abraham (2000, Round 1, Pick 13)
– Position: DE
– Career wAV: 91
– Pro Bowls: 5
– First-Team All-Pro: 2
– Games Played: 192
– Seasons as Starter: 11

#6. Larry Grantham (1960, Round , Pick )
– Position: LB
– Career wAV: 92
– Pro Bowls: 5
– First-Team All-Pro: 5
– Games Played: 175
– Seasons as Starter: 13

#5. Darrelle Revis (2007, Round 1, Pick 14)
– Position: DB
– Career wAV: 93
– Pro Bowls: 7
– First-Team All-Pro: 4
– Games Played: 145
– Seasons as Starter: 9

#4. Joe Namath (1965, Round 1, Pick 2)
– Position: QB
– Career wAV: 94
– Pro Bowls: 5
– First-Team All-Pro: 1
– Games Played: 140
– Seasons as Starter: 9

#3. James Farrior (1997, Round 1, Pick 8)
– Position: LB
– Career wAV: 95
– Pro Bowls: 2
– First-Team All-Pro: 1
– Games Played: 230
– Seasons as Starter: 12

#2. Demario Davis (2012, Round 3, Pick 77)
– Position: LB
– Career wAV: 104
– Pro Bowls: 2
– First-Team All-Pro: 1
– Games Played: 227
– Seasons as Starter: 13

#1. Herb Adderley (1961, Round 2, Pick 10)
– Position: DB
– Career wAV: 106
– Pro Bowls: 5
– First-Team All-Pro: 5
– Games Played: 164
– Seasons as Starter: 11

Topics:

NYC
LA

Best draft picks in Los Angeles Rams history

Best draft picks in Los Angeles Rams history
By Stacker Feed
2 min read • Published April 21, 2026
By Stacker Feed
2 min read • Published April 21, 2026

zimmytws // Shutterstock

Best draft picks in Los Angeles Rams history

Stacker compiled a list of the best draft picks in Los Angeles Rams history using career Weighted Approximate Value (wAV), a metric developed by Pro-Football-Reference.com to estimate career impact. The ranking also lists individual accolades such as Pro Bowl selections, First-Team All-Pro honors, and total years as a starter. Players were assigned to their originally drafted teams, excluding any draft-day trades. Data is as of April 2026.

#10. Roman Gabriel (1962, Round 1, Pick 2)
– Position: QB
– Career wAV: 98
– Pro Bowls: 4
– First-Team All-Pro: 1
– Games Played: 183
– Seasons as Starter: 11

#9. Torry Holt (1999, Round 1, Pick 6)
– Position: WR
– Career wAV: 99
– Pro Bowls: 7
– First-Team All-Pro: 1
– Games Played: 173
– Seasons as Starter: 11

#8. Isaac Bruce (1994, Round 2, Pick 33)
– Position: WR
– Career wAV: 101
– Pro Bowls: 4
– First-Team All-Pro: 0
– Games Played: 223
– Seasons as Starter: 13

#6. Isiah Robertson (1971, Round 1, Pick 10) (tie)
– Position: LB
– Career wAV: 103
– Pro Bowls: 6
– First-Team All-Pro: 2
– Games Played: 168
– Seasons as Starter: 11

#6. Deacon Jones (1961, Round 14, Pick 186) (tie)
– Position: DE
– Career wAV: 103
– Pro Bowls: 8
– First-Team All-Pro: 5
– Games Played: 191
– Seasons as Starter: 12

#5. Orlando Pace (1997, Round 1, Pick 1)
– Position: T
– Career wAV: 104
– Pro Bowls: 7
– First-Team All-Pro: 3
– Games Played: 169
– Seasons as Starter: 12

#4. Jared Goff (2016, Round 1, Pick 1)
– Position: QB
– Career wAV: 106
– Pro Bowls: 5
– First-Team All-Pro: 0
– Games Played: 151
– Seasons as Starter: 9

#3. Jack Youngblood (1971, Round 1, Pick 20)
– Position: DE
– Career wAV: 112
– Pro Bowls: 7
– First-Team All-Pro: 5
– Games Played: 202
– Seasons as Starter: 13

#2. Merlin Olsen (1962, Round 1, Pick 3)
– Position: DT
– Career wAV: 116
– Pro Bowls: 14
– First-Team All-Pro: 5
– Games Played: 208
– Seasons as Starter: 15

#1. Aaron Donald (2014, Round 1, Pick 13)
– Position: DT
– Career wAV: 123
– Pro Bowls: 10
– First-Team All-Pro: 8
– Games Played: 154
– Seasons as Starter: 10

Topics:

LA
LA

Best draft picks in Los Angeles Chargers history

Best draft picks in Los Angeles Chargers history
By Stacker Feed
2 min read • Published April 21, 2026
By Stacker Feed
2 min read • Published April 21, 2026

zimmytws // Shutterstock

Best draft picks in Los Angeles Chargers history

Stacker compiled a list of the best draft picks in Los Angeles Chargers history using career Weighted Approximate Value (wAV), a metric developed by Pro-Football-Reference.com to estimate career impact. The ranking also lists individual accolades such as Pro Bowl selections, First-Team All-Pro honors, and total years as a starter. Players were assigned to their originally drafted teams, excluding any draft-day trades. Data is as of April 2026.

#10. Leslie O’Neal (1986, Round 1, Pick 8)
– Position: DE
– Career wAV: 89
– Pro Bowls: 6
– First-Team All-Pro: 0
– Games Played: 196
– Seasons as Starter: 12

#9. Trent Green (1993, Round 8, Pick 222)
– Position: QB
– Career wAV: 94
– Pro Bowls: 2
– First-Team All-Pro: 0
– Games Played: 120
– Seasons as Starter: 7

#8. Bobby Boyd (1960, Round , Pick )
– Position: DB
– Career wAV: 95
– Pro Bowls: 2
– First-Team All-Pro: 3
– Games Played: 121
– Seasons as Starter: 9

#7. Jimmy Johnson (1961, Round 4, Pick 32)
– Position: DB
– Career wAV: 103
– Pro Bowls: 5
– First-Team All-Pro: 3
– Games Played: 213
– Seasons as Starter: 16

#6. John Hadl (1962, Round 3, Pick 24)
– Position: QB
– Career wAV: 106
– Pro Bowls: 6
– First-Team All-Pro: 1
– Games Played: 224
– Seasons as Starter: 12

#5. Eli Manning (2004, Round 1, Pick 1)
– Position: QB
– Career wAV: 121
– Pro Bowls: 4
– First-Team All-Pro: 0
– Games Played: 236
– Seasons as Starter: 14

#4. Dan Fouts (1973, Round 3, Pick 64)
– Position: QB
– Career wAV: 123
– Pro Bowls: 6
– First-Team All-Pro: 2
– Games Played: 181
– Seasons as Starter: 14

#3. LaDainian Tomlinson (2001, Round 1, Pick 5)
– Position: RB
– Career wAV: 129
– Pro Bowls: 5
– First-Team All-Pro: 3
– Games Played: 170
– Seasons as Starter: 10

#2. Junior Seau (1990, Round 1, Pick 5)
– Position: LB
– Career wAV: 133
– Pro Bowls: 12
– First-Team All-Pro: 6
– Games Played: 268
– Seasons as Starter: 16

#1. Drew Brees (2001, Round 2, Pick 32)
– Position: QB
– Career wAV: 167
– Pro Bowls: 13
– First-Team All-Pro: 1
– Games Played: 287
– Seasons as Starter: 19

Topics:

LA

Posts navigation

Older posts
Newer posts
Featured Jobs
Hearst Television
Account Executive
Hearst Television
Array

All Jobs »
PREMIUM MEMBER

Usman Kabara Ahmad

Falls Church, VA
20 Years Experience
I have decided to be a full-time multimedia journalist for those who might need my service, as I am ready to work hard on any given responsibility...
View Full Profile »
Join Mediabistro Membership Today

Stand out from the crowd with a premium profile

Mediabistro Logo Find your next media job or showcase your creative talent
  • Job Search
  • Hot Jobs
  • Membership
  • Newsletter
  • Career Advice
  • Media News
  • Hiring Tips
  • Creative Tools
  • About
Facebook YouTube Instagram LinkedIn
Copyright © 2026 Mediabistro
  • Terms of Use
  • Terms of Service
  • Privacy