Hitting your head on the basement ceiling

[Jim Thomsen]

When I first came into journalism about 20 years ago, the path of advancement was made clear to me by veteran newspaper folk and college professors alike:

— Start work at a non-daily newspaper. Or a small daily if you've had a standout college career with strong clips/tearsheets and solid internships. Or went to one of the top-tier journalism colleges like Northwestern, Missouri or Columbia.

— After a minimum of two years, work your way up to a small-to-mid-sized daily.

— After a minimum of two years after that, you can start making your bid for a metro paper — but don't realistically expect to be hired until you've had at least five or six years of standout work under your belt.

In 1989, I don't think anybody would have disputed this advancement model.

But today, my perception is that everything's different in two critical ways:

— The metros are now hiring kids right out of college — mostly those who have gone through the more prestigious journalism programs, as well as Dow Jones Newspaper Fund selectees. In many cases, they're replacing high-paid veterans who have been offered buyouts. While these kids lack experience and their talents are raw, their virtues seem to be that they're cheap and malleable. (I have a few young friends in the Dow Jones program, and they tell me they're being told to fully expect to be hired right away by a major metro or the AP for a big-city bureau.)

— There is virtually no more room for linear advancement. A Generic State j-school graduate who's put in six years at a small daily and hit his or her head on the top of the wage scale, for example, is probably stuck. Because a) nobody bigger is hiring; and b) when they do hire, they pass over the more experienced candidate. (Presumably because he can't or won't accept an entry-level wage.) Five or ten years ago, he or she might have had a fair shot, but those days appear to be gone.

Food for thought:

— Do you agree with this perspective? Disagree?

— Is this fair? Is it right?

— What does this say to people in a non-elite school or in the lower-circulation echelons of newspaperdom? What hope can be offered to them?

— Are the young talents vaulting straight into the metros a good fit for those jobs? Does their lack of experience and time-tested judgment show in news copy on a daily basis?

Discuss, please.

[dfisher]

You're spot on from what I see.

Oh, there are still some advancements -- just had a very talented former student who was at the 100K metro here move up to Kansas City and the Chiefs' beat.

But that 100K metro that used to look at maybe one or two of our grads a year, and only with Dow Jones, college paper experience and (not or) other internships (including a couple it had) now is hiring no one with more than about three years' experience, I'm told. Draw your own conclusions.

Doug

[Paul Soucy]

Jim, I think you're absolutely correct. Others would know better than I do, but I think another factor in play here is that many (most?) metros now flat-out refuse to even consider anyone who isn't already local, even bottom-dollar recent grads. (And, sadly, familiarity with the coverage area probably has little if anything to do with it.) So if a kid wants to work in a particular city, he'd better move there first and look for a job later. (How can he afford that? He can just tap the same trust fund he lived on during his unpaid internship!)

1. They don't want to pay even the minimal costs to bring candidates in for an interview and tryout.
2. They don't want to pay to move them -- or even have that discussion.
3. They don't want to pay the premium that often comes with enticing someone to move.
4. If they're going to pay a salary that barely covers the cost of living (if that), then they at least want someone who already knows what the local cost of living is and can't claim to be surprised at the price of an apartment.
5. They want the new hire to be available immediately, if that's what they need, and they want the luxury of being able to string the process out, if that's what suits them.
6. Assuming there are people with consciences involved, they don't want the responsibility of bringing someone to a new town for a job when that job may well disappear a few months later.

[dfisher]

6. Assuming there are people with consciences involved ...

Helluva assumption :evil: