How the new news cycle changes our cachet
Reading the other day that AARP-the Magazine boasts over 22 million subscribers I felt a tingle -- how thrilling, I thought, to have a story appearing in its October issue. While this is my second small piece for them, I am aware that exposure on a national level is invaluable for a journalist.
I've also been published in dozens, or close to 100 other publications, and these days it's tough to remember them all. I remember a time when waiting for a magazine article to come out was like waiting for Christmas and no one could ruin the surprise.
That all changed with the Internet, though, and it's certainly likely I could be out-scooped. This is true not only for the AARP profile but for any stories I write, including environmental pieces for tce today or the new Green Guide published by the Hartford Business Journal. Even a citizen journalist or heck, Facebook friend, could publish an article that uses the same sources. While it's fine to say there are no accidents, in the publishing world I am constantly seeing my angle reworked elsewhere--99.9 percent of the time it's not intentional (who has access to my brain but I?)
So the question is, how do I set myself apart in this "new" climate. Do I become the queen of a click, getting a story up online faster than the next guy? Do I acquiesce to those so-called publishers and editors who choose to rate us based on page views?
In my work for Examiner I have made money mostly in relation to how much traffic I drive to my stories. Since I view this work as "am-pro" (amateur professional) -- as does Examiner -- I don't have a problem with it. Yet if I were told during a job interview that I would be rated this way, I would pack my bags and go find a real journalism job. Wait, no, that's not right--I was told at the International Business Times that we must get "x" number of page views per month.
And I told them I did not have a problem with it--I was game, I implied, to be not only flexible but change the way I do journalism. I wondered, though, if a very small hurricane hit a sparsely populated area or if a minority of scientists proved fracking caused earthquakes if I would still be judged in this manner. What if, say, most readers didn't find the simple truth sexy?
I don't have the answers. We all need to pay the rent. We all need to please our bosses, and our bosses need to please the advertisers who ultimately, are pleasing you.
So the question is: are you pleased?
I've also been published in dozens, or close to 100 other publications, and these days it's tough to remember them all. I remember a time when waiting for a magazine article to come out was like waiting for Christmas and no one could ruin the surprise.
That all changed with the Internet, though, and it's certainly likely I could be out-scooped. This is true not only for the AARP profile but for any stories I write, including environmental pieces for tce today or the new Green Guide published by the Hartford Business Journal. Even a citizen journalist or heck, Facebook friend, could publish an article that uses the same sources. While it's fine to say there are no accidents, in the publishing world I am constantly seeing my angle reworked elsewhere--99.9 percent of the time it's not intentional (who has access to my brain but I?)
So the question is, how do I set myself apart in this "new" climate. Do I become the queen of a click, getting a story up online faster than the next guy? Do I acquiesce to those so-called publishers and editors who choose to rate us based on page views?
In my work for Examiner I have made money mostly in relation to how much traffic I drive to my stories. Since I view this work as "am-pro" (amateur professional) -- as does Examiner -- I don't have a problem with it. Yet if I were told during a job interview that I would be rated this way, I would pack my bags and go find a real journalism job. Wait, no, that's not right--I was told at the International Business Times that we must get "x" number of page views per month.
And I told them I did not have a problem with it--I was game, I implied, to be not only flexible but change the way I do journalism. I wondered, though, if a very small hurricane hit a sparsely populated area or if a minority of scientists proved fracking caused earthquakes if I would still be judged in this manner. What if, say, most readers didn't find the simple truth sexy?
I don't have the answers. We all need to pay the rent. We all need to please our bosses, and our bosses need to please the advertisers who ultimately, are pleasing you.
So the question is: are you pleased?
Comments
Post a Comment