Journalism has become ground zero for the vocation crisis - This year has been a grim one for journalism, with layoffs at the Los Angeles Times, Time magazine, NBC News, Forbes, National Geographic, Business Insider and Sports Illustrated. Further cuts loom in newsrooms across the U.S.

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Matthew Powers
Associate Professor of Communication, University of Washington
Published: June 25, 2024 8.37am EDT

file-20240624-17-qi56r8.jpg

Journalist Barbara Walters works at her desk at her home in New York in 1966. Rowland Scherman/Getty Images

This year has been a grim one for journalism, with layoffs at the Los Angeles Times, Time magazine, NBC News, Forbes, National Geographic, Business Insider and Sports Illustrated. Further cuts loom in newsrooms across the U.S.

Growing numbers of reporters and editors, tired of waiting for the other shoe to drop, are exiting the profession, citing burnout as the reason for their departure.
When scholars of journalism study the effects of the shrinking press corps, they usually focus on how it hurts civil society. Vast swaths of the country are at risk of becoming “news deserts,” with limited access to reliable local journalism. This state of affairs makes it harder for people to make educated decisions and is linked to reduced political engagement, research shows. What’s more, fewer reporters means less oversight of those wielding political and economic power.

But to me, those concerns – while important – ignore another issue, one that extends well beyond the news industry. As I argue with Sandra Vera-Zambrano in our new book, “The Journalist’s Predicament,” fewer people are seeing a life in news as a worthwhile career. This reflects a broader problem – namely, the ways that relentless economic pressures are pushing people away from socially important careers.

Meaning over money​

As an occupation, journalism is attractive to many people because they can be paid to do work that’s interesting and socially beneficial.

In this regard, it is similar to otherwise very different jobs like nursing, teaching, social work and caregiving.

These are “vocations,” in the sense that sociologist Max Weber described them more than a century ago.

Based on strong personal commitments, vocations promise recognition and a sense of self-worth for doing work that’s connected to broader values: healing people, fighting injustice, imparting knowledge, serving the cause of democracy.

file-20240624-19-a8ub9.jpg
Even though teaching hasn’t traditionally paid well, there was a time when the profession accorded more respect and fewer financial burdens. Getty Images

While these jobs have never paid especially well, people could get by and raise a family on them. That’s becoming less and less the case.
Across all of these professions, issues with recruitment and retention are so common that the term “crisis” is no longer an exaggeration.

Dreams clash with reality​

Journalism, in many ways, represents ground zero for the crisis that confronts contemporary vocations.

For one, pay in the industry is stagnant.

With a median wage in 2023 of US$57,500, journalists’ salaries have not kept pace with inflation or jobs in public relations and corporate communication.

Job security, as ongoing layoffs suggest, is nearly nonexistent. Recent drives to unionize newsrooms have done little to stem losses, and they do nothing at all for the freelancers that constitute a growing share of all journalists – and, for the most part, belong to no union at all.

Inside or outside newsrooms, work typically involves longer hours and more demands.

And to what end? In many cases, it’s to perform tasks that aren’t that interesting or socially valuable.

The journalists we spoke to bemoaned the relentless demands to churn out new content for websites and social media feeds. They talked about using multimedia to report on topics that were assigned primarily for their potential to amuse and entertain, rather than to inform or provoke thought. They griped about spending more time sitting at their desks sifting through press releases instead of gathering original reports from the field. And they described fewer and fewer opportunities to pursue stories that are personally interesting and socially valuable.

In this context, it is hardly surprising that many people decide to leave journalism, or avoid a career in it entirely. Jobs in public relations pay substantially more, with a $66,750 median annual wage, and involve fixed hours and more stability.

To be sure, these alternative careers might not promise the same adventure and excitement of journalism. But that also means people in that field are less likely to find themselves frustrated by unmet expectations.

More surprising – and relevant for considering the crisis vocations face more broadly – is the fact that so many people, despite these conditions, nonetheless still find work in journalism appealing.

This appeal is not naively held. Surveys regularly show that aspiring journalists are well aware of the troubles confronting the industry. They’re nonetheless still willing to sacrifice better pay and job security for work that allows for self-expression and connects to broader values.

Their persistence, in spite of these conditions, highlights something important about journalism and vocations more broadly: These are careers that provide rewards that cannot be reduced to money.

Creeping disillusionment​

The enduring attraction of contemporary vocations clarifies the nature of the crisis. In contrast to older vocations, such as the priesthood, many people still dream of being journalists, nurses and teachers.

But people who seek out these vocations today routinely find themselves exhausted and demoralized.

Nurses and caretakers are encouraged to eliminate “inefficiencies” so that the provision of care does not impede their employers’ ability to make money. Teachers are tasked with imparting practical skills to students while becoming more “entrepreneurial” themselves as budgets get slashed. Journalists are asked to produce news that conforms to, rather than challenges, audience expectations.

file-20240624-20-slvdxx.jpg
More administrative burdens for nurses means less time for bedside care. Ian Tyas/Hulton Archive via Getty Images

Add in the low pay, and these conditions threaten to reduce the belief that such jobs are worthwhile.

Many of the journalists we spoke to while researching our book find ways to manage the disappointments that come from doing work that stands in tension with what initially drew them. Or they reorient their work to better adapt to the profession’s commercial needs.

The fact that so many persist in the profession – at least for a while – should not distract from the frustrations and dissatisfaction that this produces.

At some point, the grip of market forces could erode interest in vocations to such an extent that they disappear altogether. In fact, some vocations today are probably sustained more by their idealized reputations on the silver screen – in films like “Spotlight” and “Dead Poets Society” – than they are by the experiences of actual reporters and teachers in 2024.

For the moment – and for the foreseeable future – the more likely development is not disinterest, but a struggle to have a career in these fields. That’s not just a failure of a profession overtaken by commercial considerations. It’s a reflection of a society unable to satisfy its citizens’ basic desires for finding meaning through the work they do.

Source (Archive)
 
Can't they just start their own news agency/journal/whatever if the sector is overflowing with convinced reporters willing to do everything to inform the populace? This has to have happened before at some point
 
This reflects a broader problem – namely, the ways that relentless economic pressures are pushing people away from socially important careers.

Meaning over money​

As an occupation, journalism is attractive to many people because they can be paid to do work that’s interesting and socially beneficial.
lol
Based on strong personal commitments, vocations promise recognition and a sense of self-worth for doing work that’s connected to broader values: healing people, fighting injustice, imparting knowledge, serving the cause of democracy.
Democracy™ is not going to be saved by grifting journos.
Journalists are asked to produce news that conforms to, rather than challenges, audience expectations.
How about this: actually report on news instead of giving your dumb opinion in the form of an "article" like this one? Your opinion doesn't matter when you're supposed to be reporting on events (mostly) objectively.
For the moment – and for the foreseeable future – the more likely development is not disinterest, but a struggle to have a career in these fields. That’s not just a failure of a profession overtaken by commercial considerations. It’s a reflection of a society unable to satisfy its citizens’ basic desires for finding meaning through the work they do.
It's actually a reflection on a society that doesn't see the need in worthless "news" and journos.
 
"a profession overtaken by commercial considerations."

When was it ever promised to journalists that they could write as they liked, about whoever and whatever they liked, for as long as they liked, and never have to ask where the pay was coming from? This kind of kvetching used to only be the domain of theater and music majors against a world that just wouldn't pay them for their "work" regardless of quality. You say "commercial considerations" ? I say "working in a trade".

Hang out a shingle? You are now at the service of customers. Refuse to acknowledge this? You go out of business.

Is writing a hobby and passion to you? Or a means of making a living? To be the latter, you have to sacrifice some autonomy of the when where and how from the former, welcome to being a professional, something 99% of the world can do. Why not you?

You, the journalist, are not so special in talent, or ethos, or anything at all that can be objectively measured that you should get money for just identifying yourself as a journalist. Yet you fully expect it. To you "journalism" isn't just a job, it's a title of nobility......

" a reflection of a society unable to satisfy its citizens’ basic desires for finding meaning through the work they do."

"From each according to ability" gobbledygook.

Nothing more.

"Meaningful" work to the individual does not translate at a perfect 1:1 ratio with making a comfortable living from it. Nor does this make it some human rights violation that you can't afford your preferred life on 3 days of "meaningful" (to you) work a week.

Which is the real "problem" journalists are having - they thought devotion to fully automated luxury space communism, the kind they shilled for all their lives, would put them at the top of society, not put them out of a job.
 
Last edited:
All they ever had was their credibility and they lost it.
Nah, they didn't "lose" anything. They sold away their morals and credibility for the modicum of money, fame and power their masters bestowed on them.

Journoscum are getting what they fucking deserve.
 
I've never heard the term "vocations crisis" used outside of any context besides the Catholic Church.

Be a journalist instead of a propagandist and people will listen. Get out there and get stories, get unique interviews and content others can't. If you have the skills you can do it and if not, well, you were never a journalist to begin with.
 
Propaganda has never been, and never will be, profitable. It has to be paid for either by the state or the political actor on whose behalf you are propagandizing.

Are these journalists really trying to tell me they have not even been paid for their relentless shilling? Because if yes, lol. This is just stupid.
 
Code Monkey Sector will probably be decimated by AI soon.
Possibly code monkeys specifically. However, dramatically increasing the efficiency of creating software will also reduce costs, which in turn tends to increase demand for software.

Think of it this way: compared to hand coding assembly in hexadecimal on paper, writing high level code with an IDE in a point-and-grunt environment is already something anyone can do without any special training. Yet there's still more demand for programmers than there are programmers.

What programming is has changed dramatically over the short existence of the computer industry, and it's likely to keep changing, but we're nowhere near a decline in the demand for programmers.
 
Can't they just start their own news agency/journal/whatever if the sector is overflowing with convinced reporters willing to do everything to inform the populace? This has to have happened before at some point
Newspapers have never, never, never been profitable on the basis of "writers write, editors edit, subscribers pay."

It does not work. It costs too much to do it to a reasonable standard for people to be willing to pay the necessary price.

Advertising has always been the way they actually pay for the paper. Subscribers are just there to say to advertisers "get your ad in front of 50,000 eyeballs" or whatever.

But those ads used to be bought because your local newspaper was one of the few places you'd see ads in your day-to-day. A combo of TV, outdoor, and internet ads means there's no use doing that any more. Why advertise on your local newspaper's website instead of just using Google ads? It wouldn't make any sense.

My bizarre suggestion, if someone wants to make journalism profitable again, is to ban outdoor advertising. No more billboards. Anything that decreases overall ad saturation metrics for most people will make it more possible to start a new publication.

Billboards are morally wrong anyway. See here.
 
scholars of journalism
how it hurts civil society
fewer reporters means less oversight of those wielding political and economic power
Lol. "Scholars of journalism" should not be considered people, those who've spent decades undermining every piece of societal infrastructure do not get to tell us what hurts "civil society", and the idea of the Media providing "oversight" after the last decade+ of Regime cheerleading is laughable.

it is similar to otherwise very different jobs like nursing, teaching, social work and caregiving
these alternative careers
These are not "vocations", it sounds like the author just picked the biggest, most heavily-female roles where he expects to find partisan solidarity (or maybe the closest ones to blue collar he could think of). In many megacities the biggest employers are the school and hospital systems, so it's laughable to call teaching, nursing, and related jobs "alternative".
 
Propaganda has never been, and never will be, profitable. It has to be paid for either by the state or the political actor on whose behalf you are propagandizing.

Are these journalists really trying to tell me they have not even been paid for their relentless shilling? Because if yes, lol. This is just stupid.
More like the pay is starting to dry up.
 
In this context, it is hardly surprising that many people decide to leave journalism, or avoid a career in it entirely. Jobs in public relations pay substantially more, with a $66,750 median annual wage, and involve fixed hours and more stability.
That's like noticing the guy flipping burgers at McDonalds makes less money than the restaurant manager. Yeah no shit, journalists are bottom feeders in the public relations apparatus. That's all journalists do these days, they help distribute PR narratives. That even happens with local news, just like when the Milwaukee TV stations interview a morbidly obese greaseball and his gasbag dyke because of "muh swattings" all without verifying anything about the story since they've been handed a script. We sure are long gone from Edward Bernays's day when PR firms had to cleverly pull some stunt to get journos to write about it.
 
Interesting that they don’t mention one of the chief causes of wage stagnation in journalism: the rise of journalists who don’t really need the money.

Journalism used to be regarded as a working-class, “dirty,” work-your-way-up-from-the-mailroom profession. But post-Watergate, the idea of journalism as a prestigious career with the ability to move the levers of power took hold. Naturally, higher ed got in on the graft and the Ivies started expanding their journalism programs, which led to a crop of journalists with fancy credentials from wealthy backgrounds, who didn’t need the money but were interested in using their role as gatekeepers to the public as a means to access politics.

“Reporting the news” faded into the background as “driving narratives” became the real objective. Yeah, internet advertising fucked the profitability of news organizations hard, but that’s secondary to journalism’s’ own self-sabotage.
 
Back
Top Bottom