As I mentioned in my last post, I had asked for some advice of some fellow photographers on how to approach my new work schedule. I explained I was afraid that I would get burnt out being only one of two photographers and if anyone had suggestions about how to keep that focus that allows one to see the great images, I would be appreciative.
I got some helpful advice, and I got some funny advice (that mostly involved using drugs or booze) and I got some pessimistic advice.
Newspapers for the most part aren’t doing too well right now. They haven’t been able to figure out how to use the internet to make money, especially the kind money they made from advertising sales in the paper. Much of that ad money is now heading to the internet where it isn’t difficult to find places that will allow you to post classified ads for free and do a lot of other types of marketing for free, or nearly so.
Some of the pessimistic advice suggested that it wasn’t worth sticking around the newspaper. The aggravation I would get would outweigh the benefits and gratification I get from being a newspaper photojournalist. Since the other photographer was laid off just last week, everything is still kinda new. Unsure how or if this will be successful.
I tried to be positive in asking my question, I didn’t complain about the situation or say it was unfair. It’s something that happened, and was out of my control. The only thing I can do now is go forward and make the best of it.
The pessimistic advice tended to come from photographers outside of newspapers who don’t think very much of the media. And frankly, there are times I don’t think very much of the media, even being a member of that group. There are those who suggest the formal media’s time has come to an end. With the internet, one can get news from bloggers or citizen journalists. Some good stories and ideas have come from those two groups. There have also been some major ethical issues from ordinary citizens who give a media organization a story, only for the organization to find out that the citizen had a bias or personal agenda.
Even people who are members of an established media organization have bias. One just hopes that a journalist recognizes their biases and can keep them in check. That’s part of the reason that media organizations have several layers of management and fact checking, to balance out one journalist’s possible bias with an editor who looks for stories that aren’t fair and balanced.
A crude but I think effective metaphor is that a good media organization, whether it’s a newspaper, tv program or website, is similar to a good butcher shop. No one wants the whole cow or even a side of beef. You can’t do anything with that for dinner. A good butcher looks for the best side of beef from among many, cuts away the fat and unnecessary parts to present the customer with a nice t-bone steak or prime rib.
Some organizations are butcher shops that only provide at best, a marginal cut of meat. Some organizations do a little bit better job of providing better cuts and more of a variety. A butcher shop has health code rules it has to follow which can be legally enforced. Media organizations only have sets of ethical rules to follow which may or may not be legally enforceable.
Bloggers and citizen journalists have their potential, but many are offering the whole cow. It can be difficult sometimes to determine what portions of what they have to say are worth digesting, and which ones to leave on the plate. And there are some that one should just run away from the table as fast as possible because they’re the equivalent of mad cow disease. Being some web address in the vastness of the net, sometimes a reader has no idea who the blogger is.
One hopes to have a good butcher shop nearby with a lot of choices. A consumer of news hopes to have a good provider nearby, if possible several to provide different points of view.
I honestly don’t see newspapers disappearing. I can’t imagine being left with the only choices being television news or a random blog somewhere. Blogs can be interesting to read, provide some useful information and links to other ideas. I can’t see that being the only place to get one’s news though. Television news seems to be pandering to the lowest common denominator.
One of the reasons I don’t see tv news being a reliable source of news in the future is that most of the time people can’t remember exactly what is they saw on tv. Go to a coffee shop to listen to the conversations of customers, or talk to a friend or relative about some news story they saw on tv.
It often goes something like, “I can’t remember what station it was, but I saw some story about how ABC Company was going to outsource some of their jobs, don’t remember the number, to some country overseas someplace.”
It was the NBC station in
Now if a newspaper does the story, either in printed form or on the web, you’re probably going to be able to find it. It’s going to quote company officials, have numbers and dates with it, explain the significance of the issue. 400 words for a newspaper almost counts as a brief for many newspapers. For such a story it’s most likely going to be much longer.
I’m not sure what the future is going to bring for photography or newspapers. I know I enjoy getting an assignment and seeing where my creativity takes me. Some of the advice suggested I would be better off going to work in an office 40 hours a week. I can’t see that making me happy though. Some advice suggested I would be better off freelancing full time. The ideal situation of freelancing is that you only take the jobs that interest you, clients don’t argue about the estimate you give them to do the work and they always pay on time.
I’ve done a little bit of freelancing in the past 11 years. I’ve taken a few jobs I’ve not been real crazy about, but they were paying, There were conflicts about the cost of the work. And clients hardly ever pay on time. It’s not to say freelancing is a bad job, it’s just different.
As I mentioned in the last post, things didn’t gel for me right away with my photography. I wish I knew why I didn’t get that great advice when I was in college 14 years ago, or when I started at the Post-Tribune 11 years ago, or 7 years ago when I started at the Tribune. I sometimes wonder if maybe someone said something similar to that advice and I wasn’t in the right frame of mind to hear it. Or maybe I misunderstood them. Or I wasn’t talking to the right people. Whatever the reason, I finally got the advice two years ago.
The advice works for me. Having received it a relatively short time ago, I’m still seeing just what it can do for me. It wasn’t that I wasn’t successful in the 12 years before everything seemed to click, it’s that I wonder how much more successful I could have been. I’ve seen what its done for me the past two years. I’d like to see what else it can do for me before I just decide to bail from newspapers.
No comments:
Post a Comment