Poynter Online
Go


Top Story

Young Journalists Use Facebook Ads to Reach Prospective Employers
Most Recent Articles
1.New York Times hires Boston Globe's arts editor
2:56 PM Feb. 9, 2010
2.Blackberry still most popular smart phone, iPhone gains
2:24 PM Feb. 9, 2010
3.Glitches, Delays Disrupt Plans for Virtual Border Fence
11:33 AM Feb. 9, 2010
4.Young Journalists Use Facebook Ads to Reach Prospective Employers
5:20 AM Feb. 9, 2010
5.What Great Bosses Know about 'No Surprises'
4:20 PM Feb. 8, 2010
Most E-mailed
Recent Comments
Recent Tags
Community Activity

Poynter Training
Poynter Seminars
Small, in-person training experiences.
1.NewsU: Picture Editing 101: Essentials and Ethics
Apply NOW
2.Poynter Fellowship for College Journalists
Apply by March 1
3.Making Your Opinion Matter
Apply by March 22

News University
Today's most popular courses on NewsU, Poynter's e-learning site for journalists.
Webinars
Our online classroom is just a click away. Learn more.
All Webinars

Poynter Forums

View Forum Post

Topic: Letters Sent to Romenesko
Date/Time: 12/21/2005 12:07:16 PM
Title: So, are journalists underpaid?
Posted By: Jim Romenesko
 
From DAVID CAY JOHNSTON: Daniel Gross, who writes interesting and informing stuff, gave no specific examples in his provocative Slate column asking "are journalists underpaid?" Some Romenesko readers have jumped on his column and assumed that his assumptions are reasonable.

Are they?

Some facts that those who have posted here may find informing:

Guild scale at The New York Times is $87,691.76, unchanged since April 1, 2004, because the entire 2005 raise of $50.59 (or less for those below the top minimum) was diverted to maintaining health care benefits for active Guild members, those who took buyouts and retirees. Typically The Times wages are at or near the top in the lists published in the TNG's Reporter.

A Guild pay study in the mid 1990s, showed, as I recall, that about three-fourths of Guild journalists made $1,300, or less, in merit pay. This suggests that even today most Times journalists make five figures or barely six, and that overwhelmingly their pay is dependent on their union's success in negotiating minimum salaries.

As I recall only one journalist in the Guild made 50 percent above scale and that individual evidently had come back into Guild jurisdiction from a management position. (I have no idea how much exempts are paid.)

Mr. Gross's imagined example was a Manhattan journalist couple making $250,000 -- a Times reporter whose husband is a Wall Street Journal editor.

To make that much from their jobs the husband would have to make at least $162,308, an amount that would be less only if the reporter wife negotiated for lots merit pay, works lots of overtime (hard for reporters to get), writes special section articles for the modest fees paid (which requires more work) collects significant reprint fees (which are severely limited by company police, contract rules and are an unpredictable source of income) or moonlights as a professor, author, short order cook or freelances (strict ethics rules limit opportunities).

Would anyone at the Journal, now or in the past, like to weigh in on how many editors there make $162,300 or more? And how many of these editors are covered by the in-house union or are part of management? By the way, what is the top minimum in that contract?

As Mr. Gross notes, even a $250,000 salary is no ticket to a comfortable lifestyle in Manhattan, much as that may grate on people who work long hard hours at news organizations with little job security, few benefits and demands for volumes of copy.

A 224-square-foot apartment (wall-to-wall) in Manhattan can easily cost you more than $1,000 per square foot I can safely report because I turned down an offer for more than that for my studio in an unfancy neighborhood, deep in the dark well of the building, but with a guard serving as doorman downstairs.

What should concern publishers and broadcasters is the point Mr. Gross makes at the end of his column about pay relative to the quality of journalists that news organizations in Manhattan (and everywhere) attract and retain.

Just as the street minimum wage is higher in most places than the legal minimum, salaries for journalists must be at least high enough to retain talent or the quality of the publication will slip and, in turn, so will the profitability of the enterprise. As best I can tell the only job market in which the goal is to pay the highest possible income, instead of the lowest possible to attract and retain talent, is CEO of a publicly traded company, a market whose rigging has been well documented by economists and some pay consultants.

Mr. Gross wrote:

"Writers unhappy with their wages can always switch fields, seek other jobs, or leave. If housing prices continue to rise, and if wages continue to stagnate, the media Big Three may find that their captive creative class might quit for greener pastures."

Right now I see no signs of a shortage of journalists willing to work for the wages offered by any of the major news organizations in Manhattan or Washington, but if hiring editors and producers in those cities know otherwise let's hear from them. If there is no shortage of talent, and no significant exodus by choice, then the market is pricing journalist wages reasonably.

As for housing prices, maybe reporters, editors and producers should consider each time they work on a report whether rising housing prices are an unmitigated good or whether, as with all things, there are multiple dimensions to examine. [Permalink]

View Complete Forum Topic

Username
Password
New User? Signup Now
Poynter Careers
See All Jobs
Add Your Resume
Post Your Job
Become a Member
More media jobs