The Flack's Revenge: Do PR Execs Discriminate Against Ex-Journalists When Making Hiring Decisions?
I recently got an e-mail from a reporter friend who has decided to change careers and move into public relations. Even though he has almost completed his MBA, his initial attempts to find a PR job have fallen flat; he hasn't even been able to get an interview. Here's his theory as to why he's having such a hard time:
The best PR people I deal with are in big corporations with departments full of ex-reporters. And these are companies I write some of the most critical stories about. But those guys understand my job.
Most PR people I deal with, however, are completely clueless about my job. My theory is that most PR people or the hiring managers bringing in PR people are actually scared of a reporter coming in.
One of the companies I applied to had a big discrimination lawsuit and that's all that's been written about them. Am I screwed in the job market because reporters are feared? Or worse, as I've feared -- execs think we are incapable of anything else?
Unfortunately, I don't think my friend is being paranoid (even though that is a speciality of journalists.)
Many people in business simply don't understand reporters. They don't understand their motivations for going into journalism, and they worry they won't be able to thrive -- or even be happy -- in a corporate setting.
Reporters in general, and especially newspaper reporters, don't enter the profession of journalism for a quick buck. Their egos are fed not by the money they make, but by the impact they have. Journalists have impact by covering controversy and causing change -- two things that frighten most corporations, which are essentially conservative institutions.
Being "negative" (as most corporate hiring managers would define that term) is a big part of the job of most reporters. And hiring managers are taught to screen out negative people.
You see, there are no "problems" in corporate America -- only "challenges." And though the media loves to celebrate the corporate maverick, the reason we celebrate them is because they're so few and far between. Most people get ahead in business by not making waves -- the same kind of waves that reporters are trained (and, in some cases, born) to make.
A couple years ago, a recruiter for a Fortune 500 company contacted me about a senior VP position reporting to the CEO. Even though I love the Idea Grove, I decided to take the interview. If nothing else, perhaps it could lead to some consulting work.
When I met with the overly enthusiastic HR VP, she said this about the CEO: "If he told me to dye my hair purple, I'd dye my hair purple." I was reminded of the scene in Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room when the delirious female exec advised employees to invest their entire 401(k) balances in Enron stock.
I'm afraid it's too often like this in corporate America. And the more a company is filled with purple-haired "team players" and Kool-Aid drinkers, the more likely the HR department will think twice about hiring a cynical, negative, stubbornly independent-minded ex-reporter.
But you know what? That's not necessarily a bad thing. Because most ex-journalists wouldn't want to work at companies like that anyway.
My friend is right; the best PR agencies and departments are chock-full of former journalists -- people who know that corporate Kool-Aid is not suitable for public (and especially media) consumption. The smartest companies empower their PR departments to play the critical role of intermediary between the company and the outside world -- and to do it with integrity.
If you hold yourself with dignity, aren't afraid to state your opinions, and stand up for the importance of your role, you will ultimately find an employer that respects you for it.
And by actually having an impact rather than nodding enthusiastically in the corner, you will improve the less-than-superlative image of the PR profession in the process.
Labels: journalism, Marketing Views, newspapers, PR careers, PR jobs, public relations jobs
posted by Scott Baradell at
1:47 PM
11 Comments:
I've noticed that many reporters think that though they are toiling underpaid in a noble profession, if they wished to "sell out," they could in an instant get some nice high-paying job with a "corporation." Here is a bulletin: It is hard to get a job in any field. And just because you cover cops doesn't mean some company thinks you have the skills and the manner to handle its PR
By
Terry, at 10/03/2007
Terry, there's truth to that -- it relates to the fact that some journalists don't have a respect for the profession. Which means they'd never devote themselves sufficiently to be any good at it -- or at least to really grow in a career at it. I've known many former reporter friends who got -- and stayed -- in lower-level flack jobs because they were burnt-out on reporting -- but never really bought in to their new profession.
That said, when I was a corporate communications exec at both Belo and before that PageNet, I personally preferred, say, three years' experience at a newspaper to three years at a PR agency. But I would hire the candidate if -- and only if -- I thought they really wanted to make the career change.
By
Scott Baradell, at 10/03/2007
I was a reporter for 15 years; for the last 15 I've done PR for environmental activist groups. If the guy who complained about discrimination cares to look outside corporate America for his PR career, he will find that non-profits will welcome him with open arms. They have stories to tell and are in great need of someone with expertise in how the news media work. If ex-reporters are looking for positions that will alow them to keep telling the truth and raising hell, nonprofits are the way to go. True, they don't pay nearly as well as corporations, but a number of them have brought their salaries up to something comparable to medium-sized newspapers.
By
Bill, at 10/03/2007
Bill -- that's a really great point. Thanks
By
Scott Baradell, at 10/03/2007
Non-profits are a great way to get in, but be aware of two caveats:
1) Agencies and big corporations may not give you a lot of respect, even with a decent PR non-profit resume.
2) Some non-profits will present a different bias (especially for broadcasters). Because they assume your job is so exciting and glamorous, they'll assume you won't be happy in a career they consider comparatively boring.
By
Ike, at 10/03/2007
I was in broadcast journalism for more than 20 years both in front o and behind the camera. I crossed the street into PR 16 years ago. Infrequently, I miss the adrenalin rush of the news business, but in PR you work Monday through Friday days and have holidays off. And, the money is better.
I have friends who made the switch, some successfully and some not. I think its because while they jobs look a lot alike, they exist in parallel universes that are slightly out of sync with each other.
I do hav to agree with an earlier poster who noted that getting a job is tough in any industry. Journalists who can translate their skill sets, critical thinking, instant expert attainment and quick, comprehendable writing instead of reciting things they've covered will gain greater acceptance and have an easier adjustment to the new life.
By
Anonymous, at 10/03/2007
Ditto to what anonymous said. I miss the rush sometimes, but I don't miss the hours. I got my corporate communications job in large part because of my journalism experience. I was surprised to learn that there's no "selling out" involved. Less happily, I was also surprised that the money is not as amazing as journalists say. I took a pretty big pay cut at first.
By
Nancy, at 10/04/2007
Nancy - I took a pay cut getting out, but my hourly rate went up!
And within three years, I was WAY ahead of where I was in teevee.
By
Ike, at 10/04/2007
Short-sighted and dimwitted PR folks might not have the brains to hire a journalist; not to pat myself on the back too hard, but I just brought one on board and couldn't be happier with her results thus far.
By
Anonymous, at 10/04/2007
As someone with 20 years in a variety of news jobs, and the last four years serving as a writing coach and media consultant of sorts to PR practitioners, I have also found it difficult to get past being able to show I don't have corporate communications experience.
I would have thought that my media background and the fact that I've won awards for my writing would have been rather portable into a full-time PR job.
However, headhunters have told me that agencies want people with agency experience.
Outside of agencies, I am often confronted with people who never worked in the news business, and really have no clue about how to reach out to the media in an effective way. But because you don't have PR experience, somehow you're not well-suited to do PR.
I agree with an earlier comment that the non-profit route might be more efficacious and professionally rewarding. Unfortunately, not in position to take a pay cut, so I'm a bit stuck for now.
Yes, it really is not easy to get a job in any profession. But after all the years I toiled in newsrooms, I would have thought I had something more to show employers in another field than I do, at least from their vantage point.
By
Anonymous, at 10/04/2007
To the last anonymous:
I think the longer you've been in the news business, the harder it is to make the initial transition -- because employers don't want to pay the salary you'll expect without know whether you'll thrive in a corporate environment -- which is very different from a newsroom.
That said, after you get over the hump of getting that first PR job (either on the agency or corporate side), I think all that journalism experience will eventually be equated to PR experience in the mind of potential employers.
By
Scott Baradell, at 10/04/2007
Post a Comment
<< Home