I want to be reflective. Right now, I'm thinking about my career so far at a city/regional magazine in the Chesapeake region of Maryland. As much as I've learned and grown during my time at the magazine, I can say confidently that I do not want to ever work for the media any longer. There are three things that are certain to happen when you work for the media and they are all bad.
When I tell people that I work for a magazine, they automatically assume that I write for the magazine. And when I tell them that I don't, they get confused and inquire "what is it that I actually do". For the general public, there is apparently no other work to be done at a magazine—other than write. If you don't write, then what could you possibly do for a magazine? Well, I produce video and I manage the website. This type of work just does not compute for most people.
The next thing that happens when someone finds out I work for a city/regional magazine, is they assume that I aspire to win a Pulitzer (because I'm there to write, apparently). I received the same expectation from the general public during college when I told others my major. "Oh, so you're going to be the next Spielberg, eh?" No, I'm not. I don't aspire to be the next Spielberg or Scorsese or Coppola or anyone else. I just want to do my job and do it well. This extra pressure from the general public grows thin very quickly.
The third thing that happens to employees of regional media companies, is the extra attention. Whether I like it or not, the local business community knows who I am. I work with them frequently on video and new media projects. A lot of these businesses are restaurants and going out to eat is very uncomfortable. Not only do the restaurants give me more attention than I want, but they give me this look like I owe them something. In their mind, because they gave me a free appetizer, I have to write a blog about them or plug them in a newsletter. When I go out to eat, I want to be a nameless, faceless patron who eats with his head down and leaves promptly. That's it. Just like everyone else.
There is a reason for these observations—I'm not just making this up. And the reasons are totally inescapable. Media is made to be consumed—magazines to be read, radio stations to be listened to, and movies to be watched. The amount of skill, expertise, and know-how to create the stories and programs is immense. But anyone can be a critic. That's the rub—I can go to film school, get a BS, go get a master's, spend $10,000 on a film and take 2 years producing it but it only takes 15 minutes for some knucklehead to tear it to pieces. I've used the term "general public" a lot in this entry for a reason. I needed to define the audience. Since anyone can (and they do) read my magazine, it is susceptible to not only the criticism but an unbreakable bond to other, most esteemed magazines. This is why people can somehow put me in the same league as Andrew Sullivan or A.O. Scott. This only happens with the media. In no other industry are two completely different circumstances compared. If I worked at Northrup Gruman, no one will ask me why I'm not working for Raytheon. No one will tell me that their missiles are better. The general public doesn't know anything about missiles. But they know a lot about media. If I was the supply manager for Target, no one would tell me to work at Wal-Mart because their supply chain is more efficient. Again, the general public doesn't know these things. But if I tell them I work for a magazine, they tell me I should freelance for the
New York Times because "it's a good newspaper". If I tell them I'm a video producer, they tell me they have a cousin in Hollywood who might be able to help me. Thanks, asshole, but no thanks. The common theme behind it all is, success in the media is easily defined for the general public, i.e. you're on TV, your movie is a blockbuster, your magazine is on every newsstand, your book is on the
New York Times bestsellers list, etc. No one will ask a sociology student when they'll win the Albert O. Hirschman Prize; either because no one has heard about that prize or no one cares about successful sociologists.
And since the general public "knows" the ins and outs of the media, they find it incomprehensible that other professions could lie inside. Again, using Target as an example: I could say that I was either a register clerk, a store manager, or a truck driver for Target and no one would bat an eye. But every time I tell someone I don't write for the magazine, it's like trying to explain to someone that the sky is actually purple. This is the thought processes: Magazines companies produce magazines which are read, therefore the only types of employment to be found at a magazine company are writing positions.
The media has such a hold over the American zeitgeist that everyone is an expert on the subject. Preconceptions abound. And even though I'm aware of the thought process, it still gets to me. After four years of people telling me how they "can't wait to see my name in the lights", I get really bummed out that it hasn't happened yet. And when I see someone I know who does get their name in the lights, I feel even worse. Business majors don't have to deal with that. Biology majors don't either. It's not like a biology major is constantly asked "so are you going to be the next Crick or Darwin?" But since the general public consumes more TV shows, films, and magazines than biology textbooks, they expect great things from us lowly media employees.
