Dear dimwit on the phone

He's been around a long time, but I'm not sure how much editing and page design he's done. Probably a fair amount. It doesn't seem, however, that he grasps the concept there's more to it than just pulling stories out of a queue, formatting them and dumping them on the page.
During our argument I did ask how many sports pages he'd designed -- and in particular, how many sports pages he'd designed in our market -- and he bristled and said, "Plenty," which was probably a defensive reaction.
He's an excellent photographer, and if he was upset about the way I'd mishandled a picture or had tips on how to take photos I'd certainly listen to that. But on designing sports pages? Yeah, that's my corner.

Another update ...
His first run at a sports page looks like an utter disaster.
* He left out a local story (EDIT: Which was apparently the ME's decision to hold it for a lighter local day on Monday; it was kind of a newsy story and probably should've run today, but I can live with it)
* Had the story on Tiger Woods returning on two different pages in a three-page section. Once as a brief, once as a long story.
* Doubled up on U.S. Women's Open coverage. There's a copy-and-pasted press release with an AP dateline on a semi-local who missed the cut on page one, with a paragraph at the end on the rest of the tournament. I can live with that. But he's also got a small story on page three that doesn't really need to be there.
* A World Cup story on page one with some elements that were poorly formatted.
* And nothing appears to have been proofread. There's style errors throughout the section.

I'm not sure whether to cringe in horror or cackle with Schadenfreudean glee.
Probably the former, because as long as he made deadline there might be five people at my shop who give a crap.

 

Sorry to hear that, Batman, but at least it sounds like you've got your personal situation well in hand. Nice work, and good job holding your temper through all of this. Not sure I would have been able to. I will admit that I thought of the tape recorder idea for future meetings, too. Not sure of the legalities of it, but it would be tempting to have a clear record of who said what and when sitting in your back pocket for whatever happens down the road.

Good luck.

 

Batman,

Keep that section in a drawer somewhere. The next time he wants to challenge your news judgment, you can pull it out and the two of you can have an "interesting" conversation.

When it comes to play of various stories, I understand there is some give and take and some subjectivity. I once had an SE chastise me for centerpiecing a Stanley Cup Playoff game on a Monday section front. His argument was that hockey didn't have a large enough following to warrant it. OK, fine. My response was I wouldn't want to work somewhere that didn't have an interest in my favorite sport. (I got laid off a month later, but was preparing to quit, anyway.) I get those type of philosophical arguments.

But, beyond that, just because someone may hold a higher title or position, I don't back down on matters that you mentioned above.

 

In that case, Mark, I might have agreed with the SE. If you're in a non-NHL market, or a market where hockey is not a huge deal, then it shouldn't be centerpieced on your sports cover. It's always what your readers find interesting, not necessarily what interests you.
At my shop, I would never, ever run a hockey story on the front page unless it was the Olympics or there was an on-ice murder, and I'd be furious if one of my fill-ins did it. We're not a hockey town, or even a hockey state. The closest NHL team is 400 miles away. By the same token, I wouldn't run a College World Series story on the front page if I was working in New York, even though it piques my own interest.

Your other point touches on one that's been bugging me for a few days now, however. When you have problems with a supervisor -- and I'm talking deep problems with his leadership style -- but can't or don't want to pack up and move on, how do you handle it?
I mentioned I have that meeting with the quasi-publisher and ME in a couple of weeks. I'm hoping to address some much larger concerns that I and a few others have. But at the big blow-up I was also told by the quasi-publisher that it's the ME's ship, what he says goes, and at the end of the day I have to do what the ME says no matter what it is or how silly it seems.
Basically, it made it sound like I needed to have blind faith in the guy who's driving us toward a cliff while he's got a half-empty bottle of Jack Daniel's in his hand and is insisting he's not drunk.
So how do you break through that wall without looking like a malcontent and marking yourself for death?

 

You had a better argument than this one to use, didn't you?

 

That's why it's a job unfortunately. You carve out what you can, take advantage of independence where it can be found. And when the marching orders come, you unfortunately have to follow. And I know Mark suggested holding an example of someone's failure, but in my experience that usually just escalates. Often that moment of a get back comment is quickly replaced by a veiled threat, a reassertion of control by someone who can get madder at you because they have a level of power.

Do your job well. Explain your decisions and if some boss with backing takes a really hard line, you go along. Maybe you discus with someone in power if they're reasonable, and if no such person exists, look for the next step.

 

In my work experience both in and out of newspapers, I have found that an unreasonable/dysfunctional supervisor is almost always just as unreasonable/dysfunctional in dealing with his or her superiors, so that your problem often takes care of itself if nature is allowed to take its course.

 

Huh? I respected his viewpoint, but had known for a while that the town and state wasn't right for me. I despise the NBA and NASCAR, for example. But I'll put them on the cover at times when there's a big event, figuring some people follow them. So why shouldn't I do the same for a sport I follow? Surely I'm not the only one who follows it.

I was glad to move on. It wasn't a personal fight against anyone, but the thought of staying there seriously depressed me.

 

It's a tough place to be. I've walked away from jobs more than once simply because they brought in a new supervisor whom I couldn't work well with. Each situation is different.

Your idea to have a meeting is very good. Be polite, but honest. This is your chance to tell your side of the story. If it falls on deaf ears then you will have to decide whether you want to continue working there. Is it worth it? That's something only you can answer.

 

You said you centerpieced a Stanley Cup game and the decision was questioned, saying there wasn't a large enough following there to warrant it. You said your response to justify it was that you wouldn't want to work somewhere that didn't have an interest in your favorite sport.

Did you have any other justification, or did you just say "It's my favorite sport" and walk out? I get that you are a fan of the sport, and that you knew the city and state weren't right for you. None of that - nor the fact that the thought of staying there seriously depressed you - really isn't relevant in a question of story judgment. As is said many times on here - it's not about you. It's about the product and the readers.

 

It was just a case of having an honest difference of opinion on story judgment. That's why I brought up the story, to sort of touch on Batman's story about his disagreement with the AME in his story. Point is that good people can have honest differences of opinion on something and it's worth talking through.

 

We're not an NHL town, but our previous sports editor seemed to hate hockey with a passion and didn't even want the Stanley Cup champion on the cover even if it was the fourth or fifth story shoved all the way down to the bottom.