Reporting job applicant lists elected officials as references

I'd say that listing a coach as a reference is a mistake. On the good side, it shows an employer you can get in tight. On the bad side, it will make the employer wonder if you are too tight and won't write "negative" things about that coach/team (especially if you are going for a national gig). The bad outweighs the good, in my opinion,

 

i agree that sources (coaches, politicians, whatever) shouldn't be a reference. if all your sources are happy with you, you're a mediocre reporter.

sure, the source might just say [reporter] was very professional and courteous but who cares? while professionalism is important, the key is breaking news, no matter how you get it.

why would anyone want to hire someone just because he's nice to the people he covers? it's not the newspaper's place to hire people who won't piss off institutions it reports on.

 

I consider said reporter what used to be called a "Houseman," someone who would never report anything critical of those in power.

The first time I met her was when at an event in connection with some serious allegations against the school district.

She said, "The school board members are Jews and they'll take care of this."

(I think she also made a comment about because they are Jews they care about the district's students.)

As has been said many times before, you never get a second chance to make a good first impression and that was a horrible first impression.

Although said reporter is Jewish, it is unacceptable to me to attribute goodness to any religious or ethnic group. In part, her comment shows anti-Christian bias.

A case could probably be made that a news side reporter should never predict what will happen, especially a "good" outcome.

When her resume came into to the No. 2 person in our company, he asked me if I knew her. I said I did and shared the previous tale with him. Basically, even if she was the last reporter on Earth, she wouldn't be hired at our place.

I think her stories often show bias and a failure to try to contact the other side for a response. They also have too many mistakes for my taste.

However, she has won some awards, including a press club Journalist of the Year honor, and got lots of particular praise on a series of stories on the previously mentioned allegations against the school district, which backed the establishment's side.

 

you say "houseman" i say "idiot." it's all the same.

 

I had a baseball writer list a (well-respected) GM as a reference, once.
That felt odd to me. But, it certainly got my attention more so than ASE Bubbles O'Hallahan at Nowhere Tribune Press Examiner.

 

What about an SID as a reference? I would never list one myself, but I have called ones I know to ask about candidates/possible candidates.

 

mr. x, completey agree with your story and perception of the situation. and not to threadjack, but living down south I hear that "good christian" shit all the time and it pisses me off, because those people are suaully the first ones in the "intolerant of anything other than what they believe" line.

 

I've listed the PIO of my former town as a reference because I believe to be an effective cops beat writer, there has to be a relationship between the department and the reporter. The PIO can testify to that relationship. Maybe that's different in my former community, though, because the scanners were scrambled and other than reports, the PIO was the only way to get information without that relationship.

 

The person may not have listed any co-workers or supervisors as a reference because, sometimes, you don't always want your employer to know that you are looking for a different job.
When put in that situation, who else do you list?
Plus, when some people list references, they don't just list work, but people who can speak to character.

 

DANGER WILL ROBINSON! DANGER!
That just doesn't seem right to list people you cover as sources. I know one cat who did that and he was a real slimeball (got a son-in-law-job and ended up stealing money from it).

 

Without getting too lengthy on the resume, I say label "Professional references" and "Beat references" or something to that effect. I certainly don't think you list more beat references than regular ones, but I think it can be beneficial to a prospective employer to check on both aspects of your work. Maybe four professional references to two beat references.

I think it is VERY important, however, to point out on the resume and to the prospective employer that you are well aware of the difference and by labeling it as such, you show you are aware there needs to be a distinction made.

Just a thought... I've never done it this way or seen it like this, but it seems to make sense in my screwed up head right now.

 

"They get criticism the old-fashioned way -- they ehhhhhhhhrn it."



"Alec Behhhrg. Did you hand in your assignment, Mister Behhhrg?"

;D