Is there such a thing as starting too small?

[TyWebb]

[old man groan] ... Ahhhhh, you're just some entitled recent college kid that thinks he deserves a great entry-level job.

I'm going to go the other way as most here and suggest giving the actual full-time job more of a chance. I get that it isn't blowing your skirt up at the moment, but that could change. No job I ever had in the industry stayed the same from when I started to when I left. Each one was a better job by the time I moved on to greener pastures. That was because I looked for opportunities to do work that stood out and that made an actual difference. A lot of times I was unsuccessful because that is just how this industry is. But the few times I actually pulled it off were what got me to the next level. For instance, you say this paper has a weak social media presence and some lackluster "internet pushes." Well, you could be the guy to change that. Make some suggestions, take advantage of what few opportunities you get, maybe even volunteer to be in charge of the Twitter account. If it works out and you pull it off, you'll have more than just a few nice clips. You'll have a proven track record of improving the way a paper does business. Everyone has nice clips. Not everyone has "increased paper's Twitter following from 2,000 to 10,000" on their resume.

In other words, the paper doesn't necessarily have to be a dead end. Part of that is on you and what you attempt to do there.

Also, as some have alluded to above, continuing to freelance can be a double-edged sword. If you are a reliable freelancer, then a paper struggling to make ends meet may not be likely to move you to full time and offer you benefits. Why buy the cow when you can have the sex for free? In my experience, it is easier to find a job when you already have one and have proven experience doing more than just writing.

However, take everything I say with a grain of salt. I've been happily out of the business for a couple of years now and would suggest anyone looking to get into it (especially newspapers) to find a new angle.

 

[Tweener]

Internships are tough to come by for recent grads, though. They usually want people still enrolled. But if anyone knows of any leads, feel free to PM me.

Yes, it can be difficult to get internships after graduation, but definitely give it a try. I interned at two of the largest papers in the country right after graduation and neither seemed to care that I was no longer a student. If I hadn't landed those, I'm not sure I'd still be in the industry.

 

[Mystery Meat II]

Yes, it can be difficult to get internships after graduation, but definitely give it a try. I interned at two of the largest papers in the country right after graduation and neither seemed to care that I was no longer a student. If I hadn't landed those, I'm not sure I'd still be in the industry.

Some papers have fall or winter internships that by definition almost have to go to recent grads. It's not common, but it's not unprecedented either. However, it's probably way too late in the game to glom onto those.

 

[franticscribe]

No such thing as too small to start, but I wouldn't touch CNHI with a 10-foot pole.

 

[Anonymous135]

For instance, you say this paper has a weak social media presence and some lackluster "internet pushes." Well, you could be the guy to change that. Make some suggestions, take advantage of what few opportunities you get, maybe even volunteer to be in charge of the Twitter account. If it works out and you pull it off, you'll have more than just a few nice clips. You'll have a proven track record of improving the way a paper does business. Everyone has nice clips. Not everyone has "increased paper's Twitter following from 2,000 to 10,000" on their resume.

This is one of the few pros that I've actually considered. Still, building a social media presence from what is essentially ground zero is tough and requires persistence and patience on the part of many people. Just feels like a risky situation to get myself into when the total package here appears to have little upside.

Might be different if I didn't have to relocate, but I'm just having a very difficult time selling myself on this job with the aspirations I have.

 

[DeskMonkey1]

I think you already know what you should do at this point. Taking a job your heart really isn't into can be disastrous. I mean, you're young enough to leave after a year or two but I highly regret relocating taking a job that I didn't 100% want.

Now if the job was in your backyard, I'd probably advise to go ahead and take it unless you had a better offer.

 

[BDC99]

Stay at home, build your clips.
That pish-poor place will work you like a dog.

Definitely. I'd wait it out and look for something else to supplement the freelance stuff if necessary. If they like you, they'll find a way to bring you on board eventually.

 

[TyWebb]

This is one of the few pros that I've actually considered. Still, building a social media presence from what is essentially ground zero is tough and requires persistence and patience on the part of many people. Just feels like a risky situation to get myself into when the total package here appears to have little upside.

Might be different if I didn't have to relocate, but I'm just having a very difficult time selling myself on this job with the aspirations I have.

It would very likely be difficult, and there is a definite chance that you would fail despite your best efforts. And if that is the case, there is nothing stopping you from going back to freelancing. No one said when you accept the job you have to stay there for a set amount of time. But when I've looked at resumes of potential candidates, I know I always looked for places where the candidate created something new instead of just did what is expected of them well.

And, I think I have too much of my old man in me. I'm always going to prefer a steady paycheck with benefits over the uncertainty and insecurity of freelancing. I've done both and I had much more anxiety about making ends meet with the latter. Obviously it comes down to a personal choice. You know your situation better than we ever could, and you will know what decision you will be able to live with best.

 

[Fredrick]

[old man groan]Everyone has nice clips. Not everyone has "increased paper's Twitter following from 2,000 to 10,000" on their resume.

It's long baffled me how a news organization increasing its Twitter following helps a news organization in ANY way. I was privy to some financial information the other day. Online ad sales at the news organization I work at are laughingly low. How the heck is Twitter adding one dollar to the news organizations' bottom line?? It's ridiculous that Twitter is a concern of newspapers. It is not ADDING to profits, folks! Advertisers still are only buying print ads. They are not buying internet ads and newspapers' obsession with Twitter is mystifying AND unprofitable. You tell me how Tweeting everything is helping newspapers make money. I'm listening. Guess what? It ISN"T helping make money.

 

[BDC99]

It's not directly helping make money, but if people are following writers on Twitter, they are more likely to seek out their stuff. Of course, they likely are reading it online, so that's not making money either. When Fredrick can tell us how to actually make money off the Internet we will all be rich. We're listening. News flash! The newspaper business is not the only industry the Internet has taken a huge toll on.Not even close. I don't know what the answer is. I don't know if there is one. But I eagerly await Fredrick's insight.

 

[Anonymous135]

It's long baffled me how a news organization increasing its Twitter following helps a news organization in ANY way. I was privy to some financial information the other day. Online ad sales at the news organization I work at are laughingly low. How the heck is Twitter adding one dollar to the news organizations' bottom line?? It's ridiculous that Twitter is a concern of newspapers. It is not ADDING to profits, folks! Advertisers still are only buying print ads. They are not buying internet ads and newspapers' obsession with Twitter is mystifying AND unprofitable. You tell me how Tweeting everything is helping newspapers make money. I'm listening. Guess what? It ISN"T helping make money.

We may not have figured out how to make online a money-making machine, but I'd guess that having a strong social media presence helps a paper's rep in 2015, indirectly keeping print sales afloat. And, cheap online revenue is still better than nothing.

In any case, I decided to inform that paper to take me out of the running for that full-time job. Going to freelance locally with hopes of it turning into full-time work once the hiring freeze is lifted. In the meantime, I'll look for another part-time job while I continue exploring bigger internship/full-time opportunities.

 

[TyWebb]

It's long baffled me how a news organization increasing its Twitter following helps a news organization in ANY way. I was privy to some financial information the other day. Online ad sales at the news organization I work at are laughingly low. How the heck is Twitter adding one dollar to the news organizations' bottom line?? It's ridiculous that Twitter is a concern of newspapers. It is not ADDING to profits, folks! Advertisers still are only buying print ads. They are not buying internet ads and newspapers' obsession with Twitter is mystifying AND unprofitable. You tell me how Tweeting everything is helping newspapers make money. I'm listening. Guess what? It ISN"T helping make money.

To be honest, I'm not sure how Twitter followers and Facebook likes make any difference to companies. But I do know that every company I've worked for since about 2008, or whenever Twitter blew up, has been very concerned about those numbers. Most have gone as far to hire people with the goal of increasing those numbers. So in terms of getting a job, I think having something like that on a resume would be beneficial.