Skip to main content
Welcome to a dying industry, journalism grads

Barbara Ehrenreich

Sunday, May 31, 2009
Print E-mail
deliciousdel.icio.us
diggDigg
technoratiTechnorati
redditReddit
facebookFacebook slashdotSlashdot
farkFark
newsvineNewsvine
googleGoogle Bookmarks
Share Comments (11)
Georgia (default)
Verdana
Times New Roman
Arial
Font | Size:

The dean gave me some very strict instructions about what to say today. No whining and no crying at the podium. No wringing of hands or gnashing of teeth. Be upbeat, be optimistic, he said - adding that it wouldn't hurt to throw in a few tips about how to apply for food stamps.
Images
View Larger Image
More Opinion

* Letters to the editor 06.01.09
* Consumers win with court's Prop. 64 decision 06.01.09
* Don't throw away the key on juvenile offenders 06.01.09
* How we killed Berkeley's 'Naked Guy' 06.01.09

So let's get the worst out of the way right up front: You are going to be trying to carve out a career in the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression. You are furthermore going to be trying to do so within what appears to be a dying industry. You have abundant skills and talents - it's just not clear that anyone wants to pay you for them.

Well, you are not alone.

How do you think it feels to be an autoworker right now? And I've spent time with plenty of laidoff paper mill workers, construction workers and miners. They've got skills; they've got experience. They just don't have jobs.

So let me be the first to say this to you: Welcome to the American working class.

You won't get rich, unless of course you develop a sideline in blackmail or bank robbery. You'll be living some of the problems you report on - the struggle for health insurance, for child care, for affordable housing. You might never have a cleaning lady. In fact, you might be one. I can't tell you how many writers I know who have moonlighted as cleaning ladies or waitresses. And you know what? They were good writers. And good cleaning ladies too, which is no small thing.

Let me tell you about my own career, which I think is relevant, not because I'm representative or exemplary in any way, but because I've seen some real ups and downs in this business.

I didn't start out to be a freelance writer or a journalist, but after a number of false starts and digressions, I discovered that's what I really loved doing. In about 1980, I was a single mother of two small children, and my work quota was four articles or columns a month. I did my research at the public library. I bought my clothes at Kmart or consignment stores. The kids did not get any special lessons or, when the time came, SAT prep courses.

Then came the fat times, in the '90s, which I realize now were an anomaly in the history of journalism. The industry was booming; editors would take me out for three-course lunches in Manhattan. I'll never forget one of those lunches: It was with the top editor of Esquire, and I was trying to pitch him a story on poverty. He looked increasingly bored as we got through the field greens with goat cheese, the tuna carpaccio and so forth - until we finally got to the death-by-chocolate dessert, and he finally said, "OK, do your thing on poverty - but make it upscale."

It was still an uphill struggle to write what I cared about, but at least I was getting generously paid - up to $10 a word by Time magazine. Imagine that - $10 a word. Most Americans would be happy to make $10 an hour.

Then, bit by bit, it all began to fall apart. The news weeklies: Time let me go in 1997. The book publishing industry was in tatters by 2005. And then the newspapers began to shrink within my hands or actually disappear. I was beginning to feel a certain kinship with blacksmiths and elevator operators when the recession hit in 2008, and every single income stream I had began to dry up.

But it was the recession, of course, that saved me from self-pity. I began to get sick and tired of the typical media recession story - which was about rich people having to cut back on the hours they spend with their personal trainers. All right, I realize those are man-bites-dog stories compared to a story about a laid-off roofer being evicted from his trailer home. But it seemed to me that the recession had absolutely eliminated the poor and the working class from the media consciousness. Once again, they had disappeared from sight.

So a couple of weeks ago, I pitched a certain well-known newspaper a series of reported essays on precisely this topic. They took it - but at about only one-quarter of what they had paid me for writing columns five years ago, barely enough to cover expenses. That bothered me. But then I had a kind of epiphany and realized: I've got to do this anyway. I'm on a mission, and I'll do whatever it takes.

Which brings me back to the subject of journalism as a profession. We are not part of an elite. We are part of the working class, which is exactly how journalists have seen themselves through most of American history - as working stiffs. We can be underpaid, we can be jerked around, we can be laid off arbitrarily - just like any autoworker or mechanic or hotel housekeeper or flight attendant.

But there is this difference: A laid-off autoworker doesn't go into his or her garage and assemble cars by hand. But we - journalists - we can't stop doing what we do.

As long as there is a story to be told, an injustice to be exposed, a mystery to be solved, we will find a way to do it. A recession won't stop us. A dying industry won't stop us. Even poverty won't stop us because we are all on a mission here. That's the meaning of your journalism degree. Do not consider it a certificate promising some sort of entitlement. Consider it a license to fight.

In the '70s, it was gonzo journalism. For us right now, it's guerrilla journalism, and we will not be stopped.

Journalist Barbara Ehrenreich is the author of "This Land is Their Land: Reports From a Divided Nation" (Holt Paperbacks, April 2009). She delivered this commencement address to the UC Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism class of 2009 on May 16. Contact us at forum@sfchronicle.com.

This article appeared on page H - 2 of the San Francisco Chronicle

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

工程排水量設計 與 暴雨量

  獨家/直擊大巨蛋落下「瀑布」 民眾疑惑問:排水系統呢? 14:35 2021/06/04   中時   張穎齊 中央氣象局發布豪大雨特報,有民眾直擊拍下大巨蛋從「蛋頂」沖下的瀑布影片,疑惑直呼「排水系統呢?」。(民眾提供/張穎齊台北傳真) 木柵路2段109巷口淹水。(北市府提供/張穎齊台北傳真) 南湖大橋下淹水。(北市府提供/張穎齊台北傳真) 北市消防局門口淹水。(北市府提供/張穎齊台北傳真) 六張犁信安街淹水。(北市府提供/張穎齊台北傳真) 中央氣象局發布豪大雨特報,受颱風及鋒面接近影響,北市中午12時起開始有持續性的強對流發展,市中心有瞬間強降雨,文山、大安及信義區時雨量均超過100毫米,大安及信義區最大10分鐘雨量均超過30毫米,多處積淹水。不過也有民眾直擊拍下大巨蛋從「蛋頂」沖下的瀑布影片,疑惑直呼「排水系統呢?」 北市府表示,目前測得最大累積雨量為大安區福州山站127.5毫米,水利署已發布南港區淹水一級警戒及松山區一級警戒,水利處稍早通知南港區南深陸閘門因為逼近警戒水位,可能隨時關閉。 此外,水利處也已通知各區里,因目前瞬間強降雨遠大於下水道的容量,會有積水狀況發生,如有地下室的應盡速關上防水閘門,減少積水進入地下室造成損失。而木柵路2段109巷口淹水,深約20公分,範圍約100平方公尺,南湖大橋下淹水長度約50公尺、寬度約10尺、深度約50公分。

拆除案 與都更案類似之場景 溝通或方案可能不足

緊急喊停!拆南鐵最後1戶踢鐵板 雙方對峙1小時 鐵道局:今拆除取消 07:42 2020/07/23   中時   鐵道局中工處主任工程司吳志仁宣布今天拆除喊卡。(曹婷婷攝) 字級設定: 小 中 大 特 影》緊急喊卡!拆南鐵最後一戶 雙方對峙1小時 鐵道局今不拆了! 拒拆遷戶陳致曉家門外一度聚集大批警力。(曹婷婷攝) 反對拆遷抗爭者守在大門內。(曹婷婷攝) 警方在7點多撤離,鐵道局隨後宣布取消今天拆除行動。(曹婷婷攝) 台南鐵路地下化強拆作業預計今天清晨6時拆除最後一棟拒拆遷戶、青年路陳致曉家,交通部鐵道局中工處人員和大批警力6點一到在陳宅外宣讀拆除程序於法有據,屋內上百人不斷高呼「反東移、反對徵收」口號,雙方對峙1個多小時後,鐵道局中工處7點20分宣布基於避免衍生衝突,衍生社會成本,今天拆除計畫決定取消。 交通部鐵道局中部工程處主任工程司吳志仁7點20分出面宣布,南鐵地下化是台南重大計畫,但因為考量陳宅有許多人,基於避免造成衝突及衍生不必要社會成本,決定取消。他強調,因全案只剩陳宅拒拆,接下來會傳持續跟陳致曉溝通。 針對鐵道局宣布暫緩任務,陳致曉表示,將討論戰術,「但我不會因此開心,因為今天不攻,明天、後天也會來。」並回嗆「他來我就打!」 反南鐵東移拒拆 自救會長嗆:「歡迎攻進來」 07:12 2020/07/23   中時   反南鐵東移聲援民眾守在待拆戶家中,不願撤離。(李宜杰攝) Facebook   Messenger   Line   Weibo   Twitter   Telegram   複製連結 字級設定: 小 中 大 特 警民仍持續對峙中,鐵道局也釋出善意要溝通。(李宜杰攝) 配合南鐵地下化工程,鐵道局中工處預計今日(23)清晨6時拆除東區青年路陳家。目前反南鐵東移全線自救會長陳致曉與雙親,及超過百名聲援民眾守在陳家客廳,手拉手拒絕撤退,警方及鐵道局人員被拒於門外,並提出要與陳致曉溝通,陳致曉則回嗆「絕不會交涉,歡迎攻進來!」 據悉,目前怪手已進駐陳家後院,百名警力、消防車、救護車也都部署完畢,衝突一觸即發,聲援民眾痛斥「行政訴訟還在打,不要當政黨打

司法改革心

中時社論》司法改革 制度要改心更要改 2017/6/11 下午  司法改革國是會議第1分組第4次增開會議在司法院開會。(黄世麒攝) 司法改革國是會議5個分組分別進行了3個月的會議,已全部結束。5個分組各自提出數十件改革提議,總量非常可觀,多項分組決議曾引起社會高度爭議,且司法院、法務部、律師團體間顯然有嚴重的價值觀與職務立場衝突,接下來幕僚人員如何進行議題綜整,全體會議如何達成總結性結論,事關改革成敗與國家民主發展,身為媒體必須關注,並適時對社會發出建言與警語。 分組討論議題牽涉甚廣,從金字塔式的訴訟制度、賦予大法官違憲裁判審查權、保障司法程序弱勢方權利、修復式司法法制化,到研究設立商業法院、特別勞動訴訟程序、稅務法庭,到高度政治性的增訂妨害司法公正罪,以切斷政治干擾司法的可能性。此外,還包括調整法官晉用制度、終審法院行公開言詞辯論、研議法庭直播提高司法透明度,及檢察體系的性格定位、刑事訴訟程序從起訴的方法開始改變,到改善判決文書格式以求易懂等。 司法的重要性,這裡就不必再行強調。司法的社會公信力嚴重不足,到達需要召開司法改革國是會議來開藥方治病的地步,本身就令人痛心疾首。其實司法改革大業,一方面固然有制度上需要調整的地方,另一方面也有司法人員行為、文化必須大幅檢討改進之處。改革制度需要協調立法、行政、司法甚至考試諸院配合行事,但相對司法相關人員的「革心」,還是比較容易,人的行為與文化改變更困難。台灣民主體制下司法獨立,不受行政及政治干預,為了追求司法獨立的提升而改變司法人員的行為與文化,尤其困難。 改變司法人員的行為與文化具有先天性的困難,在這次司改會議過程中已一覽無遺。這次會議特別引進了半數不具法律背景的委員參與討論,其實就是希望避免法界人士研議司法改革時,閉門造車、諱疾忌醫,甚至護短,成為改革的障礙,但諱疾忌醫甚至護短的毛病仍然不時出現,雖不令人意外,但仍然對會議的進行與成果形成負面的影響。法界人士包括官員、教授、司法從業人士,因為諱疾忌醫甚至護短而在媒體上攻訐,不惜傷害司改會議的社會形象,令人感到遺憾。 諱疾忌醫甚至護短的現象,從議題處理方式的輕重選擇,也可看得出來。關說司法,特別是政治人物包括民意代表關說司法,問題普遍而且觀念嚴重偏頗的程度,從前立法院長王金平加上前檢察總長黃世銘的訴訟案件中,就足以一覽無遺。政