Following is from employment site Glassdoor.com, and was written by someone who interviewed last month for an online editor's job at the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle:
Submitted an application through Gannett's corporate website for a job at one of their papers and heard back from the managing editor I'd be working for the next day via e-mail. Had a phone interview shortly thereafter.
My future boss didn't seem very well prepared for the interview. He kept asking me questions about my background that were already on my resume and then when I gave him an answer he would go, "Hmmm, OK. That's interesting," almost as if he never read my resume.
He also never discussed or let me ask about what would be required of me in the position. It was a continual overview of my previous experience (which was a couple years more than the position required).
At the end of the phone interview he asked for an analysis of part of his paper's website (essentially free consulting work) and writing samples, both of which I promptly turned in. I was contacted after those were received and told "I didn't do the analysis right." I did -- I didn't misunderstand his instructions; he simply changed his mind on what he wanted, which prompted him to ask for a second analysis.
Turned in my second analysis and this was followed by a second phone interview. This phone interview was worse than the first one. Again, no talk about what would be required for the position, nor any talk of future ideas for the position. I kept thinking, "For a guy in the communications field, he has a terrible time communicating."
At the end of the interview I was told I'd be contacted about the position with a yes or no answer. Weeks went by and I heard nothing. Finally, I sent a follow up email and got a generic, "we found someone with more experience response."
Overall, I found the interview process pretty unprofessional as I seemed way more prepared than the interviewer and the overall time frame seem excessive -- it took a month to do two phone interviews and get a decision from the managing editor. I'm glad I was not offered the position because if someone is hard to work with in the interview process, imagine what it would be like having them as your full-time boss.
A note: this interview review only applies to a paper in New York and not to any other Gannett newspaper or Gannett corporate. More than likely I simply got a bad interviewer, so I'm sure experiences will vary.
Submitted an application through Gannett's corporate website for a job at one of their papers and heard back from the managing editor I'd be working for the next day via e-mail. Had a phone interview shortly thereafter.
He also never discussed or let me ask about what would be required of me in the position. It was a continual overview of my previous experience (which was a couple years more than the position required).
At the end of the phone interview he asked for an analysis of part of his paper's website (essentially free consulting work) and writing samples, both of which I promptly turned in. I was contacted after those were received and told "I didn't do the analysis right." I did -- I didn't misunderstand his instructions; he simply changed his mind on what he wanted, which prompted him to ask for a second analysis.
Turned in my second analysis and this was followed by a second phone interview. This phone interview was worse than the first one. Again, no talk about what would be required for the position, nor any talk of future ideas for the position. I kept thinking, "For a guy in the communications field, he has a terrible time communicating."
At the end of the interview I was told I'd be contacted about the position with a yes or no answer. Weeks went by and I heard nothing. Finally, I sent a follow up email and got a generic, "we found someone with more experience response."
Overall, I found the interview process pretty unprofessional as I seemed way more prepared than the interviewer and the overall time frame seem excessive -- it took a month to do two phone interviews and get a decision from the managing editor. I'm glad I was not offered the position because if someone is hard to work with in the interview process, imagine what it would be like having them as your full-time boss.
A note: this interview review only applies to a paper in New York and not to any other Gannett newspaper or Gannett corporate. More than likely I simply got a bad interviewer, so I'm sure experiences will vary.
Sounds just like my interview a few years back, my manager was clueless, and I was well more versed in what I new than he was. I got the job, and he still is not manager material, but that is the Gannett way:)
ReplyDeleteMaybe the number of grammar errors in what you posted here is an indicator of YOUR lack of attention to detail and vision. Nah -- couldn't be -- because you never stopped to consider that anything could be below perfection in your submissions, or that the interviewer perhaps wanted to see if your brainpower was better than what was represented in the submission. And do you really think the operation is going to use a stranger's critique as an all-knowing evaluation of the website? You call that "free consulting" -- as if it has any real value. Enjoy that future you no doubt have at Walmart.
ReplyDeleteOh please. So you didn't get the job. It was the INTERVIEWER's fault???
ReplyDeleteAnother example of a completely clueless and self-entitled generation.
There's a lot of rejection to come. It's called life. Deal with it.
I'm amazed at the crap I hear from 20-somethings regarding what they are entitled to. After six months in, they want an improved title. After a year, at least a 5% raise. And if you're not paying national average even to a noob in Podunk, well cripes your a 1%'er, a has-been and a fossil.
ReplyDeleteThe best I can figure out is that too many episodes of Friends and The Office convinced them that "working" for a living was a little bit different than reality.
Forget them. I'll teach new skills to the geezers I have and wait for those dreamers to get their dose of reality at someone else's expense.
The geezers bring perspective, judgement and self starting initiative, traits foreign among the twentysomethings Gannett insists on hiring now. The recent batch of young clock watching, scruffily dressed hires at Usa Today scares the piss out of me. Management hands them responsibilities and assignments they clearly are not qualified for. Their journalism experience consists of internships and college papers.
ReplyDeleteWhatever happened to getting experience at small town publications before landing a job at one of the nation's largest newspapers? No one has the time to teach these kids basic reporting and writing skills here. That doesnt seem to matter anymore. If this is the future of journalism, we are all in big, big trouble.
11:36. This 20something is tired of your condescending attitude. It is time forgeezers like you to leave already.
ReplyDeleteWhy would you want that, 12:11? Then there'd be no one around to do all the work the younger people don't (won't? can't?) do ... Then you'd have to actually earn your paycheck.
ReplyDeleteAs fun as it is to bash the know-little 20somethings, some of the details of this interview process are very similar to ones I know to be true.
ReplyDeleteAnd bashing grammar? Here? Hahahaha! That's the pot calling the kettle black. Jim and many others here bend over backward to defend the rambling, verge-of-illiteracy posts here.
Not getting that Rochester job was the best thing that could have happened to you. Gannett isn't worth a single day of your career. Find a company that knows how to recognize talent and knows how to respect and praise its employees. That's who you want to work for.
ReplyDeleteI can't blame 20-somethings for wanting more than they may actually deserve after only a short time with their companies, especially when they see what happens with Gannett.
ReplyDeleteThey grew up watching their parents' generation work long hours, give it 120 percent for every minute, and pay their dues, only to wind up like many 40 and 50 somethings at Gannett. On the unemployment line.
So you really can't blame them for not wanting to waste time in paying their dues, especially for a company like Gannett, for whom loyalty is only a one-way street.
11:36: It must be fun living in a world where a couple of observations can turn into your definition of an entire generation. I don't know the 20-somethings you claim to know at USA Today, but I'm a 20-something Gannett reporter, and here's how our newsroom works.
ReplyDeleteWe have plenty of reporters with 30-plus years of experience, and I respect them all, but as a rule they have it much easier than their younger colleagues. The vets leave nearly unfailingly by 6 p.m. -- whether their stories are done or not -- and guess who's expected to stay late and round out their sourcing if those stories need it? We are. And it's usually not that big of a deal, because most of the younger reporters are in the newsroom working (unpaid) overtime at all hours anyway, probably because we are given about twice the workload as some of the vets. We get all the worst holidays, are expected to be available by phone and email 24 hours a day, and are essentially required to at least tweet and usually to blog, too. The older reporters aren't expected to do any of that. Oh yeah, and I'm almost certain they make a crapton more money than we do, because I sure as hell don't make shit.
So, like I said, I respect the veterans because I understand that they've paid their dues, but for God's sake don't make an asshole generalization about an entire generation of workers. Sure, there might be 20-somethings out there who aren't worth their salt, but there are just as many veterans who are content to coast along while their younger the colleagues get the shaft.
And wait a minute, why are we even arguing about any of this? Gannett is screwing us ALL over in one way or another, regardless of age!
Right, 4:59 pm. The powers that be like it when the older and younger workers squabble.
ReplyDeleteFrom the description above, the job interviewer flunked Interviewing 101. One uses info in a resume and cover letter to come up with questions for the interviewee, to elicit details about work ethic, philosophy, life experience, etc. This guy failed at the most basic level.
Great post, 4:59. You'll come to find the old and bitters here are very slow to catch on. They think everything should be as it was 20 years ago, and if it's not, then Gannett is to blame.
ReplyDeleteIts called paying your dues while getting some seasoning. it happens in most businesses, government and the military. i was working night shifts and weekends as a reporter in bumfuck. I learned a lot from those shifts and got to do some good stuff precisely because i was on shifts veterans had moved on from. Those Experiences you dont get anywhere else. there is no way i would have learned as much coming straight out of school. and no one to teach me like the crusty local editors I worked for back in the day. I dont trust anyone without a similar background. Sorry, but tweeting and blogging skills are not enoughwhen you are starting out, especially at a major news op.
ReplyDeleteAny "veteran" leaving an unfinised story to head out the door at 6 should be at the top of the layoff list.
ReplyDelete4:59/11:01, sounds as if you guys are in a good spot to gain the chops needed to make it to the big leagues. See you when you have some experience covering some crime, disasters and local planning commissions. this is where you get a feel for people and situations. you dont get that making a couple of phone calls on an 8 graph, editor conceived thumb sucker @ usa today.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteHow did a post about a poor interview turn into an old guard vs. young whippersnapper fight? I'm one of the so-called "oldsters"--25 years in the busness--but what I got from the post was a sense that management fumbling may be contributing to a lack of talent and direction in the Rochester newsroom. I would hesitate to work at a newsroom where the top manager seems so unengaged and unable or unwilling to adequately discuss the potential job.
ReplyDeleteAt my site, the talent pool is extremely shallow. One of our night editors--who was a page designer until the recent promotion--hired a night cops reporter with NO experience. Not even previous work on a college paper. The new reporter is pleasant enough but requires minute-by-minute handholding and guidance on gathering even the most basic information. That's a drain on a staff already stretched thin.
10:05 Many posters here are assuming the person who interviewed at Rochester was young -- and perhaps a man.
ReplyDeleteThe applicant could just as easily have been a 45-year-old woman with two decades' newspaper experience.
"The geezers bring perspective, judgement and self starting initiative .."
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely zero of the veterans where I work have this or display this. They still want things to be like they were, and have to be coddled to do anything outside of their comfort zone. Even then, they very rarely do it. They don't come in on time, leave early and have very little productive output, instead leaving it to fall in the laps of others, who are, yes, younger and work a lot harder than the older employers.
"The new reporter is pleasant enough but requires minute-by-minute handholding and guidance on gathering even the most basic information. That's a drain on a staff already stretched thin."
ReplyDeleteHey, that's how our veteran reporters are.
From the tone of some of these ugly comments against veteran workers, this topic has indeed turned into a bitch fest. Older generations ARE being forced and kicked out, taking with them decades of experience. From what I'm hearing about other people's experiences with telephone interviews these days, this Glassdoor.com poster was right on target on how he/she was questioned and treated. It's a very widespread problem taking place in companies now, not just here.
ReplyDeleteContact your human resources business partner if you need help interviewing or finding a great hire.
ReplyDeleteSorry, couldn't help but bring a little levity into the conversation...
4:02 – You are right on the money!!!
ReplyDeleteFWIW, I don't believe there was actually an opening for online editor in Rochester. The only newsroom hire here this year was a suburban reporter. And the managing editor was a female (the applicant refers to "him").
ReplyDeleteHoly crap, I interviewed for a job at Glassdoor.com and this sounds exactly like what happened to me.
ReplyDeleteI escaped Gannett Rochester Newspapers almost 20 years ago and never looked back, but I have friends still trapped in Stalag Gannett.The disrespectful treatment of journalists, the atmosphere of fear, widespread ignorance and the ennui seem to have worsened if anything. I find it sad that the 20somethings and the "geezers" are sniping at each other when you are BOTH being vitimized and exploited by the firm. Instead of taking pot shots at each other —which will improve nothing— band together or better yet, get out if you can.
ReplyDelete"victimized," can't type well.
ReplyDelete