Update: The Escapist Needs Newsies!

[kitsuta]

Wow, I had no idea there was so much (that is, any) hostility towards content collation in general and Escapist news writers in particular. It's like going to Cracked.com and reading comments complaining that there are too many snarky list articles.

Anyway, it was super fun to rewrite this story; I love its sheer preposterousness. The cringe-worthy detail about social media pokemon was a particularly nice touch. Good luck to all the hopeful news writers, and particularly to the people (I HOPE it's not just Susan) who have to read the deluge of submissions next week!

EDIT: And about five minutes after sending the email, I've realized I forgot to include a link to the source. Curse my absent-mindedness!

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

You forgot rule 4. All titles must be sensationalist bullshit.

Lol. That was pretty funny and also fairly accurate.

Does that make it more funny or just sad?

 

[Dastardly]

Please consider that it tends to echo when you scream in a cave. Act like a dick to me and I'm not going to be nice to you. The difference is that I don't have anything to lose in doing so. Be nice, calm and collected and I will also calmly explain what I think can be done better.

I'd ask that you not confuse me with Grey, or any news writer, or Escapist staff. Now, if you're meaning that to indicate that I'm somehow "acting like a dick," I really have to question your judgement on the matter. I'd prefer instead to move on from that, and boil your post down to its constituent elements, as perceived from out here:

1. You seem to believe that being "the customer" shields you from any expectation of decorum. There's a reason such things are called common courtesy in many circles. I realize that, to someone with your outlook, appealing to manners really isn't going to do much, but here I go anyway: Being "the customer" doesn't entitle you to treat "the employees" like crap without any reprisal. They're people, and people tend not to like being insulted. But...

2. You seem to believe that what you said wasn't insulting. I could understand that perhaps you don't intend it that way, but by the phrasing you've used, it can only be properly understood in that way. If I call you a moron, but then insist that it's "accurate," would you accept that as not being an insult? The issue, again, is your phrasing. You weren't directing your comments at their work. You were directing your comments at them. It's a fine line in some cases, but critically important for clear communication.

3. It seems you don't feel criticism should be constructive. If criticism isn't in some way constructive, it's just bitching. If you're not going to specifically mention what you had a problem with, and recommend some type of solution, it's just plain ol' bitching. And while, yes, you can technically still label it "criticism," it's not useful in any way.

4. You seem to believe it's the best idea to open a dialog by firing a shot across the bow. If you really wanted anything to change, you'd want to ensure a successful conversation. Starting it out with that tone (and then claiming you'll only dial it back if the other side shows themselves willing to put up with that shit) doesn't accomplish that anywhere on the planet. Your approach is commonly referred to as "picking a fight."

If you're interested in seeing change, I think you could make it happen. Start a conversation about what you feel is going wrong. Express yourself clearly. And I bet that you wouldn't be willing to just roll over and give up the first time someone disagreed with you (evidenced here), so don't expect that of them, either. As long as you stick to attacking the problem and not the person, they'll be less apt to go on the defense.

Conversations can either be about solutions, or they can be about who's right and who's wrong. They can't be both, sorry.

(Also, you didn't really even give anyone the opportunity to "be a dick to you" before you evidently decided you weren't going to "be nice to them." That doesn't provide much incentive to trust your intentions, you know.)

 

[Yureina]

Hmm... I'll have to think this one over. This could be the lucky break that I have been hoping for. But only time will tell if that is the case.

 

[Mike Kayatta]

snip

After writing up a long drawn out post explaining why I disagree or why you are just plain wrong in some cases, I reflected on it and came to the conclussion that we aren't getting anywhere with that. So you know what? Here's the criticism, let's see what happens.

1. I disagree with you proclaiming yourselves talented and insightful writers. I disagree with this for multiple reasons.

- The same article then goes on to explain that applications are to re-write a made up article from another gaming site. This implies that all or atleast the majority of News for the escapist is written in this fashion. I simply do not consider this something talented and insightful writers should do while refering to themselves as such.

- I do not like how you pat yourselfs on the back, it implies that you are already great, yet the entire Mass Effect Debacle in which nearly every writer here commented without having understood the full picture (evident from WHAT they were writing) speaks a different language. This is not what a insightful writer does.

Nobody is saying you should be self-deprecating, but if you get ahead of yourselves like that, I have no reason to believe that the escapist considers much of anything about their own work improveable.

1-2 I do not consider the news here proof of said talent or insightfulness. More the contrary actually.

- News should not contain the opinion of the writer. News is not a opinion piece, so as a matter of form it shouldn't, but beyond that the writers opinion can distort the given information. Using the Bleszinski News from yesterday, wouldn't any of you agree that it's less likely for the Reader to consider Bleszinskis opinion valid seeing as how the writer is making fun of him in the article? It fails at being a proper, neutral, news article.

- Sensationilist Titles, this is pretty much the case with any news article about something scientific.

Just a little criticism in regard to this specific Thread. This is not all I would criticize on the whole.

Hi Monoocrom,

After your many posts in this thread, I think I finally understand your confusion. If you'd please reread my initial post, I asked that only talented, exceptional, and insightful writers apply to become newsies here. In fact, the only time I did describe the current news team, was with the adjectives "quirky" and "international". I'm sure you'd agree that any company looking to hire talent would call for the best to come forward. My post is no different.

This response is not meant to imply that I don't feel as though our writers are exceptional (because personally, I absolutely do), but that was not the content of the posting, as you have stated. I sincerely hope that clears all of this up. Thanks!

 

[CarlsonAndPeeters]

Just sent my entry in. Not a lot of confidence, but one can always hope.

EDIT: Just noticed that they will only be responding to people who are being offered jobs. Not to tell the Escapist how to do their jobs, but that seems a little...rude. Like a polite form rejection email would be appreciated.

 

[Woodsey]

I shall submit a thorough news piece post-haste, if only to postpone exam revision.

Is there a specific number of spots open?

 

[Susan Arendt]

Just sent my entry in. Not a lot of confidence, but one can always hope.

EDIT: Just noticed that they will only be responding to people who are being offered jobs. Not to tell the Escapist how to do their jobs, but that seems a little...rude. Like a polite form rejection email would be appreciated.

Getting rejection notification of any kind is relatively rare when applying for a job, especially when such a large number of applicants are involved.

 

[Mike Kayatta]

Hi Monoocrom,

After your many posts in this thread, I think I finally understand your confusion. If you'd please reread my initial post, I asked that only talented, exceptional, and insightful writers apply to become newsies here. In fact, the only time I did describe the current news team, was with the adjectives "quirky" and "international". I'm sure you'd agree that any company looking to hire talent would call for the best to come forward. My post is no different.

This response is not meant to imply that I don't feel as though our writers are exceptional (because personally, I absolutely do), but that was not the content of the posting, as you have stated. I sincerely hope that clears all of this up. Thanks!

Thanks for the response Mike. I don't appreciate you implying me to have been confused though.

Sure, I'd agree that you ofcourse want people that can actually write. That however doesn't really apply to what I am saying. Perhaps I should word it differently?

It is implying that the writers are talented and insightful, which they could very much be, I just don't see it in the actual news. I'm sure you'd also agree that re-writing a news doesn't really require that, all it really requires is fundamental reading comprehension and basic writing skills.

Basically, I just wish you wouldn't have used that description because of what it implies, it just gives a whole lot of credit for something that isn't really difficult. Also, it may very well deter people who would have been perfect for the job because it raises the bar pretty high for what is ultimately a relatively simple job.

What do you have to say to my other points? I really like some of the humor that ends up in some of the articles, but I personally don't consider it a good trade off for neutral information. What is your opinion here?

Regarding the titles, I don't really think much can be said about that, it's fairly obvious WHY you (as in the escapist, not you personally) would do that, but I just simply don't agree with it. It's manipulative and I really don't like manipulation Mike.

Even if you disagree with me, what would you theoretically do differently as to compromise?

Perhaps this is a good opportunity to to discuss what exactly the Escapist's news goals are. We have never been in the business of providing dry information. There are dozens of sites offering exactly that; we don't, and never have, striven to convey information in such a neutral tone. What you may be reading as a journalist "mistake," we, and the majority of our readership, view as a uniquely compelling methodology. If you would like to receive your entertainment news in a manner that does not attempt to be entertaining as well as informative, then sadly, though your personal tastes are valid, the content that appears on this particular site may not be the best match for you. For these reasons, we have no intention of compromising our style or approach to delivering industry news. To do so would be unfair to the millions of readers that interact with our community for those exact practices.

Speaking of implications, I must be honest with you; I believe it's wholly unfair to refer to any job you do not currently perform, nor have ever performed in the past, as "simple." We receive hundreds of applications, while only able to accept a select few for the job. To say that performing these tasks doesn't require much skill can not only be construed as insulting to the writers currently laboring to provide well-written content to this community free of charge, but also to the hundreds of hopefuls who we will regrettably be forced to decline at the end of this hiring cycle.

If you would like to learn more about the inner workings of how news is produced and provided, the way our headlines are constructed, and be able to speak with authority on the difficulty of performing this job, then I invite you to submit an application. I would be happy to consider it alongside the others who've applied.

Again, thank you for your interest and concerns. I hope this makes our position on these topics abundantly clear.

 

[James Joseph Emerald]

Speaking of implications, I must be honest with you; I believe it's wholly unfair to refer to any job you do not currently perform, nor have ever performed in the past, as "simple." We receive hundreds of applications, while only able to accept a select few for the job. To say that performing these tasks doesn't require much skill can not only be construed as insulting to the writers currently laboring to provide well-written content to this community free of charge, but also to the hundreds of hopefuls who we will regrettably be forced to decline at the end of this hiring cycle.

Actually I used to write News for other sites and my own, amoung which was one with over 80000 active forum members. So I actually am in a position from which I can judge. I'm not assuming that it isn't difficult to re-write a news, I know that it isn't difficult.

I don't mean to be personally insulting to you, but just because you can string some words together into a sentence doesn't mean you're a good writer.

Writing is a huge passion of mine, and not only do I practice a lot, I have read dozens of books, blogs and articles on the subject, and attended several courses. And I can tell you with supreme confidence that "all good writing is re-writing." Which is a very common writer's adage which means "re-writing/revising is the absolute most important and time-consuming part of writing."

The basic writing process goes like this:
1. Jot down ideas
2. Turn the ideas into a barely-cohesive first draft
3. Edit the first draft so that it makes sense
4. Refine the second draft so it's interesting
5. Repeat step 4 until satisfied


Almost everyone can come up with ideas (1), write about them (2) and then ensure it's fairly cohesive (3). But only a truly talented writer can do (4) & (5) efficiently and effectively.
Which is why I think this competition is actually a really good idea, demonstrating careful consideration of the sort of skills The Escapist needs.

 

[James Joseph Emerald]

1. Jotting down ideas does not apply to the re-writing of a news that was already published by another outlet.

2. Neither does "turning those ideas into a barely cohesive first draft"

3. If you are re-writing a news from another outlet it will either already make sense or you choose a bad outlet to get the news from.

4. This is pretty much all I see them doing which amounts to quips as a attempt at humor which tends to be hit & miss or make no sense at all. I've already stated that I do not consider this something that belongs in news.

Edit: For the record, if we were talking about writing a original article I would agree with you.

My point is that they are removing steps 1,2 & 3 from the process because this isn't indicative of writing talent. You could create a computer program that takes in news information and outputs a factual report. That is not proper journalism. Reworking the information into an interesting, entertaining, informative story is the part that requires talent. Professionals make it look easy, but it's not.

 

[kitsuta]

Just sent my entry in. Not a lot of confidence, but one can always hope.

EDIT: Just noticed that they will only be responding to people who are being offered jobs. Not to tell the Escapist how to do their jobs, but that seems a little...rude. Like a polite form rejection email would be appreciated.

Yeaaaah. I hear this complaint a lot, and I 100% understand the frustration of not ever getting a response when you apply to a job you really want. But after applying to dozens upon dozens of companies in the past few months, I've gotten a "no thank you" back from exactly two. Hearing back during the first wave of applicants is incredibly uncommon, and it's not unheard of to get no response even after you go through an interview.

This application has a really low barrier to entry: no relocation, no years of experience required, no extra writing samples, just be over 18 and rewrite a fake article. That means they'll probably get hundreds of applications... meaning one or more people are going to have to read hundreds of rewrites of that one (rather lengthy) fake news article. With the amount of work that is going to go into just reviewing the applications, I'd kinda rather the staff did better things with their time than send rejection emails to the people who didn't make it.

The good news is, the original post said to expect a response within "a few weeks" (of next Tuesday) if you're accepted. Although it's a bit vague, it does give a deadline - something many companies don't bother to do even if you get past the first part of the application process. I'd definitely consider posting a deadline the sufficient amount of professional courtesy, especially for a freelance job open to so many people.

 

[James Joseph Emerald]

You are free to consider the news here difficult to write. I disagree.

You are free to disagree, but I just wanted you to know that you're in fact disagreeing with almost every professional writer on the planet. Rewrites are not easy. If you think so, you're either doing it wrong or you have savant-like writing abilities.

 

[Susan Arendt]

You are free to consider the news here difficult to write. I disagree.

You are free to disagree, but I just wanted you to know that you're in fact disagreeing with almost every professional writer on the planet. Rewrites are not easy. If you think so, you're either doing it wrong or you have savant-like writing abilities.

I appreciate healthy debate as much as the next girl, but this thread isn't really the most appropriate place to be discussing greater aspects of writing theory or practice.