“For most people, to be a journalist is to be a reporter. This is perhaps understandable as reporters are the public faces of a media organisation”
| Photo Credit: Getty Images/iStockphoto
I was a student in college when I got my first byline. An editor who was teaching us sports journalism ensured that some of our class reporting assignments were published in a national newspaper. That was nearly a quarter century ago, but I still remember the high of seeing my name in print. I thought that I was finally a “real journalist”.
I spent the next couple of years in television journalism. Whenever someone heard that I worked for a news channel, they wanted to know if they had seen me on screen. But I was almost never on camera. My job involved editing news reports, rewriting copy for news anchors, stitching scripts and footage together, and selecting the day’s top headlines as well the ‘soft’ features with which we would wrap up each half-hour bulletin. I never left the newsroom. Yet, to most people, I wasn’t a “real journalist” since I wasn’t on the field, sniffing out stories and conducting interviews.
For most people, to be a journalist is to be a reporter. This is perhaps understandable as reporters are the public faces of a media organisation. They get both the credit and the blame. Editors largely fly under the radar to the outside world, though they reign in the newsroom and often shape the news you read in ways you never see.
Later, I became a reporter. Over a decade, I had the privilege of seeing my byline multiple times in this newspaper. Two years ago, however, I stepped over the line to the news desk. This time, I have a better perspective on what life looks like on the other side of the fence.
Within the newsroom, deadlines ratchet up tensions between reporters and editors. It is common to hear an editor yell over the phone, “Where is the copy? We need it now!” Reporters argue that editors simply don’t understand the pressures they face: news doesn’t happen on schedule; sources don’t always respond when you want them to; and updates keep turning up. Editors point out that they face deadline pressure: they simply cannot let an empty page go to print.
The next morning, reporters are sometimes shocked to find that the 800-word piece they laboured on for hours has been cut down to a single column with all the painstakingly researched context chopped off at the bottom of the copy. They argue that their politically correct lede has been rewritten, which means they will have to face the wrath of sources. Worse, they say that the headlines are sometimes disconnected from the copy. They complain that editors are nothing but armchair journalists. As a reporter, I have felt some of this dismay. At times, I believed that some editors had no idea about the process of news gathering, and made unreasonable requests.
Editors argue that the text was cut because of space constraints as well as respect for brevity and clarity. They say that headlines must fit the space and reflect competing news priorities. It is a fact that editors are often faced with terribly written copies or are asked to merge the copies of multiple reporters to make a coherent copy. This means that they have to substantially rewrite a copy, usually within a short time frame. Editors also point out that reporters are sometimes too close to a story to be objective. As an editor, I have found the broader perspective useful. Context provides clarity to stories and is important to readers who are not following every single development.
The bottom line is that journalism is a stressful job. News is a collaborative effort involving not just reporters and editors, but also photographers, data journalists, graphic designers, proof readers, and many others. It helps to walk in someone else’s shoes for a while to better appreciate their role and fulfil our shared objectives of telling true stories that inform and educate people. At the end of the day, we are all real journalists.
Published – January 31, 2025 01:16 am IST