|
This paper was presented at the Association for Education in Journalism and
Mass Communication in San Antonio, Texas August 2005.
If you have questions about this paper, please contact the author
directly. If you have questions about the archives, email
rakyat [ at ] eparker.org. For an explanation of the subject line,
send email to
[log in to unmask] with just the four words, "get help info aejmc," in the
body (drop the "").
(Feb 2006)
Thank you.
Elliott Parker
====================================================================
Women Journalists Who Quit and Tell: The Elusive Search for Control
By Cindy Elmore, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor, School of Communication
East Carolina University
Submitted to the Commission on the Status of Women
Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication
Annual Convention, San Antonio, Texas, Aug. 10-13, 2005
Abstract: Women Journalists Who Quit and Tell: The Elusive Search for Control
Studies have long demonstrated that journalists want autonomy at
work and are more job-satisfied when they have autonomy. Research has
also linked autonomy to journalist turnover. In this grounded theory
study of women former journalists, control and autonomy emerged as a
common theme. Many perceived they lacked control and autonomy as
journalists, and perceive having more control in their different
roles today. Those who feel little control on the job today express discontent.
Women Journalists Who Quit and Tell: The Elusive Search for Control
As it is in many occupations, autonomy is important to journalists.
While some studies frame the issue in terms of participative
decision-making, freedom, self-direction, job authority, power, or
the degree of hierarchical structures and rule enforcement, all of
these studies have found that journalists prefer to have sovereignty
and independence in their work. Reporters want more autonomy in
making decisions about how to cover a story, about how much time to
spend covering the story, about story length, story ideas, overtime
requirements, story selection, and art suggestions . They want a
"great deal of freedom to plan and organize their work . . . (and)
freedom from supervision (is) rated highly as a career goal"
. Indeed, autonomy has been gauged among journalists for
decades. The first random national survey of journalists, conducted
in 1971, found that almost 76% of reporters said they had almost
complete freedom in how they wrote their stories. Sixty percent said
they had almost complete freedom in the selection of stories they
worked on. Almost a third of journalists said their stories were not
edited by anyone .
Numerous additional studies have established the importance of
autonomy to journalists' job satisfaction. Such a study reanalyzed
the Johnstone database to find autonomy was one of several measures
positively linked to job satisfaction . Barrett (1984), in exploring
job satisfaction within a national sample of women journalists, found
that 94% of respondents agreed with the statement: "I am expected to
direct myself in my work" . This was a higher finding than nine other
intrinsic measures of job satisfaction.
Autonomy was again a question in a 1992 national survey of
journalists, who reported that autonomy had declined, and this
perceived loss of autonomy "seemed to be a substantial factor in the
decline of job satisfaction over the past two decades" . Such a
decline in job satisfaction might be because of a reduced emphasis at
many newspapers on journalistic principles of editorial autonomy and
serving the community . Many respondents in this study reported
recent changes toward tighter management control of journalists.
Canadian journalists who perceived more "job codification, reliance
on hierarchal structures and rule enforcement" said they were the
least satisfied with their jobs . All in all, Pollard concluded,
greater participation of journalists in decisions "leads to more job
satisfaction, whereas perceptions of greater rule enforcement leads
to less job satisfaction" (p. 691). Autonomy was similarly linked to
the job satisfaction of Chinese journalists in Shanghai (Chan, Pan, &
Lee, 2004). U.S. journalists have lower job satisfaction where
newspaper policy changes place more emphasis on profits or other
business interests compared to journalistic interests such as
editorial autonomy, "serving the needs of the community (and) serving
readers as citizens" . Among the 12 West Coast newspapers studied,
wherever editorial autonomy had declined, there were lower levels of
job satisfaction, whereas at those newsrooms where there was an
emphasis on traditional journalistic goals, job satisfaction was higher.
A perception about journalists' job autonomy was one of the four top
predictors of job satisfaction in a national study by the Associated
Press Managing Editors Association . Copy editors who feel they have
the autonomy to make their own decisions had "significantly lower
levels of emotional exhaustion and depersonalization and higher
levels of personal accomplishment" than those who felt less
decision-making autonomy. The same was true for copy editors at 13
western newspapers where computerized pagination had been instituted,
resulting in some loss of autonomy and routinization of work.
Wherever autonomy levels were low, so was job satisfaction . The link
held true for journalists at television news organizations. There was
a strong relationship between "relationship-oriented behavior" of
television news directors and the job satisfaction of the news
staffs, because this management style allowed more involvement by
staff in the decision-making process.
Higher levels of job autonomy perceived by public relations
practitioners best explained their greater job satisfaction compared
to journalists in the San Francisco area. Autonomy was correlated
with job satisfaction for both groups, but the journalists, on the
whole, reported having less autonomy . After analyzing open-ended
written or interview responses, Olson wrote, "several journalists
offered emotionally-charged disclosures about their lack of ability
to control their own schedules or initiate story ideas. There is a
high degree of control by managing and city editors" (p.
42). Autonomy was gauged again in relation to a new newsroom team
organizational style at newspapers in Minneapolis and St. Paul. Some
53% of journalists were found to have less "authority" under the team
system than before teams were instituted. The authors concluded,
"Generally, those who used to be able to work independently, without
a lot of oversight and intervention, say they have lost authority" .
Less-productive journalists were more likely to be "policed" by
colleagues under the team system (p. 814). A 4-year case study at the
St. Louis Post-Dispatch similarly found that journalists did not
perceive more autonomy or authority under a team system . In another
study, chief factors leading to journalists' satisfaction were a
sense of achievement, personal growth, newsroom policy, community
impact, and autonomy . As part of a larger national survey of 2,209
journalists about job satisfaction, "powerlessness is a central
issue" in whether or not journalists would recommend the journalism
profession to others . A theoretical review of the underpinnings of
job satisfaction in the news media concluded that autonomy is one of
the fundamental theoretical threads .
Autonomy also has been linked to journalist turnover. A national
survey of 2,086 departed newspaper journalists found that a perceived
lack of involvement in decisions was one of the three most-cited
reasons for journalist turnover. Seventy percent of respondents said
that newspapers did a poor job involving employees "in decisions that
affected them," with 43% of respondents stating that this absence
"factored highly in their decision to leave" . That also held true
for broadcast news directors. Where they reported a participative
management style at their companies, they also reported low turnover
rates in the news division and high individual job satisfaction.
Those who reported a more authoritarian management style—and hence,
lower autonomy for journalists—had high rates of turnover .
Most studies that address journalist autonomy came to their
conclusions after asking current journalists—usually in
self-administered questionnaires—how long they think they will remain
working in their present jobs, how long they expect to remain in
journalism in general, or other questions related to their working
conditions and perceived autonomy. Only two studies have gone to
former journalists for input. The Newspaper Association of America
surveyed departed newspaper employees about why they left their jobs,
finding that the most-cited career-related reasons for employee
turnover were lack of advancement opportunities, dissatisfaction with
pay, and a perceived lack of involvement in decisions. It was not
reported what percentage of the respondents were journalists versus
other types of newspaper employees . Not only is there a need to
isolate the findings of former journalists, but the literature also
lacks a descriptive in-depth account of former journalists' views
regarding their perceived job autonomy. Given that autonomy is
significantly related to job satisfaction, and given the findings
that perceptions about autonomy are related to journalists' turnover,
the accounts of former journalists may shed additional light on this
concept. It is possible that one does not realize how much his or her
autonomy was constricted until he or she enjoys greater independence
and freedom in a new role. Olson's study comparing the job
satisfaction of journalists and public relations professionals, for
example, included the perspective of 83 PR professionals in the San
Francisco area, many of whom were ex-journalists. The PR
professionals overwhelmingly reported higher levels of autonomy and
job satisfaction compared to the journalists . Perhaps it was their
former experience as newspaper journalists that led this group to now
recognize their comparatively greater freedom and influence.
The Study
This study was part of a larger abbreviated grounded theory study
launched in an effort to discover new theories, themes, and concepts
that might explain or describe the poor retention of women
journalists. This paper focuses on that portion of the study that
dealt with issues of control and autonomy. Such a qualitative
examination allows a much deeper understanding of the topic. For this
study, I conducted in-depth interviews with 15 women former newspaper
journalists during the winter and spring 2003, using snowball
sampling to select the interviewees. Because this was part of a
larger grounded theory study, hypotheses were not devised in advance,
and questions were open-ended . The women, who were in three
different states, discussed at length a variety of topics dealing
with both their previous and current professional and personal lives,
in sessions that ranged in duration from 75 minutes to 2 hours and 20
minutes. Interviews were tape recorded, and transcripts were closely
reviewed, then analyzed and coded for themes in an effort to better
describe and understand the women's experiences and perceptions as
newspaper journalists and their reasons for leaving. "Patterns of
association" were sought in the responses , so that "incidents" and
concepts that were heard repeatedly were organized into coding categories .
The women interviewed ranged in age from 28 to 52, and worked at
newspapers between 5 and 27 years. During their newspaper journalism
careers, they worked in 13 different states at everything from small
weeklies to mid-sized dailies and large dailies. They were, at
varying times, sports reporters, feature writers, news reporters,
columnists, or copy editors for sports, news, business, or editorial
sections. They had been wire service reporters and editors, copy desk
chief, assistant features editor, features editor, assistant metro
editor, assignment editor, managing editor, and weekly editor. Three
are black, 1 is Hispanic, and 11 are white. They are married and
single, parents and childless. Five took jobs in public relations
when they left newspapers or shortly thereafter. One left to practice
law. Two went to graduate school, and were still students when
interviewed. One writes for and edits a special interest magazine.
Five stay at home with children. One participant does freelance
writing about 30 hours a week so she can be home with a school-age
child. All of the women have bachelor's degrees and seven have
advanced degrees. Anonymity was promised and pseudonyms are used.
Discussion
While "autonomy" was not often raised in the words of these women,
control was, and having control over one's work is at the heart of
autonomy on the job. Perceptions of control or lack of control came
up time and again in this interview group. In his review of
motivation research and its application to organizations,
Mitchell wrote that people typically "seek and prefer settings and
activities where we have control and mastery" (p. 110). Kanfer (1993)
called control one of three motives that are "regarded as integral to
the human condition" . Here, all of the women interviewees offered
occurrences and situations where they perceived having either little
or considerable control over various circumstances relating to their
former work in newspapers or their roles today. Control emerged
during selective coding as a theme that helps to inform the women's
overall perceptions and circumstances regarding their careers or life
roles. Some of their views were prompted by an open-ended question,
in which the women were asked how their tasks were determined at
newspapers. Other telling anecdotes and instances came up in the
general course of the interview.
Table 1 depicts where the women fell, overall, on their perceptions
of control while at newspapers and now. Five of the women described
having a lack of control on
Table 1
Women Participants' Perceptions of Control
Little control before/ More control before/ A
mix of control before/ Had control before/
More control now Little control
now Better personal control now Has control now
Maggie Lindsay
Joyce Paula
Kaye Marian
Darcy Nancy
Lynn
Doris DeeDee
Ruth
Carol
Sally
Myra
the
job at newspapers, and they perceive having greater control in their
lives today. All five women report that they are more content in
their roles today than they were at newspapers. Some of these five
women described occurrences where they strived to take control over
various career or work-a-day circumstances during their newspaper
careers, but their overall perception was one of lacking control and
autonomy. Maggie and Kaye best personified those views, although
their motivations for greater control were quite different. During
the last few years of her career, in concert with attending law
school, Maggie said she came to realize that she was no longer
getting good assignments and that her pay was lagging behind other
younger—and white—reporters. More important to her as a black woman,
Maggie felt that she was ineffective in influencing the newspaper's
coverage of issues that affected minorities or minority communities.
She wanted to do more, but felt she could not as a journalist. She explained:
I never felt like I could really make a difference in changing and
effecting change within the organization that would benefit . . .
those people who never had access to that media, those people who
would never be understood by the media, those people whose lives
might have been adversely affected by the media.
But becoming a lawyer gave her the "freedom" to help in other ways.
As a lawyer, Maggie said she could freely evoke change through
political activism without the conflict of interest in journalism.
Being a lawyer, she said, "I had freedom to decide my own fate."
Maggie also said she can now set her own hours, which she never could before.
Kaye similarly described wanting, but not having, more control in her
life working as a copy editor for newspapers, albeit control of a
more personal nature. She sometimes acted in an effort to control her
low pay and poor hours, although most of the time she felt powerless
to change both. Autonomy and control in her work was clearly what she
wanted. When Kaye described her best supervisor, she spoke of an
editor at a mid-sized daily who was available to answer questions and
give guidance, but for the most part left her alone to do her work.
"I don't need someone standing over my shoulder the whole time and
think that I have good enough judgment [not to need that]," Kaye
said. At one job, she worked mostly different hours from her
supervisor, which on the surface implied great freedom but in reality
gave her little. As she explained:
I would prefer—especially when I had like the boss in [a large
newspaper] who disagreed with me so often, it would have been nice to
be able to run things by him rather than to have him be upset about
the way I'd done things the next day when nothing could be done about it.
For most of her newspaper tenure, she perceived little or no freedom.
One long-term editor never gave her the leverage to enforce deadlines
on reporters, although Kaye was required to meet hers. She recalled:
The story was going to go in, no matter when the reporter got the
story written and it was my job to make sure that it didn't have any
errors in it. . . . I just felt like my hands were tied.
Kaye similarly felt that she had no control over her hours or over
whether or not she could count on being able to attend something she
had planned after work. Today, she feels that she has control over
her time and her interests in that she spends her days with her
children and domestic concerns, which give her considerable gratification.
Ruth's experiences and viewpoint were similar to Kaye's. At
newspapers, Ruth felt that she lacked control over what she felt to
be an unduly slow editorial staff that would not meet its deadlines.
Nor did she feel much autonomy as a copy editor who selected which
stories appeared on her pages. She explained,
I would say even with the selection of news—gatekeeping—whatever it's
called, I don't think I ever felt that I . . . had a lot of
independent judgment, you know. There would always be an editor over
me who had opinions who would come along and second-guess what I'd done.
Today, in her role as a stay-at-home mother, Ruth said she is busy,
but she has control, explaining,
I like the freedom and the flexibility. . . I can pretty much do what
I want to do other than, you know, I do look after whatever the kids
need, wherever they need to be, I'm the one who gets them there, and
I'm the one who sees that we get fed every night. But other than
that, I do what I want to do.
Lynn similarly feels more in control today as a stay-at-home mother.
When she wants to do freelance writing, she said,
I can pick and choose what I want to do. . . . Or, if somebody comes
to me [with an assignment], I can say yes or no based on what else is
happening in my life. . . . Otherwise, I think that I would be too
stressed if I had a regular regimen of having to do things.
Sally feels much more in control in her public relations job today
than she did as a reporter. She has much more control over her hours
and stress. As a bureau reporter, she felt the constant stress of
having little control over her ability to achieve because,
"If you didn't have a good editor who had a lot of clout [in the
central office], who was pushing for your stories, it didn't really
matter." As a beat reporter, she had some freedom to select her
stories, but Sally perceived that ultimately, "your editor had a lot
more say in it than you. . . . I mean, you just didn't get to go pick
what you wanted to do—very seldom." She even felt the final stories
that contained her byline often were not her own because of the
writing and rewriting by editors.
Two of the women interviewed described having less control now than
they had in their previous roles with newspapers. Both Lindsay and
Marian are in public relations jobs they dislike, although Marian
greatly enjoys her increased income and status. Lindsay has disliked
all of her jobs, but she drew one important distinction between the
control she felt in the role of a newspaper reporter and as a public
relations practitioner. Lindsay said that she now needs the approval
of a "committee" for everything she writes. She also feels she has to
mop up after the sometimes inaccurate or inappropriate media messages
sent by others in the university over whom she has no control. While
Lindsay was extremely frustrated in newspapers by long hours and poor
pay and acknowledged that all reporters have to answer to editors,
she felt that, ultimately she had more control there than she does in
PR. "At newspapers," she explained, "you had to put up with other
things, but for the most part, the words were yours." Marian shared
similar views. While she is happy about her increased pay in public
relations, she feels she has no control over her hours or her tasks.
She dislikes the considerably closer supervision in this job,
explaining that it is far more stressful than it was at the newspaper
because, "I'm not as in charge as I was before. You know, I don't get
to kind of do my own thing anymore." The speeches and press releases
she writes are often rewritten, and she is frequently criticized for
not being able to drum up publicity about events that she knows would
not elicit any interest. Yet because of her workload, she lacks the
time to dig around for more appropriate media releases. At her last
newspaper, Marian felt almost completely free to come up with her own
assignments and to decide whether she wanted to cover something on
the weekends—which she chose to do or not depending on her personal schedule.
The other women interviewed described a mix of anecdotes and
perceptions about their levels of autonomy at newspapers and in their
present roles. Some, like Joyce, Darcy, and Carol, feel far more
control over their personal lives now than they did working in
newspapers because Darcy now does not work and Joyce and Carol feel
they can better control their work hours. But all three women
perceived that they also had considerable control over their duties
and written work when they were reporters. While they said that
events on their "beats" sometimes dictated what stories they covered,
all three women described having considerable leeway over what they
wanted to write about. Darcy believes that she got one high profile
job at her last newspaper because she was "a good reporter who had
some independence and good ideas and, you know, somebody who could be
trusted to do a story without having their hand held a lot." Her
favorite editor was one who made suggestions about story changes
without doing the rewriting herself. She let the reporter figure out
how to improve a story where it was needed. Once, when a different
editor changed Darcy's story lead after telling her the story was
fine and sending her home for the day, Darcy said she was livid. When
she saw the change the next morning, "I was furious. . . I just tore
into him," and she complained to the managing editor. "I mean, you
just . . . don't completely rewrite a lead without talking to
somebody," Darcy said. Clearly, she had become accustomed to having
control over the content of her work and expected it to continue.
Like Maggie, however, Darcy did not enjoy having to stifle all
political activism while working at a newspaper, and now enjoys
having the freedom to put political signs in her front yard during
the local election season. Overall, Darcy said that "control of my
time" is what she most enjoys about her role as a stay-at-home
mother. Joyce similarly felt that most of the time as a newspaper
journalist she could choose what she wanted to spend her time writing
about because she usually knew more of what was happening on her beat
than her editor.
Myra offered mixed perceptions about her levels of autonomy and
control in newspapers. When she was hired as managing editor of her
hometown newspaper, Myra said she had "incredible power" to mold and
shape the newsroom how she wanted. But after awhile, she could not
control the belt-tightening that prevented her from hiring the
caliber of journalists she wanted, and Myra left. She described
another experience where, as the obituaries editor for a large
newspaper, she was able to revamp the entire focus of the obituaries
page. Previously, the newspaper typically wrote obituaries only about
nationally prominent people, but Myra expanded the page to include
more stories about people who may not have been well known but had
interesting lives. The reason? "Because I was in that position
without a very elaborate management structure above me telling me not
to do it," Myra said. All in all, Myra perceived that she could weigh
in with her views and be heard, but that she worked at "very
hierarchical newspapers" and had very little job autonomy. Myra said,
"When I think of autonomy, I think of having total control, and I
don't think you ever have that in this business." Now, as a graduate
student, Myra's control comes in other ways. She knows that she could
return to the newspaper business at any time she wants; she has
received offers since going back to school. She also has been
recruited for university teaching positions, which is what she wants
to do. Moreover, she has better control over how she spends her time.
Carol, who left her newspaper job to travel internationally, was
forced to choose a job outside of newspapers when she returned
because she wanted to continue living in the same city and her old
reporting job was taken.
Paula, Nancy and DeeDee described feeling in control in both their
roles as newspaper journalists and in what they do now. And,
interestingly enough, all three women have, for the most part, been
happy in both roles. Paula spoke often of having control and autonomy
on the job in sports copy editing. Even as early as her first job out
of college, Paula recalled,
When you're in sports and you're a copy editor and you're at a small
newspaper, you get all kinds of control. I mean, you get to design
the entire sports section, edit most of the stories, go to all the
[news] budget meetings . . . It was really fun.
And because she rose quickly at her next newspaper, a mid-sized
daily, Paula also perceived having considerable control not only over
sports, but again, input over the larger news decisions of the
day. Today, because Paula feels she could make more money going back
to work in newspapers than her husband, he sometimes tells her that
she should go back to work while he stays home with their seven
children. She resists because she wants to be home with their
children. She wants to retain control over her role as a stay-at-home
mother. The only way she would consider going back to work "is if I
could work from home and no one's asked me that."
But that is exactly what Nancy has been able to fashion for herself,
giving her considerable control over her work and her hours. After
leaving newspapers to move with her husband and not finding part-time
newspaper work, Nancy spent a year building up a home-based freelance
business to where she is happy with her income and a 30-hour-a-week
schedule. She said, "I'm in a position now [where] I can be choosy.
For what I'm doing now, to have this extra time. . . . I can't see
going back to newspapers." Not that she felt she lacked autonomy
there—she simply has more now. Once, at a newspaper job, Nancy worked
days for an editor who worked nights and for the most part, directed
herself. In another job, she was in charge of her section as the
features editor. Even when writing full time, she "found with
features I could control my schedule," with days set aside for
interviews and days where she could focus on her writing. She added,
"I liked getting out. And I think . . . we take it for granted that .
. . reporters have flexibility. There's not anyone watching over them
all the time. . . . So I loved that." Although Nancy had not
initially planned to have a freelance career, she began to like it
because "I liked being on my own" and also enjoyed contributing to
the family income. She explained,
I have flexibility. I have control. I sound like one of these ladies
that you don't think you'll ever grow up into, but you know, I have
lunch with a couple of friends. I do church work . . . . I'm very
active in [my son's] school.
DeeDee said that as a sportswriter she had considerable freedom
because she had her own column in which she selected most of the
topics, or she wrote sports feature stories that she could plan out
ahead of time or even write from home. She perceived having less
autonomy when she worked as a copy editor, and remained in that job
only short term because of the lack of freedom it provided. She recalled,
I don't consider myself a real good 9-to-5, you know, pencil pusher,
do-the-same-thing-every-day. I think that's why the editing just
drove me nuts. Too much in a box and it has to be done this way.
Since leaving newspapers, DeeDee has felt free to first pursue a
master of fine arts degree, followed by a 3-year medical school
preparatory program, while working several part time jobs along the
way to help pay bills. At the same time that she was studying to take
her medical school entrance exams, a newspaper job offer came along
that she did not anticipate, giving DeeDee a choice of options.
Discussion
While this analysis is unique to these participants, it nevertheless
provided broad description and context through the experiences of
women former journalists regarding issues of control and autonomy. In
describing in detail the perspectives and reality of the
participants, it provides a deeper, more evocative look at control
and autonomy issues and their importance to women in journalism.
Overall, it was apparent that control was important to these women
former journalists. That is not surprising given the findings of
research that link autonomy with journalist job satisfaction. Even
for workers in general, having control or decision making input is
important. The central finding of a large random national worker
study by Freeman and Rogers was that American workers want more
participation in workplace decisions that affect them. With this
study, we can further delineate what issues were of uppermost concern
to former journalists who raised them during in-depth interviews
without being asked specifically about control or autonomy.
Some of the women former journalists here felt that they could not
control their ability to achieve on the job at newspapers. Some could
not control their hours, their stress, or their personal obligations.
Some of the editors felt that they could not control the work of slow
reporters who kept them on the job late. Some of the reporters felt
they could not control the slow or heavy-handed editing of their
editors. Maggie felt that she could not control or influence the
coverage of minorities at her newspaper. Some of the participants
felt that they had less control over their work or their personal
lives while employed at newspapers than they have in their present
roles. Only two perceived having greater control over their work
and/or lives as journalists than in their roles today. Many of the
women offered mixed assessments—more control about some things, less
control about others, in each role.
Control was an important phenomenon to these women former
journalists, as depicted in these abbreviated comments: Maggie: "I
never felt like I could really make a difference in changing and
effecting change within the [newspaper] organization. [Being a
lawyer] I had freedom to decide my own fate." Ruth, speaking of her
life as a stay-at-home mom: "I like the freedom and the flexibility.
. . I can pretty much do what I want to do." Lynn, similarly: "I can
pick and choose what I want to do." Marian, on her PR job: "I don't
get to kind of do my own thing anymore." Darcy: "Control of my time"
is what she most enjoys about her role as a stay-at-home mother.
Paula: "When you're in sports and you're a copy editor and you're at
a small newspaper, you get all kinds of control." And Nancy, speaking
of her life as a freelancer working from home: "I have flexibility. I
have control."
Interestingly, eight of the women said they either have continued to
practice journalism through freelance writing (or, in one case,
hosting a local television interview show) or still hope that they
can find a way to do so. What the women have tried to control, or
hope to in the future, is their ability to keep the intrinsically
satisfying aspects of their former newspaper jobs in their lives
through freelance writing, editing, or interviewing, or by
emphasizing the writing and editing tasks of their present jobs in PR.
Only two of the women, Marian and Lindsay, feel less control today in
their life roles compared to when they worked at newspapers. Both are
dissatisfied in their work, while the others expressed contentment in
their post-newspaper roles.
Conclusion
In the end, these women left newspaper careers in part in an effort
to obtain or seek out a level of control—over stress, over hours,
over low pay, over family well being, over geographic choice, over an
unachieved goal, or for something else that they considered to be a
worthwhile, attainable outcome. Gaining control rebalanced the
inequities caused by a lack of control. Those whose new roles have
brought about better control say they are happier now. Those who
perceived having control before and now also project contentment. The
only two women to openly express discontent in their lives today are
in jobs where they perceive having little or no control over the
content of their work or their hours. Most of the women studied here
enjoyed the practice of journalism and are either still practicing
journalistic work or hope to do so as freelance writers and editors.
They feel more control in this way than they did in the work-a-day
world of newspaper journalism. The question raised here is why did
most of these women perceive that they had too little control on the
job at newspapers? And would better perceived control and autonomy
have helped to keep them on the job?
While the sample was aimed at depth and not breadth, the women
interviewed at length came with great variation in their work
experiences, demographic characteristics, and post-newspaper roles.
The search for control was their commonality. Many studies have
gleaned information about journalists' perceptions of control,
autonomy, and freedom on the job. Only two sought the views of former
journalists, despite the fact that they now have the ability to
discuss those experiences with the perspective and hindsight a
current journalist may lack. One study was not qualitative and the
other was specific to public relations practitioners, some of whom
had been journalists in the past. While a similar study should be
conducted to determine whether male former journalists provide
similar views about control, this study provides what has been
missing in the mostly quantitative studies about journalists and
autonomy. It does so by describing former journalists' perceptions
about control while they worked as newspaper reporters and editors
compared with today, when they are in new roles. While these women's
experiences were uniquely theirs, we can now descriptively depict how
control remains important to journalists both on and off the job—and
often, when it comes to control, the two spheres are related. This
provides a first detailed portrayal of former journalists' views
about control, about the perceived consequences on their lives when
they perceive they lack it, and about how many left journalism in an
effort to achieve it.
References
|
