Emily Gould on her overhsaring problem

Apparently everyone in NY media thinks this is a must read. And for certain circles, yes it is.

But if you don’t particularly care about Gawker or Emily Gould or what it’s like working in NYC media or the blogging world or becoming a micro-celebrity, then this NY Times magazine article probably isn’t worth reading.

I found it to be well-written, and she is maybe a bit harsh on herself. One surprise is that this wasn’t a mudslinging piece, which I assumed it would be.

She deserves lots of credit for not dragging her coworkers, specifically Josh Stein (read the article and you’ll know what I mean, the two had an office fling and he wrote a magazine article basically tearing her a new one for sharing too much), into the mucky muck. It’s always refreshing to see someone take the high road.

At my old job, it would have taken me years to advance to a place where I would no longer have to humor the whims of important people who I thought were idiots or relics or phonies. But at Gawker, it was my responsibility to expose the foibles of the undeserving elite. I felt liberated ? finally, a job where I could really be myself! Never again would I have to censor my office-inappropriate sentiments or shop the sale racks at Club Monaco for office-appropriate outfits. But at the same time, I wasn?t quite convinced that the system of apprenticeship and gradual promotion that I?d left behind when I left book publishing was as flawed as establishment-attacking Gawker made it out to be. I?d been lucky enough, in my publishing job, to have the kind of boss who actually cared about my future. At Gawker, I barely had a boss, and my future was always in jeopardy. In my old job, I?d been able to slowly, steadily learn the ropes, but now I was judged solely on what I produced every day. I had a kind of power, sure, but it was only as much power as my last post made it seem like I deserved.

Sometimes I worried that I?d been chosen not in spite of my inexperience but because of it. Hiring women in their early 20s with little or no background in journalism was a tactic that worked for the site?s owner twice before, and I expected to be a victim of the same kind of hazing my predecessors were subjected to as they learned how to do their jobs ? and how to navigate New York ? in public. I?d once heard someone refer to us as ?sacrificial virgins,? which didn?t seem too far off.

Also, the comments are worth reading since they really bring out the venom.

[The New York Times – Exposed]

Comments on this entry are closed.