We’re getting older and more educated, but still not all that well paid. Job satisfaction is better than a decade ago, but not nearly what it was when many of us got into the business in the 1970s.
Those are some of the findings of a nationwide survey of journalists done by the Indiana University School of Journalism for the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation.
The survey, taken last year, provides some interesting demographic information about the people working in the nation’s newsrooms. Readers often ask the same questions about reporters, editors, photographers and others working at The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
I don’t have access to personnel information about our staff, but I can offer some observations on some of the findings based on 16 years of working here.
– Age: The national survey shows the average age of journalists to be 41, up from 36 a decade ago. That’s primarily the result of the aging of the baby boom generation of journalists who entered the field in the early 1970s.
The average age of journalists at the AJC is probably close to the national average. Interestingly, it’s also close to the average age of newspaper readers, which is about 44.
– Gender: Two thirds of those working in the field are men, according to the national survey, about the same as it has been for 20 years. In larger newsrooms, including here at the AJC, my observation is that the male/female split is much closer. In new hires over the past decade or so, I wouldn’t be surprised if women didn’t capture up to 60 percent of those jobs.
– Race: In the national survey, minorities constitute 9.5 percent of all journalists, a very slight increase over 1992. At the AJC, the number of minorities in the newsroom is approaching 20 percent, but again, that percentage has not changed much in recent years.
Compared with whites, minority journalists are much more likely to be female and in the business less than five years.
– Education: The most dramatic change in the demographics of newsrooms has been in education, according to the survey. Nine out of 10 American journalists now have college degrees. Thirty years ago, fewer than 60 percent did. At the AJC, that number is probably approaching 95 percent.
– Political affiliation: There were fewer self-proclaimed Democrats among journalists in 2002 (37.1 percent) compared with 10 years ago (44.1). But there wasn’t a corresponding increase in Republicans. Ten years ago, 16.3 percent said they were Republicans. In 2002 that number had risen somewhat, to 18.6. In the last survey, a third of all journalists called themselves independent.
Before you ask, let me say I have no idea how these numbers would break down for our newsroom. Contrary to the popular belief of many, we don’t put our journalists through a political litmus test.
– Job satisfaction: A third of all journalists described themselves as very satisfied with their jobs, up from 1992 but still significantly below the 49 percent who liked their jobs in 1971.
You can do the math: A lot of journalists don’t like their jobs, perhaps related to the next category.
– Income: The median salary nationwide for journalists was $43,600 in 2001, about $12,000 more than it was in 1991.
For a job that now essentially requires a college degree, the pay scales of American newspapers — especially smaller, community dailies — are woefully out of date. For young journalists, they aren’t that much better at larger dailies.
Journalists entering the field not long ago felt some camaraderie with teachers, who historically faced low starting wages and limited raises as they earned experience. But as starting salaries for teachers began to rise in the 1990s, the entry-level wages for most journalists stayed low and haven’t gotten better in recent years.
The survey also shows that over the past 30 years, pay increases for journalists have not kept pace with inflation — confirming something those of us in the business long ago concluded: You won’t get rich doing this.
