Tryouts on trial

A new
thread at Testy Copy Editors starts out like this:

A well-respected major daily has asked me come in for a weeklong copy
editing tryout. My current experience at a wire service is helpful, but it’s
a lot different from a newspaper copy desk. Most of my newspaper experience
was at dailies so small that they didn’t even have copy desks. Any tips on how
I should prepare? I have a couple of months before I go in.

I’m thankful for the post because it gives me the opportunity to launch into a
fresh rant, which starts out like this: Tryouts are an insult to proven professionals.

Here’s what they’d be telling someone like me: “Well, we’ve noted you have 15 years of experience,
nine of them at metro dailies; we trust your references, most of whom are
top editors of these publications; we love your clips, which have passed muster
with these editors — but we need to absolutely certain, so: Please expend a
week’s vacation and come work on our desk for a week.”

I guess it’s really a test of moral character: Anybody who’d submit to the
indignity of having to be tested after a successful decade and a half in the business
must want to work here beyond all reason. Those are our kind of people, they
reason.

That’d make sense if they were running a brain surgery suite. I’d want to be
absolutely certain the doctors I hire know where to cut. But we’re talking about
the copy desk; nobody ever died of a misplaced modifier.

So why the zeal to be so certain? Could be because once people get to one of
those “destination papers,” they never want to leave. Or the papers want to
be really careful so they can hire for keeps. But these papers keep having deskers
quit or retire, so that doesn’t really fly either.

I’d love to learn what these tryouts accomplish, beyond having seasoned pros
around to fill in while the paper’s veteran staffers take their vacations (though
flying them in and putting them up in a hotel strikes me as a pretty expensive
way to fill gaps in the staff). What do they discern that they couldn’t learn
from interviews, clips and references?

The New York Times is the prime offender in insisting on tryouts. The reasoning
could be that it’s an honor to work in Times Square — you know, nights and
weekends so you miss all the really cool stuff happening in the big city, though
they don’t pay you enough to enjoy it anyway; and nothing prepares you for the
moment when a reporter starts making stuff up, so no matter how good you are,
Jayson Blair happens anyway.

Thanks, folks.

I’m not saying we should refuse to submit to tryouts. They provide vital reassurance
in the post-Jayson era that the best papers are important enough to require
sacrifice of the people who aspire to work for them. Sacrifice builds character,
as we all know.

Tryouts also are a status symbol … we all love to imagine our co-workers
whispering “he’s got a tryout at the Times next week” behind our backs.

Tryouts also provide a window into the faraway galaxy of Establishment Media.
Most of us work in smaller papers in the minor leagues, so those who get an
up-close look at The Show can provide vital intelligence to the rest of us while
waiting for their call-up.

Finally, tryouts give some of us the chance at taking our swings at Yankee
Stadium. Many are summoned and few get hired, but it’s good for the soul to
know you had Your Shot. Better that than a life regretting that you never tried.

I suppose a tryout for a newspaper job is no worse than, say, trying out for
a spot on a semipro sports team. But there’s no shot at glory, fame or millions
working on our rim. It’s anonymous, underpaid work enjoyed by a small
(and dwindling) number of people. To switch metaphors to Hollywood: why the auditions for people who’ve proven they know the script?