I was reading the “How I Became a Better Writer Thanks to Distracted, Hungover College Kids” post over at copyblogger.com earlier this morning and one of the commenters asked about natural talent. “Do you find that, for the most part, your students either get it or they don’t? In other words, is there an innate drive and ability that makes a good writer a good writer?” Intriguing question. I’ve worked with students who were good, solid writers, which made my life a lot easier. As for the others? At times, I wanted to take them aside and tell them to change majors before they wasted any more money. I’m of the mindset that you can write or you can’t. Not that one can’t learn to be a better writer (if you’re good at what you do, you’re always learning), but like the commenter said, “it just seems like the really good writers are born, not made.” Do you agree or disagree?

I spent some time last week with a friend from my first newspaper job. We had both come there fresh out of college.

The newsroom had an interesting dynamic: Some staff members had been there 10 or 20 years, and they mixed with many of us straight out of school. There’s nothing wrong with this mix, in fact, a diversity of voices is beneficial for any news outlet. The problem came with the way we were treated. Under certain managers, young employees — especially young women — felt belittled and devalued.

As we shared long-buried rants over dinner, I asked my friend a question: “Does it still bother you?”

I was surprised to find that yes, it did. She felt the same as I. I still cringe if people call me “kiddo,” and I’m hesitant to tell coworkers my age. I think it is directly tied to ageism in the treatment I received at my first job. Even with my experience, I still worry that people won’t take me seriously (or worse, will resent me) if they find out I am younger.

Does anyone else feel this way at work? Have you ever worked in a newsroom that was not welcoming to younger employees?

In early February, I became a freelance writer/blogger for the entertainment website Starpulse. No, it’s not The New York Times or Smithsonian magazine. Heck, it’s not even Entertainment Weekly. But I like it. And working full-time as an editorial assistant of a community newspaper where I proofread and copy edit press releases for publication as well as confirm letters to the editor, it’s nice to actually write an article once or twice a week. Plus it gives me an excuse to keep up with pop culture. As if I needed one before.

Unfortunately, I don’t get paid for writing for Starpulse. Yeah. Go ahead. Call me crazy. Yes, I admit that I hesitated to write for the website when I found out I wasn’t going to be compensated, given current economic conditions. But since I want to be a pop culture journalist when I grow up, this seemed like the ideal platform for me.

However, some younger journalists don’t see freelancing for websites like Starpulse as a means to further their career. My friend, colleague and Cincinnati-based music journalist Mildred Fallen briefly wrote for Examiner.com, a blog-like site that operates a network of hyperlocal news websites where writers and journalists can share information (and get paid for it, if they get enough web hits) on what’s going on in their city. Here’s what she said, in an email, about writing for Examiner:

(It) all depends on what you want from it, and where you already are in your career. In my experience, writing for Examiner was brief. I knew it wasn’t going to yield any returns money-wise that would make a difference to my pocket so I used it as a way to continue being productive while searching for full-time employment. Eventually, I started working full-time again, which whittled my free time down to almost none. Overall, it didn’t necessarily improve my writing career, but I think the visibility of the Internet helped me reach a wider readership and there’s also complete autonomy of what you publish. (Great point! OK, back to what she said.) And publishing something regularly helped me not be so depressed about not having a job in my field. Also, it was handy to learn social network marketing tools such as using SEO keywords to appear in more Google searches, and interesting to know exactly how many hits my pieces were getting each day. You also get immediate feedback if people comment. You definitely have to be hustling outside of writing for sites like these to be able to gauge if it’s worth it – like it’s best used as a supplement to broaden your portfolio. Now, I just use it as a link employers can access to see a few clips in a hurry without downloading a PDF or an attachment.

Writing for Starpulse is new to me. So while I can’t quite yet say that it’s helping my career, it definitely isn’t hurting. I get to write on a topic I love, plus I’m getting my name “out there”, which is good for any journalist, young or old.

And now for the shameless plug: Check out my articles on Starpulse.

What do you think? Do you feel that websites like Examiner.com and About.com (where you eventually get paid for writing) and even Starpulse.com help younger journalists in their careers? Is it worth it, or just a waste of time?

A recent post on Reflections of a Newsosaur, Are hyper-local programs fair to j-students?, addresses collaboration between mammoth media companies and college journalism programs, and what these partnerships mean for students. Are they good or bad? Blogger Allan D. Mutter provides both sides of the argument, then offers his own analysis. Ultimately, Mutter believes these partnerships are mutually beneficial, saying”while these arrangements distinctly benefit media companies (which rightfully ought to compensate student contributors with something more tangible than ‘exposure’), the programs on balance represent a fair bargain for journalism students, who will need every advantage in launching their careers at a time most traditional news organizations are chopping staffs instead of expanding them.” In the end, journalism students need all the exposure they can get before they’re released into the field, and big media companies provide an opportunity to do just that.

One example of such collaboration is the New York Times “East Village Local” publication. On February 22, the Times announced that NYU students would staff the new publication. The site will launch in the fall, after it’s developed by faculty and students.  The class “The Hyperlocal Newsroom,” will provide continuous content, as students report and write for the site as part of their coursework. Summer classes will be opened to other university students, too.

But a post on The Awl doesn’t find much merit in these programs, or at least not as much as Mutter does, arguing “I can totally understand the argument that creating these publications and staffing them as such is the best way for the kids to learn. And sure, I’d rather j-schools have students go out and report for a publication than have them sit in class and talk about Twitter and whatever. But this kind of working for free isn’t just the situation of their school days; this is most likely how it’s going to be after they graduate too. Training them to accept these conditions is just a way to prepare them for the non-job market.”

So Gen-Jers, what do you think? Is it a smart pairing? Do students really benefit? Or does it just make working for free seem acceptable?

Recently my student chapter hosted a critique session, bringing faculty and professionals in to check out student resumes and work samples.
The students got a lot out of it and learned more about SPJ in the process. And our chapter membership got to meet faculty they’d never had in class.

Have any Generation J groups done this to connect with your local college? It’s especially valuable, I think, for college students to see younger-demographic journalists in action.

Here’s a shot of me talking with a freshman about her portfolio:

Photos by Michelle Zeman / Ball State SPJ chapter