Examining the editor pipeline (or lack thereof)

When I started my John S. Knight Journalism Fellowship at Stanford, I had a hunch: The journalism industry isn’t doing a good job of training editors. And that’s a problem because almost all newsroom leadership roles are editor roles, and most people are required to have editor experience before ascending to top management positions.

I published a survey to see what I could learn and received over 100 responses. Thanks to everyone who participated! What stood out to me the most, is the level of passion that folks bring to their work. Many people wrote multiple-paragraph responses, often expressing frustration about their own paths as editors, some saying that this was the first time they were ever asked about editor training and support. The vast majority said there is a lot of work to do — they spoke of a lack of formal training, barriers to advancement, and unclear success metrics. However, there is also a lot of energy among existing editors to make sure that future editors have a more solid and supportive path toward these roles.

Here’s a summary of the results. (Note: The author used large language models such as Claude and ChatGPT to analyze survey results.)

Demographics

The survey was filled out by 116 respondents, all of whom consider themselves professional editors in the journalism industry. Their self-identified roles are below:

Respondents ranged in experience from less than one year to over 50 years. They had an average of 13 years of experience as editors and 20 years of experience as journalists.

An editor’s role now: What does success mean?

I asked a few questions about each person’s current role, revealing the diversity of work that falls under the “editor” title nowadays. The most popular responses were not surprising (story editing, writing headlines, editorial strategy), yet these editors also wore many hats. Responsibilities like budget management, hiring, professional development and audience engagement were selected by just over 40% of respondents.

Most interesting to me were the responses to the question, “At your current role, how is your success measured? Are you satisfied with it, or do you think a different metric should be used?” Many people elaborated at length on this topic, and the frustration was palpable, especially among those who felt their success metrics were subjective or nonexistent.

For digital editors, quantitative metrics were common (page views, unique visitors, subscriptions). People seemed generally comfortable with these due to their concrete nature, though some pointed out a lack of connection: “Engagement has been the primary mode of measuring success. It’s a little frustrating, because a lot of factors beyond my control influence engagement,” one person wrote. Others wished they could add impact metrics to their traffic data.

Nonprofit and startup outlets tend to focus less on traffic, and more on real-world impact. Some, interestingly, included being cited by legacy publications as an impact metric. However, quite a few outlets have no specific metrics at all — success is measured, for these respondents, by whether their boss and their team is happy or not with their work. While some were satisfied with that, others felt they did not know what they were striving toward. “The problem is that in a subjective business like magazine editing and writing, style and the taste of my bosses play a significant role,” one person wrote.

Little to no formal training for editors

Not surprising, but shocking, are the survey results related to editor training. Only 41% said they learned editing skills in school and 28% received formal training in a professional workplace. Half of the respondents said they attended training events hosted by professional organizations, while only 17% had joined longer-term training cohorts outside the workplace.

The vast majority (82%) said they learned in informal ways in their own workplaces (mentored by a senior editor, studying edits given on their own writing, trial and error), and a significant proportion (39%) said they received no training at all — they were simply thrown into the deep end. “There’s basically no training for this job. You learn it by doing it and begging to watch others better than you do it,” one person wrote. Some felt the industry has a “sink or swim” mentality when it comes to editor development. As one person explained, “I learn on the job. Often times, I wing it. Direction only given when something goes awry.”

While there are plenty of reporting and leadership trainings in our industry, there are comparatively few editor training programs. Editing is sometimes covered during leadership training, but not always. And specialized editing courses exist, but are often separate from management training, which most people said is essential to the role. Meanwhile, formal training programs sponsored by workplaces are in decline (quite a few of the programs mentioned by respondents no longer exist), which means people need to seek manager approval for time off in order to participate in out-of-office trainings. This leads to unfair allocation of trainings — based on the biases or whims of a manager, rather than the trainee’s merit or desire for development. One person wrote, in response to what would make them more likely to access training, “It isn’t me that needs convincing. It is higher ups who have to decide if resources are worth spending on me.”

Is there a reporter-to-editor pipeline?

Going into this project, one of my hypotheses was that you don’t need to be a reporter first to be a good editor. I worried that too many good journalists were being pushed out of the industry as early-career reporters, even though they had the right skills & mindset to be strong editors.

I think of myself as an example. I tried my hand at reporting — including a three-month stint as a city reporter at a major paper — and found it stifling. Soon after, I began editing at a student magazine and realized my skills and personality were much more suited to editing, and that’s led to a fruitful career for me.

Well, the majority of survey respondents (about 80%) disagreed with me … emphatically. “I think if you’re an editor and you’ve never worked as a reporter, you have no business doing the job,” one person wrote.

Digging into the results, though, lends some nuance. When asked about the top skills needed for an editor, reporting doesn’t come up at all. The top two were emotional intelligence/people skills (mentioned by 36%), and technical skills for writing, such as grammar and attention to detail (mentioned by 33%). Rounding out the top five were leadership qualities, strategic thinking and personality attributes (curiosity, flexibility, adaptability and open-mindedness were common).

Similarly, when asked “What experiences were most helpful for you to improve your ability to succeed as an editor?” reporting rarely came up. Mentorship, hands-on experience, leadership and professional development were common responses.

So why do people still think, when asked directly, that editors need to be reporters first? As one person summarized, “Important [for an editor] to understand reporter pain points and opportunities, but an empathetic mindset can ably substitute for that.” Reporting experience helps editors to build credibility and trust, provide guidance, and set reasonable expectations for direct reports. Respondents noted that some excellent editors do not follow a traditional reporting path, and that empathy and strong communication skills can substitute for reporting experience. And generally, people acknowledged that reporting and editing are different skill sets.

It seems the reporter-to-editor pipeline is yet another piece of industry lore (such as, “journalists need to be objective”) that needs to be more critically examined.

The good and bad for BIPOC and minority editors

It’s no secret that there’s an acute lack of nonwhite editors in our industry. In the 2020 Leavers Survey conducted by Carla Murphy for Open News, lack of newsroom diversity is cited by 39% of respondents for why they left the industry. Newsroom mismanagement and workplace stress tied for the top response (61%).

For those BIPOC journalists who do become editors, respondents in this survey faced quite a few challenges. Many cite being underestimated or having their skills questioned, facing bias in hiring and promotion, experiencing pay disparities and encountering both overt and subtle discrimination. As one person wrote, “My work was always doubted and required extra effort to build trust.”

Journalists from LGBTQ+ and working-class backgrounds also cited similar issues in their newsrooms. Women of color, especially, said they experienced both gender and racial bias.

On the bright side, some respondents noted how their lived experience has enhanced their skills and competence as editors. In many cases, this is unfortunately accompanied by additional burdens — such as handling all coverage related to their ethnic background, or the emotional labor of constantly advocating for diversity. Still, some people said that developing diversity programs and mentoring other journalists of color were rewarding parts of their jobs.

Looking ahead: Bittersweet lessons learned

A friend of mine was on the job hunt recently and heard this piece of advice from a colleague: “No one knows what to do [in journalism right now], so if you want to be a newsroom leader you need to be willing to figure it out.” It resonated with me because it was such a clear-eyed assessment of the state of journalism today. This is not the time to play it safe or to cling to the way things were done before. Successful journalism leaders will ride the wave of change, and ideally harness it for the greater good.

When asked what skills editors will need 5 to 10 years from now, survey respondents cited adaptability as a key characteristic. The ability to balance new technologies with journalistic ethics, to continue to learn about new platforms and metrics, and willingness to challenge journalistic norms, were mentioned often. Beyond that, it’s what you expect — strong interpersonal skills, leadership qualities, audience engagement and technical skills round out the list. “How to motivate, delegate, and empower. Basically, leadership skills to unlock the talent of staff,” one person wrote.

If they could go back in time, many respondents said they would advise their past selves to seek mentorship and training at the beginning of their editor journey. While they appreciated on-the-job learning experiences, many felt that structured training would have accelerated their growth and smoothed out some growing pains. Perhaps relatedly, quite a few people said they wished they had trusted their instincts and had more confidence in themselves; imposter syndrome was a common issue. Many also mentioned the importance of work-life balance, avoiding burnout and toxic work environments. “Be kind to your writers and to yourself,” “batten down the hatches and get a therapist,” or, put simply, “Work hard, don’t die,” respondents wrote.

Many responses were bittersweet. Editing is a tough job, and some respondents cited serious challenges to their physical and mental health. But many people continue to be passionate about journalism and appreciate the impact they have in their editing, despite industry uncertainty and difficult working conditions. “Editors are unsung heroes — the invisible glue holding up a newsroom — and we need them to sustain our industry,” one person summarized aptly.

Conclusions/Analysis

In addition to this survey, I conducted several follow up interviews with people who had unique experiences or who had reached out specifically to discuss the survey. While I wasn’t able to talk to everyone I wanted to, I feel there are some big takeaways that I want to share:

• More research is needed! While I was pleasantly surprised to receive 116 responses, I know that it’s still a pretty small slice of our industry, and so many respondents noted that this subject is under-examined. I think it’d be useful to survey hiring managers in the industry, people who run professional training programs, as well as deans and professors at journalism schools.
• A major training gap exists. Even with a small slice of respondents, it’s pretty clear that there’s a need for more training. The number of people who say they received little or no training before taking on an editor role is pretty stunning.
• Flexibility will be key. There’s no one formula to being a star editor these days. New programs should focus on being nimble and managing through uncertainty.
• We should at least consider that people don’t need to be long-time reporters before they can try their hand at editing. If that’s the case, think about how different the training landscape could look. Should newsrooms consider more entry-level editor roles and editing internships? Should journalism schools create an editor track that’s separate from a reporter track? Should professional organizations offer editing trainings that are catered to entry-level journalists? There are a lot of opportunities here to reshape the pipeline and ensure high-quality editors aren’t lost in the early-career shuffle.
• Any solution must consider power dynamics in newsrooms and in our society at large. American media, much like the society in which it exists, has a serious issue with systemic racism, not to mention the myriad other -isms. People with less structural power in society are so much less likely to gain editor roles in newsrooms — so what does that mean about the narratives that we craft or the perspectives that we uplift? Any organization that wants to support a robust and fair news ecosystem (one that can survive the headwinds of today) must create programming that will alleviate the existing inequities in our field.
• Whose responsibility is editor training? This is the big one to untangle as we open up this conversation. The industry has been through several major upheavals in the last few decades. Declining revenues and corporate cutbacks are the obvious villains, but formal workplace editor training is one of the less-obvious victims. It seems that we never had an industry-wide conversation to make sure somebody picked up the mantle. To that end:
• >> What does editor training look like at journalism schools right now? Only 41% of survey respondents said they received editing training in school. I’m interested in how the evolution of journalism from a blue-collar “just do it” industry into a professionalized, college-degree-required field has impacted the pipeline.
• >> How are industry trade groups thinking about leadership trainings with relation to editing? Quite a few respondents cited programs like Poynter’s Leadership Academy, ONA’s Leadership Accelerator, Table Stakes and Maynard 400 as positive professional development experiences. Some received editing training as part of these programs, and some did not.
• >> What is the responsibility of large, legacy media institutions to train editors, as compared to small, startup organizations? While I didn’t see this in the survey data, I have observed that quite a few editors cut their teeth at small organizations where newsroom leaders who are desperate to recruit folks (yep, that’s me!) dedicate significant time and energy to training editors internally. These editors, once trained, are then able to apply to and get hired by larger institutions. I think that’s great for individual editors who otherwise wouldn’t get a chance to advance. However, large media institutions benefit from this pipeline, and only a few of them invest in formal training programs of their own (Dow Jones News Fund, New York Times, NPR and ProPublica are the exceptions here). Meanwhile, small community-centric newsrooms are trying to do their own training: I heard from folks at South Side Weekly, City Bureau (which I co-founded) and Feet in Two Worlds who either currently run or want to launch editor training programs.

To all you editors out there, I echo the overall theme of what survey respondents said: Editing is hard, but so important! Take care with the responsibility you’ve been given, but also take care of yourself. And always ask for help if you need it.