Ever wondered what a Zomato for media organisations would look like? Well, we’ve stumbled on something pretty close to it – a job and recruiting website where journalists are leaving some brutally honest reviews of news companies.

A Good Samaritan (read: journalist with a leading English newspaper) pointed it out to us and suggested we trawl through it to see how “glaringly sad the lives of those who work in newsrooms are”.

We happily obliged.

The website, Glassdoor, allows people to leave anonymous reviews about media organisations in which they’re working or have worked. Unsurprisingly, most reviews are by journalists who have chosen to remain anonymous. The format is to provide a reader with the pros and cons of working at an organisation and also to offer advice to the management.

While scanning several hundreds of reviews across organisations, some familiar themes cropped up. Most journalists complained of poor pay scales, lack of infrastructure and appraisals. We also noticed a certain despondence at leadership in newsrooms.

This is not to say that all is dark and unhappy. All organisations we looked up had favourable reviews that talked of helpful colleagues, good bosses, great learning experiences and of perks of working with market leaders.

However, it is the uncomplimentary reviews that elaborate on the crisis in media today

1) Dealing with deadwood

Most reviews of the Chennai-based daily, The Hindu, had a common gripe: it’s laid-back and sarkaari. A deputy general manager put it succinctly.

“140 years old style of functioning

Pros

Little work, loads of free time, low targets, ideal if you are 40+ – the kind of place you want to relax and live

Cons

– no challenge
– rigid editorial
– bosses who want juniors to be laid back
– bosses who think they are superstar
– people who have already worked and are earning their pension
– among old timers, good employees have left – and the deadwood is blocking the progress

Advice to Management

Remove all the deadwood – you don’t (sic) have to carry them. Have an advanced management system.”

A sub-editor/reporter calls The Hindu a “stable if unexciting job”. The review was written back in 2015 and notes that while the salary is decent, “the laid back atmosphere can make younger staff lethargic”.  

It’s not just The Hindu. A review of The Times of India states that The Times Group “can sometimes resemble the ultimate PSU [public sector undertaking]. Highly bureaucratic in parts and impossible to navigate on occasion.”

2) Where is the money?

It’s no secret that pay scales in the media are anything but great (until and unless you make it to a fairly senior editorial role). Low salaries and appraisals are the common threads running across most reviews.

Here’s what a senior copy editor with The Hindustan Times has to say:

“I have been working at Hindustan Times full-time (More than 5 years)

Pros

Great editors, latest technologies, good colleagues, decent work culture

Cons

Poor salary hike, little appreciation, work load

Advice to Management

Increase salaries of good employees for their encouragement.”

A former editorial coordinator with The Indian Express states in a review written in 2015: “You work like a horse with a tunnel vision to complete the pile and u get only peanuts to eat… And then at the end you realise that you are the only one recruited for a team of 100 people!”

A senior graphics designer with Dainik Jagran says, “it gives less than salary you need to be survived [sic].” A senior sub-editor in Jagran in 2015 also complained of no “soap in washroom”.

3) No satisfaction

While many reviewers felt that working with Big Media adds to their CVs and brand value, some expressed despondence at not being able to practice the journalism they had set out to.

“…the focus is on producing content for the sake of ads and not for the sake of good journalism,” says a mid-level staffer at HT, adding “pay is below par, increments are lower than the inflation rate”.

“Team leaders are mostly clueless about their own editorial stand,” says a web journalist, again with HT. Many reviews blame lack of job satisfaction on crumbling leadership in the newsroom. Here’s what an anonymous former NDTV employee has to say:

“Cons

Nepotism, growth for only a handful, Seniors are shallow and promote favouritism.
Too much chaos in order to get their TRPs back on track.”

The “cons” of working with the TV Today Group are somewhat similar. A former senior producer notes, “Management actively pulls rank and discourages questioning.”

A TOI journalist says, “One of the biggest problems with working for the Times of India is of paid journalism. Stories will get killed it if interferes with the interests of anyone who is willing to place an ad.”

Besides lack of independence, a former employee with ScoopWhoop complains of having to churn out mindless copies: “If you want to pursue journalism, this place is your last option. You may be asked to write on anything that makes no sense.”

A relatively new media company, Catch, has one review, where the anonymous employee has this to say to the management:

“-Don’t ruin the stability of the place under the influence of self-serving coterie.
-Understand that any journalistic venture is different from running a grocery shop.”

4) Being inhuman

Working when unwell featured as a con in many reviews as also the lack of infrastructure. A sub-editor with The Telegraph says: “Hectic schedules can make you sick, but it doesn’t concern the management.” A former TOI employee notes the cons:

“Poor HR policies. No flexibility especially for female employees. No infrastructure for pregnant women or handicapped persons. Very poor all round infrastructure at office. Terrible work timings. Not at all employee friendly. Very difficult to get leave.”

In advice to the management, she says, “Hire more employees so that people don’t have to work themselves to the bone and even attend office when they’re ill.”

A trainee with the Press Trust of India mentions “poor work/life balance” as a con but adds “that is the case of journalism everywhere”.

While platforms like Glassdoor offer an opportunity to prospective job seekers, they also allow employees to give an insider’s view on what it’s really like to work at a place.

These platforms are also places where former employees can vent at organisations that they feel have been unfair. Be that as it may, journalists in particular have very little space to talk about their working conditions given the media’s code of silence on most things pertaining to the industry. In that context, it would be instructive for top bosses and the management to take note to what’s being said about them on these forums and not dis it as mere rants from disgruntled employees.