Malcolm Gladwell: Aspiring Journalists Should Skip J-School

Malcolm Gladwell told TIME magazine that he would tell aspiring young journalists today to skip journalism school and study something else instead.

"The issue is not writing. It's what you write about," Gladwell told TIME.

Gladwell said he enjoys reading Bloomberg's Jonathan Weil, who broke the Enron story, because he's "one of the very few mainstream journalists who really knows how to read a balance sheet."

Gladwell used Weil as rationale for advising young journalists not to attend journalism school, instead becoming an expert in another field that they could then cover as a journalist.

"Most accountants don't write articles, and most journalists don't know anything about accounting," he said. "Aspiring journalists should stop going to journalism programs and go to some other kind of grad school. If I was studying today, I would go get a master's in statistics, and maybe do a bunch of accounting courses and then write from that perspective. I think that's the way to survive. The role of the generalist is diminishing. Journalism has to get smarter."

Read Gladwell's full Q&A at TIME.com.

Comments

[RedStateCenterLeft]

Gladwell's a novelist, sort of like a Fox News person. I'll take professional journalism education tied to the liberal arts and sciences any day, thank you.

[lmvd3]

Anyone ever heard of double majors???

[owlbreath]

This is not a new idea. I have spoken to journalists who have been advising aspiring journalists to major in an area that interests them and then use that developed expertise as a basis for their journalistic writing. Meanwhile, in college, join the school newspaper where someone will mentor you. That way you become well versed in an academic area and knowledgeable about how to gather and deliver information for a paper.

[Rational-1]

Newspapers are obsolete. Aspiring journalists need to focus on more than just writing/story telling.... multi-media. TV journalists are more influential.

[owlbreath]

TV journalists do not do investigative journalism; they are more concerned about entertainment. Jimmy Breslin said that the story is on the third floor. In other words, journalists need to do the footwork that is needed to seek out the information, getting a unique angle on the story. Newspapers have become obsolete because the owners are business people, not writers and journalists. Journalists are supposed to ask the hard questions respectfully. These new owners are only interested in making money and if that means entertainment will sell papers, then that is what they want from their staff. Multi-media journalism panders to the Sesame Street generation; they want to be entertained and visually stimulated rather than intellectually challenged in a thought provoking manner. Yes, hard print is dying, and it is a sad commentary on our democracy.

[bugsbonzai]

This is very true, and in many fields. Going to school for journalism is like going to college for acting. David Mamet once famously decried college acting schools to be a waste of time. "Get out and start acting already," was Mamet's advice. I think Gladwell is on to something. Get some hands on experience before reaching for the stars.

Just as our entertainment industry is compartmentalizing, so too is journalism. We need more experts covering the beats who can pick up the details, nuances and actually analyze from the point of reference of an expert.

[Lex10]

.............and go to hairdressing school!
You could call your salon Blink's Streaks and Tipping Points!

[texastrixie]

Aspiring journalists should find another career. Yes, it would be fun. Yes, it would be interesting. But it wouldn't be enough to pay your rent.

News organizations have little money for investigative journalism, and more and more, "investigative" journalism is going to be someone with a camera in a cell phone, or leaked documents, etc. War correspondents are still paid, but journalists in a war zone are no longer considered human versions of Switzerland, now they are usually considered as easy targets for kidnappings for ransom.

If you are smart enough, and inquisitive enough to be a journalist, you can be something else that actually pays. Everyone and their brother wants to "write." Actually, many of us can. And we will - for nothing.

[drucelt]

Gladwell is on the money...Great journalists do not need the bogus credential of a "J. Degree"... Look at the backgrounds of the great journalists....from Mencken, Murrow, Bernstein and Woodward, I.F. Stone....etc....I, mean even look at this site...where is Arianna's "J. Degree:? ...the list goes on...J. School is for wanna be talking head celebs...it is not for the intellectual specialist...just look at your local paper or local TV. news...morons with perfect hairdo's who lack basic intellectual curiosity...if they cannot pronounce a particular word --- especially when it is of foreign root --- mock their own ineptness....it is pathetic...the dumbing down is pathetic..­.Intellect­uals’ created the US....and yet, sadly, we have spent the last 200 plus years mocking and deriding intellectuals....

[Rog49Thomas]

Wise words.

Today in the USA, a "journalist" only needs how to quickly take down the talking points given him and repeat them pretty much more or less verbatim.

And for broadcast journalism, the ability to shout and to cry on demand are really all that's required.

[TheBaffler]

I would recommend whatever eduction that would lead one to become something other than a pop-psychologist huckster like Malcolm Gladwell.

[yphili184]

You guys he has a point. It's more of a reflection of the current state. A lot of journalism seems to be done by people who are inexperienced in the field they are writing about. I dont know how many times some hack with a lot of information goes on tv and runs circles around an ill prepared/ uninformed reporter.

[Lulubelle1]

As one who went to J-school, I reluctantly agree!

It is very important to learn to write well, to research well, to know the laws of privacy/li­bel/slande­r, when it's appropriate to use anonymous sources, etc. I'm grateful to have that knowledge, and it is valuable to have the skill of good written communication and persuasive interview skills in any job that I do.

But in terms of covering a story well, and deeply, it is incredibly valuable to have an intimate knowledge of that subject area, and have operated within that environment at least for a time. That deep subject matter expertise can be developed, but everything a journalist writes up to that point will be misguided or fluff. It's just too easy for those within the sphere being covered to pull the wool over the eyes of someone who doesn't understand the details.

[changeself]

mr. gladwell, you could have benefitted from journalism 101 in understanding journalism in a social-histoprical context.

according to your uninspired idea, why would you need journalists in the first place?

accountants can write, and have been writing, about their numbers alright, without calling themselves journalists. politicians can write, and have been writing and speaking, about their politics just fine, without calling themselves journalists. why would you need journalists, right?

you have no clue what connecting the dots means do ya?

[Rational-1]

Journalists need to allow experts to communicate their knowledge, not vice versa. They are suppose to seek experts with conflicting views, give them equal time, and let their audience decide which bits of information to believe. Reporter are fact gathers, not experts. (Too bad most don't know how to verify facts or confirm sources anymore.)

[Joe Williams]

Mr. Gladwell's opinions strike me as uninformed. Most journalists do not get to specify their beats unit they have proved to their employers that they can gather and communicate information.

In journalism school, I was taught libel law, database search, fact checking, interview techniques and, most importantly, how to write clearly and accurately.

Most journalism does not involve arcane subjects, and even when it does, degree-level expertise in the subject matter doesn't mean you can write about it. If you really want and expect a career-long specialization (which is a pipe dream these days), the best journalism schools offer dedicated curricula--science journalism, business journalism--while ensuring that the graduate can communicate to non-specialists.

I work for one of the 20 largest newspapers in America, and my job is probably the most coveted in the newsroom. To get it, I had to spend ten years writing about things that didn't excite me--street crime, school board meetings, zoning disputes--while I waited for my dream opportunity to open up. I do have a liberal-arts degree in my specialty, but without my graduate degree in journalism, I could not have done the general-assignment reporting well enough to earn the promotion.

An aspiring reporter without a grounding in journalistic ethics and procedures is a propagandist or plagiarist waiting to happen. The New York Times' Judith Miller was a university-trained "expert" on the Middle East, but she wasn't so hot about double-checking her facts.

[changeself]

well put by someone who's been practicing journalism.

developing a perspective that guides you to produce a meaningful story

takes a generalist education and a commitment to justice.

it's no accident that most journalists are liberal to progressive politically.

once you learn to connect the dots and see the big picture,

you are bound to become a progressive activist.

[HailSinfonia]

Having gone to a university with a "famous" J-school, I get his point. Most of what they learn are the tools for working at a podunk newspaper or some small local TV station.

They also learn to write in strange one sentance paragraphs on an eighth grade level. So, it's really about lowering the intellectual discourse.

If a young person wanted to be a real journalist, I would urge them to study (depending on their interest) History, Political Science and English.

This I believe is what he is saying. A good liberal arts education with an expertise in your field of interest is more likely to produce success, than a J-school degree.

[changeself]

yes, solid liberal arts and critical thinking foundation is what it takes to be a real journalist.

no, that's not what gladwell suggests: he wants narrowly trained technocrats as "journalists". complete opposite to what you suggest.

[max08]

"Most of what they learn are the tools for working at a podunk newspaper or some small local TV station."

The Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism advocates working for a "podunk newspaper or some small local TV station" after graduating. At least, it did in my day.

[HailSinfonia]

As experience, that's great. If you are satisfied in that position, and you do a good job great also.

If they have higher aspirations, however, they might want to at least self-educate WAY beyond the degree, especially geography, history.

Just a thought.

[texastrixie]

A degree with a History, Political Science, English and Economics basis (even if you get 20-30 hrs in each) will qualify you to fold shirts at the Gap and little else. If you don't land a job writing, or become a professor, or go to law school, you are going to find you have no saleable skill.

[Eric8]

The Role of the Generalist is Diminishing, which means, America no longer requires public intellectualism? Let me make the case against the elitist Gladwell. He thinks intellectuals should give up, being an eclectic mix of knowledge, and instead become specific driven managers of information, thick tech-nerds, who in this way, will find the transition from the classroom to the corporate world easier. You can tell he is an elitist because he is telling YOU what you should do; elitists don't encourage free thinking and individual freedom but instead advocate mass conformity and acceptance. Did you see how he didn't even lament about the decline of his term "Generalist" or passionately defend the need for such people in our absolutely ethically bankrupted culture of corporate nihilism. If your an educated person, the last thing you should be doing is taking advice from corporate specialists who peddle the obnoxious information society and do what you want to do. Free Your self from the regime of numbers and statistics; Free Your self and Think For Yourself and Do Whatever Makes You Passionate! Learn About Every Subject, Don't Narrow Your Talent, Be A Renaissance Person not a robot!

[escribacat]

Fanned!

[HarkaDahl]

A sincere impassioned plea! I love it.

[HailSinfonia]

Double fanned!