But it’s supposed to be! It’s on McSweeney’s!
It’s about journalists. I’m now ashamed to say that I’ve actually told a few students that they’d be great at science journalism, we need more good journalists, it’s difficult to make a living at it, but you might consider it as an option. Now I’m feeling like I’d been suggesting they consider a career in the exciting field of dumpster diving for pennies.
Thanks for the McSweeney’s link, Dr. Myers. I busted a stitch reading it, tragic though it was.
My sister was an editor at several science mags including SciAm and Discover. She once wrote an article about paleontologists who study coprolites. Headlines she considered included “In the beginning was the turd” and “The origin of feces”.
Sad, but true. Journalism was never a money making career, but it has gotten much worse.
The internet didn’t do it alone. Some years back I pulled 10Ks (at the SEC) for the big newspaper chains and as of a few years ago their newspapers were making money. The problem was the merger binge of the 1990s. Newspapers couldn’t buy enough other newspapers. When the business started to slow, those assets which were priced based on continued revenue growth, suddenly had to be written down to realistic levels. That’s where all the red ink was. Live by financial shenanigans, die by financial shenanigans.
Unfortunately, many science-based careers are exactly that: unless you hit the sweet spot in regards to grants, marketability, and other areas, you’re dumpster diving at best. I went into technology because it was supposed to be more lucrative than scientific research. Then the first tech bubble burst, and tech employment was much harder to achieve. I’m probably making as much or less than if I had gone into a more scientific field.
No, I don’t regret my decision, and no, I don’t blame anyone for it, it’s just a whole messed up world where nobody’s guaranteed anything unless they already have lots of money.