the editor talks with you

Norman Isaacs once told me that he looked for two things in people he hired: brains and character. Norman was a legendary editor. We first met in New York City where I was researching a magazine article on the controversial National News Council. The council had been formed to investigate complaints against the media. To say it was not popular with some editors, publishers and broadcasters puts it mildly. Norman served on the council, he told me, because he felt the public had a right to be heard with their media grievances. A few immature people let the power of the media go to their heads. When anybody complained about how the media treated them, they were ignored or called kooks.

The magazine editor asked me to write about Isaacs, too. Norman readily agreed and we talked for several hours about his long and illustrious career. As a result, he became one of my champions. I did not realize what influence he had. Our newspaper had submitted an investigative series for the Pulitzer Prize. The articles were about the financial abuses of a religious order. This was before revelations of how TV evangelists abused their flocks. We caught flack about it and were accused of being religious bigots. We knew that Pulitzer jurors rated entries on public good and what the entrant had to endure. If you disclosed controversial findings and took a lot of heat, it improved your odds.

Pulitzer judging is highly political. Large metropolitan papers win most of them. Not that they don’t deserve them. They have time and money to go after big and controversial stories. They also have considerable influence on the judges. We were a small suburban newspaper. Our chances of winning were not high. Because Norman knew me, he went to bat for us with the Pulitzer judges. We were in stiff competition against the New York Times, Washington Post and others. But Norman used his considerable influence to help us win because he believed good community journalism, even by small newspapers, should be recognized. Norman taught me a lot about people.

Whenever we interview candidates for jobs, we probe their brains and character. What do they believe in? Who influenced them? What are their values? I do the same in interviewing the famous, the powerful and just ordinary folks. It makes a far deeper, more insightful story if it reveals the subject’s values. Why and what are decisive questions. Why did you do that? What were your motives and thinking? How did it work out? Prompted by Norman Isaacs two-pronged test, I have added a third — attitude.

You can be smart as a whip with bedrock solid values, but you need a can-do attitude. That means you not only love the kind of work you do and cannot imagine doing anything else but you believe it is important to your readers and community. Without a positive, cut-through-the-crap attitude, you are never going to realize your potential. And that is the challenge our Maker gives us, to overcome our challenges and realize the potential we possess. I hope you share that belief with me.

Next: Heal yourself