I can't find it now, but I recently saw a tweet from a prof who suggested that profs boasting about working 100-hour weeks were full of it in part because cranking at that pace is not conducive to good work. The same could be said of other jobs, including journalism.
/1
/2
I say this having worked on many breaking news stories and being addicted to the adrenaline; having worked on long, intense projects, staying up night after night, determined to make each line perfect, and willingly burning myself to the ground in pursuit of that stuff.
/3
I know political reporters who feel the same surges, who become immersed in the moment-to-moment actions of a legislative body or a campaign. Again, the jolt and the juice is irresistible, a high like nothing else. I also know the job sometimes requires that intensity.
/4
I know all that, and I know the same feelings cross into other professions, but I also know it's not normal. That pace, that constant state of high alert, is not normal. The experience is exhilarating and addictive. It should not be a default setting.
/5
By default, I mean the assumed standard, the assumed baseline of our work ethic. "If you don't burn yourself out at a 100-hour-per week pace, you're not working hard enough," shouldn't be our collective standard. We should place less value on working ourselves to death.
-30-
You can follow @seanrobinson1e4.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled: