IBT Media Interview Questions
& Process

I had a Skype interview that was a bit disorganized as they called me an hour early, but I did it anyway. I talked with a friendly Executive Producer whose mind seemed to wander sometimes. My past experience was very relevant since I had a similar role at another news organization, and I had lots of pitches, technical skills, management experience, and ideas to improve their content. The more I looked into the company, the more it seemed like Newsweek was just IBT rebranded. I knew I had a lot to offer because their videos had grammar and factual errors, low views, clumsy editing, and bad graphics. Then, I was offered a second 'cultural' interview with the Legal Counsel, which got postponed multiple times. During this call, it became clear it wasn't an appealing place to work. The interviewer used interrogation tactics to find out why I left my last job and seemed fixated on my old company's internal structure, instead of my skills. She wouldn't let me talk about my experiences with other news agencies and didn't seem knowledgeable about current events or politics. Her questions were rambling and abstract about comparing management structures in different types of companies. I could answer them because I know business jargon, but she didn't seem to know much herself, especially about how a newsroom runs. She couldn't tell me how many people were on the editorial desk or about their intake/output system. After about an hour of her talking about abstract concepts she couldn't apply to Newsweek, I had to end the interview because I realized it wasn't the right place for me. It seemed chaotic, disorganized, business-focused, and more interested in hiring MBAs than people with practical newsroom experience, which explains their content quality.

Editors mentioned they typically don't hire people from out of state and prefer local college grads, disregarding other experience. After an initial phone call, I had a Skype interview with two editors. They didn't share much about the role and were dishonest about travel opportunities. Upon offering the job, they revealed the pay structure: a base salary plus a significant portion based on clicks. The editor claimed hitting traffic goals was easy and would likely double my salary, which turned out to be untrue. Most staff struggled to meet these goals, and the click-dependent pay negatively impacted content quality.

There were two rounds of interviews. The first one was with the editorial director, in his office, and it was pretty chill. He asked me questions I was expecting for the role. The second round involved meeting one-on-one with three current staff writers. Afterwards, the editorial director rejoined us for a quick chat about what happens next. I ended up getting the job.

I applied and didn't hear back for 6 weeks. By the time they got back to me, I was already deep in interviews elsewhere. I let them know, and things moved pretty fast. It was a really time-consuming process with several tests. The company seems to prioritize quantity over quality and doesn't feel like a great place to work. I declined their offer.