LVN wrote:

---

As someone who has had to submit items to The University Proofreader, I do respect the skills and the hard work that position entailed! That's one of those job titles that doesn't adequately explain the real job.

---

another old timer wrote:

---

Olden Days wrote: I have no doubt that this topic has come up on this board before -- but it might be worth a mention again.  Like so many others, SFT treated Bud Kirkpatrick in a very shabby manner.  Bud, though maybe not the world's leading PR whizkid, was dedictated to USM and was a nice guy.  For his years of service (just like the deans) all Bud got was a kick in the butt on the way out the door.  SFT had better hope that there is a purgatory because he is not headed to heaven. Right on. No matter what you thought of Bud and the way he ran PR, you had to be sickened by the abyssmal way he was treated. I was standing there the day he got in his truck and drove away from USM for the last time. By the way, I heard that Giannini was involved in this somehow.

---

Roscoe Thorndyke wrote:

---

I don't believe you'll find anything in my earlier comment that demeans proofreaders or the job of proofreading. I only pointed out that Ms. Cutrer was promoted from proofreader to the news staff and thus befitted from LSM's maladministration of the office, a fact that she confirmed in her rambling and self-congratulatory response. Had Ms. Cutrer not found ways to ingratiate herself to LSM, there's no way that she would have been promoted.

Mr. Roscoe (P?),

It is demeaning to proofreaders everywhere to think that one must be promoted from that job in order to have a "better" job. Proofreading jobs are honorable ones, just low paying because of the arrogance of others.

You were not there, so you have no idea what you are talking about - only spreading false information from your own mind or from someone in the office (same one every time). I did not receive a promotion - ever - from Lisa. She would have never let that happen. She would have never given me kudos. That's not her style.

The job was posted on HRs Web site and I applied for it because I couldn't pay my bills on $24,000 a year. I loved my job, but I was broke constantly. I was interviewed along with several others and I got the $32,000-a-year mainly because there wasn't a reason she could think not to give it to me - I had the experience. The salary was a big jump (though not as much paid to a male colleague doing the exact same job) because no one at USM thought the university proofreader should make a decent wage.

And I have no shame for posting my "rambling and self-congratulatory response." The truth is the truth.

If this is P: I've always thought so highly of you. I have never said a bad word about you, even though during our time working together you couldn't remember where I was from, that I had kids, that I had any education or experience, or really what I was there for. I was just thankful that most of the time you remembered my name because I respected you so much. If this is not you, I apologize.

It's no surprise, however, that LSM would not let Ms. Cutrer take the title of "editor" of the Eagle's Eye (formerly Update). That was in line with Mader's policy of ensuring that individuals within the department did not get special recognition for performance.

That title was bestowed on someone there after I left, so though your comments are very true, there was one who didn't fall in this category - ever.

In breaking down the traditional chain of command, LSM made sure that everyone answered to her directly, creating a dysfunctional environment in which some flourished.

Absolutely correct. That's why most of us left. There is SO much more to this story...

The designation of all writers as "assistant directors for news and marketing" was a part of that demeaning process, designed primarily for control through chaos. 

No one knew what the title actually meant, either. I still don't.

Having no personal experience in news operations--a lack of knowledge compounded by arrogant foolhardiness--LSM was oblivious to the fallout. She would be gone anyway before her mismanagement would begin to bear bitter fruit.

Most people do not realize this, but here goes: The PR department was NOT in on any of the shenanigans of the last few years. Most of us hunkered down and did the job we were hired to do. We heard all the shocking announcements at the same time y'all did. We were not a PR department in as much we worked on major PR for the university. We each had a beat, and on that beat we communicated with our assigned faculty and staff members to write stories for release to newspapers and other media. That's all. That's it. It was hard to deal with the fact that information supposedly from our own department wasn't known to us until we received the press release in our e-mail box. Do you know how weird that is????

It was not like this with Mr. K. He was hands-on, always using his department's members to write stories and brainstorm ideas. I have no idea what Mr. K thinks of me - we didn't work long together - but I adored him. When he was head of the office, there was laughter, fun, respect, professionalism, and actual PR work. It was a great atmosphere with Mr. K, Phil, Ron, Jack, Phyllis, Steve, Nova ... sigh. Everyone there had a degree and experience and got his or her job based on that. The change afterward was unbelievably sad.

And if this is rambling, so be it. But it's all true.

 

 

Angela Cutrer wrote:

---

Roscoe Thorndyke wrote: I don't believe you'll find anything in my earlier comment that demeans proofreaders or the job of proofreading. I only pointed out that Ms. Cutrer was promoted from proofreader to the news staff and thus befitted from LSM's maladministration of the office, a fact that she confirmed in her rambling and self-congratulatory response. Had Ms. Cutrer not found ways to ingratiate herself to LSM, there's no way that she would have been promoted. Mr. Roscoe (P?), It is demeaning to proofreaders everywhere to think that one must be promoted from that job in order to have a "better" job. Proofreading jobs are honorable ones, just low paying because of the arrogance of others. You were not there, so you have no idea what you are talking about - only spreading false information from your own mind or from someone in the office (same one every time). I did not receive a promotion - ever - from Lisa. She would have never let that happen. She would have never given me kudos. That's not her style. The job was posted on HRs Web site and I applied for it because I couldn't pay my bills on $24,000 a year. I loved my job, but I was broke constantly. I was interviewed along with several others and I got the $32,000-a-year mainly because there wasn't a reason she could think not to give it to me - I had the experience. The salary was a big jump (though not as much paid to a male colleague doing the exact same job) because no one at USM thought the university proofreader should make a decent wage. And I have no shame for posting my "rambling and self-congratulatory response." The truth is the truth. If this is P: I've always thought so highly of you. I have never said a bad word about you, even though during our time working together you couldn't remember where I was from, that I had kids, that I had any education or experience, or really what I was there for. I was just thankful that most of the time you remembered my name because I respected you so much. If this is not you, I apologize. It's no surprise, however, that LSM would not let Ms. Cutrer take the title of "editor" of the Eagle's Eye (formerly Update). That was in line with Mader's policy of ensuring that individuals within the department did not get special recognition for performance. That title was bestowed on someone there after I left, so though your comments are very true, there was one who didn't fall in this category - ever. In breaking down the traditional chain of command, LSM made sure that everyone answered to her directly, creating a dysfunctional environment in which some flourished. Absolutely correct. That's why most of us left. There is SO much more to this story... The designation of all writers as "assistant directors for news and marketing" was a part of that demeaning process, designed primarily for control through chaos.  No one knew what the title actually meant, either. I still don't. Having no personal experience in news operations--a lack of knowledge compounded by arrogant foolhardiness--LSM was oblivious to the fallout. She would be gone anyway before her mismanagement would begin to bear bitter fruit. Most people do not realize this, but here goes: The PR department was NOT in on any of the shenanigans of the last few years. Most of us hunkered down and did the job we were hired to do. We heard all the shocking announcements at the same time y'all did. We were not a PR department in as much we worked on major PR for the university. We each had a beat, and on that beat we communicated with our assigned faculty and staff members to write stories for release to newspapers and other media. That's all. That's it. It was hard to deal with the fact that information supposedly from our own department wasn't known to us until we received the press release in our e-mail box. Do you know how weird that is???? It was not like this with Mr. K. He was hands-on, always using his department's members to write stories and brainstorm ideas. I have no idea what Mr. K thinks of me - we didn't work long together - but I adored him. When he was head of the office, there was laughter, fun, respect, professionalism, and actual PR work. It was a great atmosphere with Mr. K, Phil, Ron, Jack, Phyllis, Steve, Nova ... sigh. Everyone there had a degree and experience and got his or her job based on that. The change afterward was unbelievably sad. And if this is rambling, so be it. But it's all true.    

---

Whoa, Nellie! Verbosity reigns supreme. That's probably a lot more information than most of us want or need to know. Your assumption of the identity of someone who chooses to post to this board anonymously is irresponsibly presumptive. And your criticism of that presumed person is then petty and personal. I'm sure those traits fit well into the dysfunctional environment created by LSM. This isn't about the honor, importance or pay of proofreaders. The position of university proofreader is an important one and USM has had many outstanding people in that job through the years. On the organizational chart as it existed prior to LSM's structural flattening of the office, however, a move from proofreader to news staffer was a move up. Historically, university proofreaders had no responsiblities related to the PR news operation and. It should have remained that way, as it is at other institutions with well-oiled news operations. News releases were written, edited and proofed by editorial staff, ensuring multiple eyeballs saw the copy, but providing a process for the timely release of stories, which is essential to news flow. LSM's interjection of the university proofreader into the news flow created another operational dysfunction. Not knowing how anything in the office actually worked anyway, however, she could continue to prance around the dome, with the bliss of ignorance and her delusions of grandeur.