IB Times Reviews

Pros

Bagel Wednesdays, decent office, some good editors.

Cons

Run by incompetent weirdos who are more interested in their bizarre church than in journalism. No understanding of news or reporting. One of the founders plead guilty to fraud.

Pros

The company depends on young talent, so recent graduates/new journos will get good experience in a newsroom. Bonus structure (based on hits) benefits writers. A great place to learn from other writers/editors. Truly smart people. Bagels on Wednesdays. Ultimately, IBT is just a stepping stone, though.

Cons

Traffic driven, no transparency between higher-ups and writers/editors, very much trying to be a new media company but failing. Bonus structure means some writers earn more than editors. Missed pay dates as recently as December 2015. Expensive health coverage, no 401K. Seemingly poor handling of finances and no long-term strategy for growth could explain why IBTimes' newsroom has dwindled to 22 from a peak of 110 last year. All the other properties within the company have also gone thru staff cuts (two rounds: one earlier this year and one last week). I was not a part of this, but I learned more of it through Twitter and Politico than any internal correspondence. Overall, the company goes through drastic ups and downs and it doesn't value its employees. While editorial runs smoothly, corporate is a mess. Great place to start, but if you can avoid it, do so.

Pros

Editors didn't care enough to scrutinize your work, so you could run with your story ideas. They did hire good reporters who cared enough about their beats to produce quality work. Some left for better jobs. The best advice I ever got there was to focus on publishing a handful of great clips to get a new job as soon as possible. It was a decent-paying job for New York City, but because many full-time employees were treated as contractors, meaning no payroll taxes. (To be sure, some employees were offered full-time contacts before I left, so this might be an old problem. Still, it was an ongoing.)

Cons

The crushing silence unbefitting of a New York City newsroom with television sets. Editors who didn't care much about story development and ensuring quality content Management and editors who would talk well at meetings but fail to execute ideas in a meaningful way. There was little to nonexistent communication with the editorial team. Ethical problems were addressed too slowly, if they were addressed at all. A strategy to tighten up operations that was entirely too reactive. For some reporters, the experience was like a content farm. It has the worst op-ed section on the internet, rivaling even the fringiest right-wing blog. An uninformative, unorganized and embarrassing social media operation for an online news publication An oblique business model that fostered concern within the newsroom about the entire operation.

Pros

The company has managed to provide some work to reporters at a time when finding work is difficult. I met some wonderful people during my two years at the company. Some people managed to move on and get much better jobs after their stint at IBT.

Cons

The publication sells itself as a "serious" news outlet but only awards -- and promotes -- employees who focus on pop-culture articles that bring in page views. So many talented reporters, who wrote fantastic, respectable articles, have been fired for not bringing in the "appropriate" amount of web traffic. It is extremely disheartening. IBT is a paradox -- they claim to want to be a serious publication, but management is constantly getting rid of the only talent they actually have in the newsroom to make room for more trending articles that do absolutely nothing for the company's reputation. Health insurance is completely unaffordable for the $30,000 entry level salaries offered. On more than one occasion I witnessed a random firing , where the CEO and CFO did not even explain the reason why the employee -- usually a talented news writer -- was being let go.

Pros

some people are nice and personable.

Cons

Some people are not social at all, especially when you think this is suppose to be a social company. As some others have said, it is quieter than a morgue. Management sits in their offices with the door closed, I think it is because they are afraid to talk to their staff and actually have to make some decisions. You never get any responses to your emails that are sent to management, unless it will effect management. HR is a joke and never around when you need to talk about issues or even know HR policies. Reporters just search the internet and then re-write the story for ibtimes, some even resort to plagiarism. They promote inept staff and don't bother disciplining when a staff member does something wrong over and over again. The pay is marginal and you cannot survive, nor are any accomplishments acknowledged. DON'T even think about asking about more money as management thinks you should be grateful for working for them. Everyone is looking for another position and cannot wait to leave. This company will not survive in the long run.

Pros

Decent place to start your career. Opportunity to travel. Lots of young people. Good social scene. Can make good friends.

Cons

Won't offer benefits if it costs them anything. No 401K matching, dirt poor salary, no review periods so no one knows how they are progressing, totally unfair salary balance across news room, computers awful to the point that it makes newsroom uncompetitive, highly inexperienced management, especially ME. One editor in particular toxic to morale and make people deeply unhappy. That's passed down from the EIC, who everyone fears. Newsroom is full of fear. Reporters/Editors don't want to take risks because they are scared of EIC. That trickles down through the newsroom and results in people just doing enough to get by. Young people need to be encouraged and told that failure is just part of the job. That doesn't happen at all. IBT is a stepping stone, not a destination. If they could do more to treat people better and offer more benefits and salary they might gain a better reputation in the media world and some loyalty.

Pros

Great location, smart people surround you. I did sales support. You're involved in pitching to clients. Good ideas and great attention from top brands.

Cons

There is a massive chasm between the good ideas and implementation. As someone educated at a top university, I was personally hired to add to the sales support division. None of my experience or exposure was ever called upon despite my access to highly influential brands. Horrendous abuse of employees' time, especially younger ones. The worst part? Compensation is exceptionally low and management does not spend time building a close cohesive team. They took us all one by one and let us go from the job without any prior warning and when the fault was with the spending of the upper management itself.

Pros

The reporters actually all tend to be top notch – very smart, engaged and want to do good work. Same goes for the overworked section editors — they tend to be very knowledgable and actually want to do good journalism and help young reporters grow. The senior management, on the other hand, is terrible.

Cons

- The management is massively incompetent and the business model is unsustainable. - They do not value their top reporters or editors. The best employees all move on within a year of being hired. The company puts on a good front but is rotten at its core, as a result, the best reporters and editors quickly move on to freelancing, grad school or other publications. Basically anything to get out. - The company does not adequately insure for work-related accidents (broken/stolen cameras, travel related incidents, standard stuff in the line of journalism). - If you want to do real journalism you have to fight off the zombie content farming with a shovel.