Thirty years after my first day at the FT, what’s changed? - FT中文网
登录×
电子邮件/用户名
密码
记住我
请输入邮箱和密码进行绑定操作:
请输入手机号码,通过短信验证(目前仅支持中国大陆地区的手机号):
请您阅读我们的用户注册协议隐私权保护政策,点击下方按钮即视为您接受。
FT商学院
Thirty years after my first day at the FT, what’s changed?

Looking at old newspapers, I realise there are no new stories, just new reporters

On January 9 1995, a gormless 25-year-old in a bad suit started work at the Financial Times. My preparation had been a degrading four-month training course in a dead former seaside resort, where I woke up each morning feeling dumber than the day before, but work was worse. The building’s windows didn’t open. Canteen lunch was revolting. When darkness fell in mid-afternoon, I realised that some adults never experienced sunlight on winter weekdays.

The work seemed dull and incomprehensible, yet the two poor sods babysitting me were still bashing on their plastic keyboards at 7pm, when the newspaper “went to bed”. We didn’t have a website then.

I trekked home that evening sensing I’d chosen the wrong employer. I did leave in 1998, crushed by the tedium of writing the daily currencies report, but I drifted back in 2002. This week is my 30th anniversary at the FT. To see how the paper had changed, I went to the British Library to find the edition of January 9 1995.

The library printed me a reader’s card with a brand-new photo. The picture confirmed that I had changed beyond recognition since 1995. I expected the FT would have too. As so often in my journalistic career, I was wrong.

When I fed the microfilm into the library’s machine, a newspaper popped up that looked startlingly like today’s: in its layout, the lengths of articles and the unshowy, untrendy, understated prose, written to be comprehensible to non-native English-speakers. Several of that day’s bylines were for colleagues still writing today.

What was most spookily familiar, though, was the content. The front-page lead that morning was about infighting within Britain’s ruling Conservative party over Europe. The government was also denigrating civil servants.

Another front-page story, by our Moscow bureau chief Chrystia Freeland (now potentially Canada’s next prime minister), recounted the brutal Russian invasion of Chechnya. In a photograph, demonstrators in Berlin held a sign saying, “Today Chechnya — tomorrow the whole north Caucasus.” There was “rising east-west tension over Chechnya and Moscow’s cancellation of German-Russian military manoeuvres”, but Germany’s defence minister said: “At this precise moment it would be wrong to scale down contacts.”

There’s a saying in journalism that there are no new stories, only new reporters. Certainly, reading that newspaper, I had a sense of news as an eternal cycle of repetition with minor variations. China was “facing a looming trade war with the US over infringement of patents and copyrights”. Madrid had ordered a “corruption probe”. A French Eurosceptic was running for president.

One columnist assailed what’s now called “woke” language: “Being dim, for example, is called attention deficit disorder if one is working class or mild dyslexia if middle class.” Scrolling the microfilm back a few days, I saw that Labour’s leader Tony Blair wanted “to drop threat of VAT on school fees”. History definitely rhymes.

There were occasional hints of the world of 2025. China was expanding currency trading “to broaden its fledgling market-style financial system”. And Europeans would need private pensions as they lived longer, or else “their social security systems will be beyond reform in the next century”.

Entirely absent from that edition, even from the section on “Media Futures”, is the internet. That May, FT.com launched. The internet would eventually devastate countless media, but the FT now has 1.4mn paying readers, which is about four times our daily circulation in 1995. Unwittingly, I had joined one of the only going concerns in journalism. I chose the right job. True, that partly reflects my lack of any alternative skillset: I wasn’t going to open the batting for England. More than that, though, I still identify with what I see as the FT’s mission: to cover economic, financial and political power. We mostly write about stuff that matters.

Thinking back to the two people who babysat me that first day, I no longer believe they were beaten-down wage slaves who had resigned themselves to this life. I think they bashed away all day because they cared about their work. One is still at the FT. The other, the exemplary Rod Oram, put in over 40 years in journalism before dying of a heart attack in New Zealand last March, aged 73, while training to cycle from Beijing to Birmingham.

Had I known on January 9 1995 that I’d still be here 30 years later, I would have been horrified. It actually hasn’t been so bad.

Find out about our latest stories first — follow FT Weekend Magazine on X and FT Weekend on Instagram

版权声明:本文版权归FT中文网所有,未经允许任何单位或个人不得转载,复制或以任何其他方式使用本文全部或部分,侵权必究。

科技巨头为什么对“通用人工智能”众说纷纭

通用人工智能被誉为硅谷下一个重大突破,但它究竟是一个科学目标,还是一个营销流行语?

洛克希德•马丁向英国推销导弹防御系统

美国防务集团希望在地缘政治紧张局势加剧以及美国投资“金穹”之际,为英国建造一个新的导弹防御系统提供帮助。

军事力量逐步就位,特朗普接近对伊朗发动打击

美国总统暗示将在数日内采取行动,美国已准备好能够打击福尔道地下核设施的部队。

普京召开的投资论坛未能吸引西方公司

俄罗斯的盟友们也只是向圣彼得堡派遣了低级别的官员和商人,但印尼总统是个例外。

微软准备退出与OpenAI的关键性谈判

ChatGPT开发商计划转型为营利性公司,促使这家软件巨头制定应对预案。

FT社评:特朗普需要慎重考虑伊朗问题上的命运抉择

美国总统可能会被拖入中东另一场寻求促成政权更迭的愚蠢行动中。
设置字号×
最小
较小
默认
较大
最大
分享×