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)。如果该手机号尚未注册,将自动创建 FT中文网账号。短信可能需要几分钟送达,验证码15分钟内有效,请耐心等待:
请您阅读我们的用户注册协议和隐私权保护政策,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。

特朗普为何直击泽连斯基要害?

卢斯:无论美国盟友多么敦促特朗普支持乌克兰,他都无法原谅乌克兰领导人让他在交易能力上显得无能。

巴基斯坦在沙特对也门的战争中面临艰难抉择

防务协定和对沙特的财务依赖,使巴基斯坦几乎没有回旋余地,无法不被卷入与胡塞武装的冲突。

谁在面试你——是HR,还是网安部门?

奥康纳:利用AI进行求职欺诈的行为,迫使原本人情味十足的人力资源领域不得不与疑心重重的网络安全部门合作。

专访扎克伯格:Meta已跻身人工智能技术前沿

在投入巨资挑战AI领域的竞争对手后,这位科技亿万富豪力推Meta新发布的Muse Wonder模型。

沙特机场遭突袭后,王储的经济愿景堪忧

机场遭袭可能对沙特的国家形象以及吸引外国投资者和游客的能力造成更持久损害,而这两者对王储经济计划的成功都至关重要。

美国经济是否像其股市一样“狭窄”?

美国股市屡创新高,但全靠AI交易支撑。那么美国经济呢?也全都依赖AI吗?
设置字号×
最小
较小
默认
较大
最大
分享×