Pros
There are some good people working there, trying their best. Good pay and benefits. In fact, some people there may not be aware of how good they have it.
Cons
Deeply unpleasant team dynamics in the communications and editorial teams, driven from the top down. A contradictory mix of over-reliance on process, or no process being followed at all, with managers involving themselves too much in the day-to-day work of their teams, or being checked out and unaware of what was going on. The happy medium between these two points can be found elsewhere, but not here.
There was a real culture of scrutiny rather than trust. Senior leaders seemed more interested in appearances than actual outcomes. Micromanagement was the norm. People obsessed over minor details instead of seeing the bigger picture, and any attempt to work differently or ask for clarity was treated as a weakness. Pressure was applied to members of management to make atmosphere unpleasant for people they deemed to be underperformers, rather than looking at how they could support those people. Poor behaviour overlooked if a member of the SLT was well-liked.
The environment wasn’t emotionally safe. Feedback felt weaponised rather than constructive, and communication from leadership was often unclear or contradictory. Over time, it became a place where anxiety and burnout were seen as part of the job, rather than symptoms of a broken culture.