Tri-Met advertising for a new p.r. flack
The salary could run as high as $64,984 a year. Plus benefits, no doubt. Oh, the Tweets you'll Tweet!
| Posted at 1:48 PM | Permalink |
|
About
This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on February 4, 2011 1:48 PM.
The previous post in this blog was $30,500 damages for more Portland police brutality.
The next post in this blog is Have a great weekend.
Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.
Comments (21)
Uhhhhhhhhh, didn't Tri-Met actually mean to advertise for a "News Reporter"
ala METRO? Ya know some cigar smoking, whiskey drinkin' tough-as-nails,
no-nonsense ball buster fighting for truth, justice and the Amer..........
OH. Sorry.
Posted by paul | February 4, 2011 1:56 PM
Jack,
The "Plus benefits" should be in BOLD print,
please.
Posted by Abe | February 4, 2011 2:18 PM
Tweets? There's no mention of social media in the job description!
Posted by Thomas Le Ngo | February 4, 2011 2:25 PM
But is this a real job? Or is this yet another example of where they have to pretend that they didn't select one of Sam's college buddies months ago?
Posted by Texas Triffid Ranch | February 4, 2011 2:39 PM
Shame on you! You've got it all wrong! This is Tri-Met!
They hire Neil Goldschmidt's friends.
Posted by Jack Bog | February 4, 2011 2:41 PM
Why do we bother with buses and trains and the like.
Let's just convert TriMet to a "virtual" transit agency.
TriMet could become the latest in telecommuting.
Posted by Erik H. | February 4, 2011 2:59 PM
Neil Goldschmidt doesn't really have any friends, just minions, leveragers, and in-the-know dark-side string-pullers, especially the ones who pull his. What a sick circle of protoplasm.
Posted by Mojo | February 4, 2011 4:20 PM
Too much pay for the job as described.
Posted by Bluecollar Libertarian | February 4, 2011 5:59 PM
This must be the replacement to the TriMet PR lady that called people Teabaggers for speaking at TriMet Board meetings lately. Or maybe it's an addition because they want expand the name-calling programs. Will they ever learn?
Posted by lw | February 4, 2011 9:45 PM
Dang, I'm applying!
Posted by Daisy Chain | February 5, 2011 8:32 AM
lw,
When they cannot justify their actions, attacking those who speak truth will do. Throw everyone who doth protest into the same category and call them Teabaggers?
Posted by clinamen | February 5, 2011 9:42 AM
Can't keep the buses on the road but seem to have no problem hiring pencil necks.
Pathetic.....contemptible....deplorable...
ridiculous....pitiful.....and THE BEAT GOES ON!
Posted by al m | February 5, 2011 11:09 PM
Speaking of transit, this survey should be filled out by persons interested in this subject.
This is the last day to do so:
http://streetwise.kittelson.com/posts/119-help-us-improve-your-transit-system
Posted by al m | February 6, 2011 11:16 AM
As a PR person myself, I do think the job description is a tad on the "junior" side - someone should not get $65k for filing media clippings and reporting to the Director of Communications. That said, however, I couldn't help but get a little irked when I first saw this posting. Please don't lump all "PR" people into the "overpaid flack who tweets all day" category. Some of us are truly worth our $65k+ salaries, if not much more.
Posted by Amy | February 6, 2011 11:17 AM
Amy, how much of your income comes from the taxpayers? If the answer is "none," I don't care how much you get paid or how many people you employ.
The problem is government p.r. -- it's bleeding the taxpayers dry.
Posted by Jack Bog | February 6, 2011 11:27 AM
Why does government need advertising people in the first place?
Posted by Mr. Grumpy | February 6, 2011 3:42 PM
Amy,
My concern is with the government PR as well.
Especially if it is our dollars used to propagandize us and in some cases goes against our own interests.
Being prudent is needed as well. If short of money, why do all this PR work? I suspect much of it in Portland is being done these days by Sam Adam's direction, as he most likely plans to run for reelection. Often incumbents have this advantage.
Posted by clinamen | February 6, 2011 6:18 PM
Yes, why does government need PR people? I can't go anywhere else to get my street cleaned, get a building permit, get my water and sewer service, get police and fire service. Oh, I forgot, those services aren't what government is all about any more.
I wonder who government is competing against to require PR?
Posted by lw | February 6, 2011 6:23 PM
It may just be to puff themselves up about how great they are, how much they do for us and trying to convince us as well. No matter how much they spend, it doesn't change my opinion about them and how often they act against the citizen's interests.
Posted by clinamen | February 6, 2011 6:37 PM
My 2 cents...
Government isn't competing against anyone. It's all about propaganda, either to keep us going along with some agenda, or possibly to prevent too many us from raising our middle and leaving faster than they can lure replacements.
Posted by Mr. Grumpy | February 6, 2011 6:40 PM
Sorry for the late reply...
I agree with you re: the problem being paying high salaries for government PR, when used for frivolous self promotion of politicians and their pet projects. It was my knee-jerk reaction to defend the value of my livelihood, but alas, I'm not getting paid with tax dollars!
Posted by Amy | February 7, 2011 7:04 PM