Pros
My three years at the New York Post and Page Six made one thing very clear: hierarchy ruled everything. Opportunities, growth, and even pay often felt tied less to performance and more to who had the closest relationships with senior staff. Management was generally lenient, but direct communication was inconsistent at best.
Cons
In an effort to “bring back office culture,” the company implemented a return-to-office schedule, first three days a week, later four. Ironically, walking into the newsroom on most days meant stepping into near silence. Despite leadership insisting that in-office energy was essential, many higher-ups were rarely seen on Fridays, while those below them were expected to be there without exception.
As for Page Six, it somehow manages to distance itself—at least stylistically—from the broader conservative, often sensational tone of its parent outlets. Yet even with that distance, it still leans heavily into flashy, click-driven coverage that can feel more like noise than news. It’s a strange blend: a brand that prides itself on entertainment reporting done with “integrity,” while publishing stories that rarely say much of substance beyond the headline.
Culturally, the environment often felt like a real-life spin-off of Succession, complete with annual reminders that raises would be capped at around 2%—this while the parent conglomerate owns more than a hundred outlets across multiple countries. Still, that tiny bump did occasionally make a Trader Joe’s splurge feel possible, if the price was right.
Overall, the journalism was mediocre, the work was manageable, and the job paid the bills—but the experience highlighted a workplace where hierarchy overshadowed merit, communication lagged, and morale was paper-thin.