In a meritocracy, actors who act well get good roles. They don't get to be journalists, too - a job that, in a meritocracy, should go to those who do journalism well.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
One of the best things about being an actor is that it's a meritocracy.
Some in journalism consider themselves apart from and to some extent above the people they purport to serve.
Politics demands certain skills honed by experience, just as journalism does, just as acting does.
There are a lot of really good skills you get from doing journalism - it completely changed my world and how I interact with other people.
There are two main jobs in acting - the first one is to be a good actor, and the second one is to convince everyone that you're a good actor.
When you work with actors, what you're hoping to absorb is good ways to be an actor as opposed to how to handle being famous.
I've played journalists before, and I have good friends who are journalists. I think being an actor is not very far from being a journalist. Because you investigate, you try to understand, you're asking questions, you're interested in the other.
When I was in college, I did sort of want to be a journalist. Being an actor, you kind of have the same interest. You go into a story, and you tell it from your point of view for people who aren't there. That's what an actor does with a character. But the real life is more more interesting.
I think to be a good actor you need either a good experience of life or education, or both.
I'm not that comfortable with actors receiving honours, partly because I think they ought to go to those who really help others.
No opposing quotes found.