All of Bella's Comments + Replies

Here's the message that displays on their page if you have it turned on: 'The Dietary Profile service is currently unavailable while we build a new and improved service which will launch later this year. In the meantime please check individual product pages for further allergen information'

I'm not sure if it always said 'which will launch later this year' but I'm confident it's been broken since 2022 or so.

Sainsbury's used to offer this (called 'dietary profiles', maybe used to be offered in 2021 or so?) but it got broken at some point and they've never fixed it. They're already tagging new products as vegan or not, since they have a 'new + vegan' section, implying they wouldn't need to do any extra categorisation work — so I'm not sure why their dietary profiles are broken.

2
Bella
Here's the message that displays on their page if you have it turned on: 'The Dietary Profile service is currently unavailable while we build a new and improved service which will launch later this year. In the meantime please check individual product pages for further allergen information' I'm not sure if it always said 'which will launch later this year' but I'm confident it's been broken since 2022 or so.

Hey! This post feels very relevant for me (I'm Director of Growth at 80k, and manage a digital marketing team, haha!). We've spent $mns and years of staff time on growth + digital :)

Three major reasons we don't invest more: 
1. Low capacity to plan + execute campaigns (I failed to hire despite hundreds of hrs of effort in 2024);

2. Slow feedback loops on end-of-funnel outcomes we care most about (people changing their careers can take years)

3. Evidence suggesting that digital marketing is perhaps less likely than other growth channels to find the folks ... (read more)

5
Anna Pitner
Honestly, I think 80,000 Hours is one of the EA orgs that’s actually doing this relatively well. A lot of people’s first exposure to EA ideas seems to come through your content and digital channels, which already suggests meaningful impact. My intuition is that at some point there are diminishing marginal returns on performance-style digital growth. In for-profit contexts, when budgets get large enough, it often becomes rational to shift away from strictly measurable performance marketing toward less directly attributable channels, because those end up strengthening performance indirectly rather than replacing it. I wonder if something like that is happening here as well. I was also curious about your point on hiring capacity — do you think the difficulty was mainly a lack of candidates with the right skill set, misalignment with the role’s constraints, or something else? That part feels like an important bottleneck in its own right. And yes, I’d definitely be happy to stay in touch. If you ever find yourselves looking for extra help or outside perspective on this in the future, I’d be very interested to chat ;)

I think investing in [shortform] mediums would just be good money chasing after bad.

Interesting!! Curious for any more detail on why you think this, if it's not too annoying to write out :)

if you have in mind content like the highest-quality video essays on YouTube

Yep, that's one of the things I'd be super excited about!!

To that end, earlier this year I helped get started AI in Context, which has been heavily inspired by the awesome creators you mentioned above :)

It sure is time and resource-heavy to get the videos out (we've only managed two so far... (read more)

2
Yarrow Bouchard 🔸
My much belated reply! On why I think short-form social media like Twitter and TikTok are good money chasing after bad, i.e., the medium is so broken and ill-designed in these cases, I think the best option is to just quit these platforms and focus on long-form stuff like YouTube, podcasts, blogs/newsletters (e.g. Medium, Substack), or what-have-you. The most eloquent critic of Twitter is Ezra Klein. An from a transcript of his podcast, an episode recorded in December 2022: My life immediately improved after I quit Twitter in early 2021. In retrospect, I see Twitter as a harmful addiction. On the extremely rare few occasions where I’ve dipped into looking at Twitter since then, it’s always made me feel really yucky and frazzled afterward. But I still feel why it’s addictive. The same overall critique can be applied to TikTok without many modifications. Serious discourse on TikTok suffers in the same ways as on Twitter, for the same reasons. And any Twitter copycat, such as Bluesky, or TikTok copycat, such as Instagram Reels, has the same problems, since they’ve deliberately copied those platforms as closely as possible, including what makes them bad.

Concrete operationalization: There's a long tail of search terms that orgs like CEA could do ad spend on that would be terms generated by highly thoughtful people. I would bet they are underspending on these terms. Also focusing on what these terms translate to in other languages, and doing more deep talent search in other countries and trying to integrate those people into our network. Is anyone buying ads on Baidu for the Chinese equivalent of the word "utilitarianism"? There could be a lot of low-hanging fruit like this that hasn't been considered.

I wou... (read more)

Bella
45
16
15
4
3

EAs are trying to win the "attention arms race" by not playing. I think this could be a mistake.

  • The founding ideas and culture of EA was created and “grew up” in the early 2010s, when online content consumption looked very different.
    • We’ve overall underreacted to shifts in the landscape of where people get ideas and how they engage with them.
    • As a result, we’ve fallen behind, and should consider making a push to bring our messaging and content delivery mechanisms in line with 2020s consumption.
  • Also, EA culture is dispositionally calm, rational, and dry.
    • Th
... (read more)
7
QuantumForest
I do not understand why so many disagree with your take. I think it can both be true that EA conferences, the forum, long-form YouTube and books etc are great and keep the community active and interesting but that we also miss out on reaching new young people over the long term. I think that there are actually two reasons to be active in more channels: 1. Reach new people and keep the community alive over the long term. I mean people need to find out about the ideas and cause areas somewhere right? If they are not easily discoverable where people get their information and interests then that will be harder. Before people decide to read a whole book about something or attend a conference they need to be interested or curious about it in the first place. 2. Get EA ideas and cause areas out there in the general conversation to hopefully have some effect on policy and societal norms etc. I think there are lots of EA ideas or cause areas that are “memable” and interesting. It is just a matter of how one frames it. Sure it will most likely not be the most popular stuff but it could influence relevant discussions on economics or politics or whatever.  I think graphs like this one can be pretty mind-blowing[1] and making more people aware of these effects could have a good effect on the margin. I think the idea portrayed by the graph is very powerful: that one’s effort or giving could help 100 times more people if applied to the right target. I'm sure this concept could be shown in many other ways too. To take another random example of nerdy “non-EA” meme I have seen a few times is this graph. It sometimes appears in discussions regarding fusion power. I have no idea how accurate[2] it is but the main point is that is a pretty complex “meme” but in the right contexts it is relevant and could influence discussions.  Some other examples I can think about are the web comics xkcd or SMBC where particular strips get widely shared many years after they were published. There

I'm quite excited about EAs making videos about EA principles and their applications, and I think this is an impactful thing for people to explore. It seems quite possible to do in a way that doesn't compromise on idea fidelity; I think sincerity counts for quite a lot. In many cases I think videos and other content can be lighthearted / fun / unserious and still transmit the ideas well.

An additional reason EAs may not be playing the attention arms race is that they may be persuaded by the fidelity model of spreading ideas.

Whether this is true or not depends on what specifically you mean by it. If by attention-grabbing content you mean:

  • Short-form vertical video (TikTok, Instagram Reels, YouTube Shorts)
  • Short-form text a.k.a. microblogging (Twitter, Bluesky, Mastodon, Threads)

Then I think it’s not true. I think investing in those mediums would just be good money chasing after bad.

On the other hand, if you have in mind content like the highest-quality video essays on YouTube, such as:

... (read more)

I see this take a lot.

My immediate response is fourfold:

a) a lot of EA's core worldview philosophy is about doing boring stuff (that works), and so we attract people with an aesthetic repulsion to overmarketing that stick here and contribute highly. It's not clear that standard marketing strategies work for something like EA without making such people more likely to leave, so I would be hesitant to propose changes to the current setup.

b) the School of Moral Ambition is already doing essentially a more marketed version of EA. I highly recommend anyone inter... (read more)

What's "SMA" in this context?

2
calebp
sorry - school for moral ambition

This was a really great post — articulated lots of things I've thought but never found the time to properly write up :) Thanks for your work and for helping make it more transparent!

So far, the video's actually on a stronger trajectory than the previous one — our last video got 7k views in its first 11.5 hours, whereas this video has 9.8k views in its first 11.5hrs :)

I do think it's possible it gets its reach throttled because of the content, though. We tried to do everything we could to make it less likely without materially harming the message we wanted to get across (such as censoring hurtful words, and not telling the story in an exaggerated or sensationalised way).

1
LT🔸
Thank you for the correction! I think what threw me off was the previous video’s impressive 6M views by comparison. I just spent some time looking at examples of how highly successful videos from smaller channels often perform, and I think my perception of the relationship between initial performance and total views was miscalibrated because of how I've observed popular videos from well-established channels performing.

When I was dealing with a significant + upsetting personal situation last year, I was surprised by how much everyone who I told about it was like "Ah, yeah, something kinda like that happened to me as well. It was really rough." Some had very applicable advice, others were just commiserating, but I mostly wanted to highlight my agreement with Julia's post!!

You're not alone; people will understand; it's normal & human to have this kind of thing happen.

Thanks for doing this really important work :) I think it's great that you prioritised hard around getting signups at club fairs & around outreach near the start of the year! Sprints like this are super tough but I think are probably the right call for most organisers <3

I guess I think the main thing your analysis could be missing out is the quality / delivery of the message in 2024 versus 2025. I don't know how you decided on what to say, but e.g. I remember getting very different responses at my club fair based on whether I asked "What's the world... (read more)

I'm sorry this happened to you — I hate stepping on snails. Whenever I walk on paths and it's raining, I take extra care to look where I'm going.

I also move snails off paths if I have the time, though beware: if you pick an exposed snail up by its shell directly, you can cause them to detach from the shell internally, which can kill them. Instead, you should tap on the shell to make them retreat inside (they fear a predator), then safely move them.

1
Shrilaxmi 🔸
This is REALLY useful info, thank you!

Thanks, this is a good point!! I think my 'structural reasons' list still basically applies to a less ambitious vision, though (but they're all less of a big deal cos you're doing less).

They're both great episodes, though — relistened to #138 last week :)

FWIW the piece didn't strike me as having the hallmarks of LLM-written prose, just as a counter-anecdote :)

Answer by Bella5
1
0

I think it'd help if you spelled out more how you think these views contrast. They seem obviously consistent to me (if you have totalist views in population ethics, you think less suffering would be good).

1
Ze
Thanks for the comment. It is consistent indeed, you are right. I was trying to argue, solely focusing on reduction of suffering when it comes to animals may be inconsistent with the totalist views but in fact it seems plausible to say that reduction of suffering in animals is the best way to increase total utility of their well-being.

if someone doesn’t believe themselves to be a good enough fit, perhaps they’re best-placed to know that about themselves

I disagree — I think some people are just naturally under-confident, in a way that doesn't correlate particularly well with their actual skill. For example, see these seven stories written up by my lovely colleague Luisa :)

I’d like to know if any of the paid jobs advertised on 80,000 Hours receive very low or zero applications.

Yeah, I don't have that data sadly since it's with all the different orgs running those rounds. I've run 5... (read more)

2
SiobhanBall
Yes, some people experience IS which isn't a reflection of their actual skill. Data no, but it would be interesting to ask. It would surprise me if any of your job postings get the very zero or low number that you mentioned before.  When you opened up those rounds, did you consider near-misses from prior rounds or your professional networks first before deciding that a full open round was necessary each time? How do orgs make that decision?   
Bella
67
21
5
3
2
3

Two very quick thoughts:

  1. I think maybe you and I differ on the number / variety of roles I'd be excited for readers of this Forum to apply to. It might be true that roles at e.g. CEA or 80k get many applicants (I think our record was somewhere around 500 applicants, for a recent advisor round, but I could be wrong), but I bet that there are tons of roles that get very low or zero applications from among readers of this Forum that could nevertheless be very impactful.

As an intuition pump: there are currently 715 jobs on our job board. How many of those a... (read more)

Hi Bella, thanks for engaging! I appreciate your time and input.

1. Besides big central orgs, I’ve applied for roles at small orgs, newly-incubated orgs, somewhat fringe ‘we identify as EA-adjacent but not full EA’-type orgs. Also across cause areas. What they all have in common is that they each received 100’s of applicants. I would say the majority were in the 300-400 range.

2. I’m not saying that they’re getting 100’s of EA applicants, but 100’s of applicants overall. I suspect that many of those have been brought in on the tide of ‘how to have an impactf... (read more)

These guys absolutely worked their butts off to make this video, and I think the results show it :') Thanks Chana, Aric, Phoebe, Sam, and everyone for making something I'm so so so excited for the world to see!!

Thanks for this post!

Something it looks like you didn't consider, and I'd be interested in your views on, are the arguments raised by this post.

Basically, the view I've come to in recent years is we are almost totally in the dark about the overall sign of eating wild-caught fish.

I still stick with veganism for some of the reasons you raise in the 'moral progress' section, but I think given current tech / welfare science, it's very hard to feel confident in a conclusion either way.

3
Chris Popa
Thanks for bringing that post into the conversation! We really appreciate the cautious approach it advocates and agree that there's a great deal of uncertainty when it comes to understanding the full welfare implications of wild-caught fish. That said, we think the situation with sardines and anchovies might be somewhat different from many other species. These small pelagic fish are already being caught at or near maximum catch levels, primarily to produce feed for farmed salmon. So increasing human consumption wouldn't lead to more fishing, but rather to a diversion of existing catch from salmon feed to direct human food. This shift could reduce the scale of salmon farming, thereby lowering both the direct suffering of farmed fish and the wider ecological harms associated with aquaculture. Because these small pelagic fish are already being caught (unlike species like tuna, which are mostly caught for direct human consumption) the food web effects of this shift may be more or less neutral. And while anchovies do eat krill, which might be sentient, this concern may be outweighed by the positive ripple effects of reducing salmon farming. On the human side, sardines and anchovies may help some people stick to a veganish diet by improving nutrient intake and reducing reliance on supplements or costly alternative proteins, which could further reduce harm overall.
Bella
4
0
0
50% disagree

Morality is Objective

 

I was unable to come up with a non-assertive, non-arbitrary-feeling grounding for moral realism when I tried very hard to do this in 2021-22. 

 

My vote isn't further towards anti-realism, because of:

  • Some uncertainty about what people might think I mean by 'objective' (I think I have specific, unchanging, moral reasons to do particular things)
  • I was a committed realist before 2021, so maybe I'll become convinced the other way! But I guess not.
2
Bentham's Bulldog
How is this different from, say, the external world?  Like, in both cases you'll ultimately ground out at intuitions, but nonetheless, the beliefs seem justified. 

IIUC, polls this far out from an election aren't generally trustworthy, so I don't currently think it's particularly likely they'll win.

I'd be pretty excited about 80k trying to do something useful here; unsure if it'd work, but I think we could be well-placed. Would you be up for talking with me about it? Seems like you have relevant context about these folks. Please email me if so at bella@80000hours.org :D

I strongly agree with this part:

[T]he specifics of factory farming feel particularly clarifying here. Even strong-identity vegans push the horrors of factory farming out of their heads most of the time for lack of ability to bear it. It strikes me as good epistemic practice for someone claiming that their project most helps the world to periodically stare these real-and-certain horrors in the face and explain why their project matters more – I suspect it cuts away a lot of the more speculative arguments and clarifies various fuzzy assumptions underlying

... (read more)

I think this is just Matt's style (I like it, but it might not be everyone's taste!). I think the SummaryBot comment does a pretty great job here, so maybe read that if you'd like to get the TL;DR of the post.

More anonymous questions!

How much weight is given to location? It seems that UK/US-based organisations within EA often claim to be open to remote candidates around the world but seldom actually make offers to these candidates (at least from what I’ve seen/heard over the years)

I think I'd give quite a bit of weight against a candidate if they never had the ability to visit the office. But I think if someone lived overseas but e.g. could spend a couple of weeks here every 3-6 months, it's not a big downside.

I'm not sure which organisations specifically y... (read more)

I agree with the substance but not the valence of this post.

I think it's true that EAs have made many mistakes, including me, some of which I've discussed with you :)

But I think that this post is an example of "counting down" when we should also remember the frame of "counting up."

That is — EAs are doing badly in the areas you mentioned because humans are very bad at the areas you mentioned. I don't know of any group where they have actually-correct incentives, reliably drive after truth, get big, complicated, messy questions like cross-cause prioritisatio... (read more)

8
kuhanj
Thanks for the feedback, and I’m sorry for causing that unintended (but foreseeable) reaction. I edited the wording of the original take to address your feedback. My intention for writing this was to encourage others to figure things out independently, share our thinking, and listen to our guts - especially when we disagree with the aforementioned sources of deference about how to do the most good.  I think EAs have done a surprisingly good job at identifying crucial insights, and acting accordingly. EAs also seem unusually willing to explicitly acknowledge opportunity cost and trade-offs (which I often find the rest of the world frustratingly unwilling to do). These are definitely worth celebrating.  However, I think our track record at translating the above into actually improving the future is nowhere near our potential.  Since I experience a lot of guilt about not being a good enough person, the EA community has provided a lot of much-needed comfort to handle the daunting challenge of doing as much good as I can. It’s been scary to confront the possibility that the “adults in charge” don’t have the important things figured out about how to do the most good. Given how the last few years have unfolded, they don’t even seem to be doing a particularly good job. Of course, this is very understandable. FTX trauma is intense, and the world is incredibly complicated. I don’t think I’m doing a particularly good job either.  But it has been liberating to allow myself to actually think, trust my gut, and not rely on the EA community/funders/orgs to assess how much impact I’m having relative to my potential. I expect that with more independent thinking, ambition, and courage, our community will do much better at realizing our potential moving forward.
Bella
45
17
1
4

Strongly agree with this well-articulated point.

Sometimes friends ask me why I work so hard, and I don't know how to get them to understand that it's because I believe that it matters — and the fact that they don't believe that about their work is maybe a sign they should do something else.

I got another anonymous question! :)

In the post about 80K’s pivot to AGI, you discuss active headhunting for specific roles relevant to AGI. To what extent do you expect a candidate in this role (and 80K’s outreach more broadly) to focus on your historic audience (ambitious, altruistic young people) vs active outreach to those with relevant skills for making AGI go well (e.g. ML professionals, lawyers)?

The kind-of-annoying but true answer is "some of both!"

I expect that a reasonably high proportion of our new outreach efforts will be focused on trying ... (read more)

I got the following anonymous question:

Heya Bella! When is the preferred start date for engagement specialist role? And, how late a start would you be willing to accept?

The preferred start date is basically as soon as possible after we conclude the evaluation process!

But, we understand folks will have notice periods, and other obligations that might mean they need to wait a while.

I think needing to wait e.g. several months is a (significant-ish) downside, but we'd be willing to do so for the right applicant!

Ah — thanks so much David for adding the more recent link!! I'll add that into the job ad on our site too :)

Bella
23
13
0
2

I loved your telling of de Sousa Mendes' story — thanks for sharing it. The moral courage he showed is really beautiful to me :)

Just speaking for myself — I'm not a college student, but I'm totally happy to get meeting requests where the only point is to hang out / meet the person! Sometimes these kinds of meetings are awesome :) But I'd prefer the person to send a connection request saying that rather than not have any message attached.

By the way, it looks like there might be some problem with the Forum UI here, as this post has some text suggesting that, since writing this comment, I changed my mind from "29% agree" to "14% agree." But I haven't intentionally changed my vote on the top banner, or changed my mind.

2
Toby Tremlett🔹
That's odd - to me I'm still just seeing your first vote. I'll send this to Will to check out. 
Bella
9
5
0
29% agree

I agreed, but mostly because of my unfortunately-dim view of the tractability of work increasing the value of futures where we survive.

2
NickLaing
Me too Bella, see my comment above
2
Bella
By the way, it looks like there might be some problem with the Forum UI here, as this post has some text suggesting that, since writing this comment, I changed my mind from "29% agree" to "14% agree." But I haven't intentionally changed my vote on the top banner, or changed my mind.

(I didn't read all the comments so someone else might have said this already)

I think this post is admirable for trying to persuasively correct a mistake you see people making — but I end up disagreeing because of equivocation between end factory farming and end factory farming within our lifetimes.

I think the goal is to end factory farming, & my sense is most of the harms you're worried about only accrue when people have an unrealistic sense of how likely that is overall (not guaranteed) & how soon that might happen (maybe not for a very long time,... (read more)

9
ElliotTep
Yeah I agree with this and wish I was clearer from the get go. 
Bella
12
3
0
1

Thanks for writing this Zach! The broad strokes of the dynamics here are not news to me (I work at 80k which is a project of EV) but lots of the detail was novel and feels good to know.

By my count, animal welfare is 100x more neglected than global health (Edit: global development, not global health — my mistake). I'm unsure how much bigger it is in scale (given that making trades between humans and animals is hard) — but I'd guess it's very very much larger in scale.

I'm not on the podcast team but just quickly jumping in to say we do release highlights on the 80k After Hours feed! Not sure if they're planning one for this episode but it'd be a good candidate, I agree!

Edit: sorry, we actually release highlights episodes for every main feed episode — my bad for the misinfo!

Hey Emily, I'm sorry to hear you've had trouble figuring out how your broad skill set fits in.

For the roles I'm hiring for right now, specific experience is less relevant than evidence of the most important skills for the role. Copying directly from the job description for the Head of Marketing role, for example:

  • A strong interest in effective altruism, longtermism, and/or having a big, positive impact in the world — ideally with experience in applying EA principles in real-world decisions
  • Strong judgement; the ability to consider complex strategic questions
... (read more)
1
Emily Brown
Thank you so much for this insightful response! This is exactly the kind of information I was hoping for. I really appreciate you breaking down how you evaluate candidates and what you're looking for in applications. Your explanation helps me understand how to better showcase my skills and experiences in a way that aligns with EA organizations' needs. I'm truly excited about the potential to contribute to high-impact roles, and I hope my enthusiasm and diverse skill set will shine through in future applications. Thank you again for fostering such an informative discussion. This has been incredibly valuable!

Hi Pranshul,

Thanks for your comment, and I'm really glad to hear you'd be excited about working at 80k!

I think being a new high school graduate is not a dealbreaker for us / doesn't directly rule you out, so you'd be very welcome to put in an application on our website!

However, for full transparency's sake, I do think I should say that I'd guess it will be a fairly significant downside compared to candidates with more experience, and I'd be somewhat surprised if ended up hiring someone with no prior work experience or tertiary education.

Hey Batur,

Thanks for your detailed & thoughtful questions!

I'll answer in order:

  1. For the rounds I'm running, I'll reach out to candidates we're moving forward with either just before or shortly after applications close on the 18th and 25th August.

  2. I haven't yet confirmed precisely what all the stages of the application will look like — it'll probably depend on the applications I get, and might vary a bit from person to person. But to give you a sense, for the last hiring round I ran, we had the initial application (3 substantive questions), then a p

... (read more)

Hey Vincent! Thanks for your question :)

I think that there are lots of diffuse and hard-to-directly-measure benefits of having employees work from our London office. The main one that I'm especially excited about is the person in this role absorbing — and contributing to — our team culture, which I think is really helpful for keeping us as an organisation aimed at producing the most impactful outcomes.

I'm somewhat unsure this is the right attitude overall, and we are open to remote applicants (& many of the applications we've gotten so far are from remote candidates).

7
Vincent van der Holst
Thanks Bella, I agree there are certainly benefits to on-site. In recruitment scoring I give additional points for proximity, so when I have equally scoring candidates the candidate in our city would win. Usually remote wins in our model, but the proximity scoring depends on the role (e.g. someone doing physical events would almost certainly have to be on-site).  Ultimately it depends a lot on the company and the role, but thanks for explaining and I think it's good to have both remote and on-site open. 

Thanks so much for your questions! I'll answer them in order:

For me, the precise wording of your CV is not at all important. I mostly look at CVs to get a sense of the candidate’s prior experience, so if you wanted to highlight parts of your work experience which seemed relevant, that’d be cool, but it doesn’t seem necessary.

In general, titles at 80k are very much up for negotiation, with a couple of constraints:

  1. We have some words that we use in titles which refer to specific groups, such as ‘director’ or ‘head of’ — and you can’t use them if you’re not a
... (read more)

Here's another anonymous question I got:

How do you like people to approach their CVs? (Particularly in terms of successful candidates, or even just what gets people through to the next round at least)
e.g. Using the same words as you did in the JD, or different ones? With the I did X by doing Y which led to Z impact formula? And does the latter have to be numbers
Also, is the Head of Video title negotiable?
Lastly, how does the salary scale work e.g. 1y of exp vs 10 years

I'll respond in a comment!

2
Bella
Thanks so much for your questions! I'll answer them in order: For me, the precise wording of your CV is not at all important. I mostly look at CVs to get a sense of the candidate’s prior experience, so if you wanted to highlight parts of your work experience which seemed relevant, that’d be cool, but it doesn’t seem necessary. In general, titles at 80k are very much up for negotiation, with a couple of constraints: 1. We have some words that we use in titles which refer to specific groups, such as ‘director’ or ‘head of’ — and you can’t use them if you’re not a director or a programme lead! 2. We generally want the title to give a reasonable impression about the kind of work done in the role (so, the head of video couldn’t have the title ‘head of podcast’ or something). The salary formula has lots of inputs, so it’s not easy to say ‘you’d be paid £x more per year of experience.’ However, to give you a sense, for the ‘marketer’ role, someone with no relevant prior experience would be offered approximately £58,000 per year; someone with four years of relevant prior experience would be offered approximately £65,000 per year; and someone with ten years of relevant prior experience would be offered approximately £76,000 per year.

Thanks for your question and for giving some detail on your situation!

It's not a hard requirement that the Head of Video be able to spend time in London (though we do prefer it for the same reason we prefer all our staff to be in London — so that they can both absorb and contribute to team culture!).

There is an additional complication about videos, which is that if we're making videos, we'll likely need to film them and/or record audio in some particular location. So, it is a requirement that the Head of Video would be able to arrange that happening...some... (read more)

An anonymous user submitted the following question to me via my Admonymous:

Hey,

I see for the Head of Video role there is a need for significant time to be spent in London. I am disabled and a wheelchair user that is exceptionally interested in the position, but wondered how much time would be needed and what support would possible be available? I live in the Cotswolds currently, and I love the area and lifestyle that offers so would prefer not to move away from here if at all possible. My biggest issue is I do not currently have a wheelchair that makes me

... (read more)
2
Bella
Thanks for your question and for giving some detail on your situation! It's not a hard requirement that the Head of Video be able to spend time in London (though we do prefer it for the same reason we prefer all our staff to be in London — so that they can both absorb and contribute to team culture!). There is an additional complication about videos, which is that if we're making videos, we'll likely need to film them and/or record audio in some particular location. So, it is a requirement that the Head of Video would be able to arrange that happening...somehow! I'd guess that a Head of Video would want to be physically present for filming, at least some of the time, which would mean that they'd need to arrange it to happen in a location that is accessible to them and to whoever else would be involved in the filming. I guess it might be hard to do that in the Cotswolds (?) since you might need to arrange travel to the Cotswolds for a bunch of people, but definitely not impossible! I hope that gives you some more context on how location might constrain applicants to the role, & please feel free to ask followups on Admonymous if anything is unclear!

Hey Helena — thanks for your question!

I'm happy for generalists to apply to the marketer position — I don't think prior marketing experience is required to excel in the role, so long as you're excited to learn the relevant skills!

You're certainly welcome to apply to both! We'll typically share application materials internally where it seems decision-relevant, but otherwise, the applications are progressed separately.

If I were you, I might spend some time thinking about if one of the roles seems better suited to you based on your skills & the type of wo... (read more)

1
HelenaR
Thanks Bella, that's super helpful! Good to know. I did also think it would be better to work out which role interests me more. I was leaning more towards the marketer position based on skills and interest, particularly with the varied responsibilities and skills - I love being able to a range of different tasks/projects in a role. Thanks again

Thanks for your question, and for reaching out to me even though you felt hesitant!

You're right that the job description mentions interest in effective altruism and longtermism, and that our staff often have backgrounds in EA or related areas.

However, I think that if 80k only ever hired people who had previously had roles which were legibly EA — or excluded people who'd ever had a harmful career — we'd likely turn people away who could have been excellent in the role, and we'd be making a mistake. So, I don't think you should think you're unqualified if yo... (read more)

Load more