I really can't emphasise that enough. Academics and students and the like may be able to sweet-talk people into granting an extension to a deadline. Not so in journalism.
That has the consequence that whatever else journalists and editors might be, they do make decisions quickly. It might be an idiotic decision, but at least it's quick.
Maybe to give a little example: Back in the day, when I was Editor of a number of publications, you had a time slot at the printers. You had to get the copy to the printer by that time, and they slotted you in. If you missed that, they had to stop the press, and restart it. That was expensive. The printer would charge the publisher for this, and the publisher took that out of the salary of the Editor. Typically, that would be £5-10K. As a consequence, the Editor would be well aware that missing deadline by 10 minutes could cost £10,000. That sort of thing makes one obsessive about ensuring deadlines are met.
Did I mention deadlines are important?
And yet I rarely see fictional editors who look as though missing a deadline is the greatest sin in the world.
The only thing I'll point out, having worked in newspapers (on the advertising side) is that you omitted the poor sad copy-editor, versus the "Editor", versus the "Editorial" folks; I've seen them get confused with each other.
The deadlines can be a bit looser if the paper in question does have their own presses, but only sort of.
Also, no one ever really gets to yell "Stop the presses".