Rembrant van Rijn,
National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.
Wikipedia lists about twenty forms of metafiction, but the type or trope that annoys me is the novel about a novelist.
Strikes me as too often as a case of write what you know taken to the artful, self-conscious excess that uncomfortably resembles Mary Sue-ism.
A writer (or a reporter) as a character's background occupation, on the other hand, does not impact my molars to quite the same degree.
In those cases, the actual practice/performance of their profession -- except in general terms -- is irrelevant to the story line and frequently appears as an explanation of why the character is at a certain place at a certain time, interested in a certain topic, or to justify their personal habits.
Thrillers sometimes portray journalists in pursuit of a hot story; romance sometimes present hermits as authors.
Need a nosy, mobile character, make him a reporter. Need an attractive and reclusive stranger in the Hebrides, make him a writer.
Mysteries with murder week-ends almost always have a writer to round out the list of suspects -- which is a little twee, now that I think of it.
Oddly enough, stories featuring radio or television performers don't irritate me at all.
I wonder if my reaction has something to do with the suspension of disbelief, is merely a reaction to a suspicion of self-aggrandizement, or a belief that the writer should remain invisible when penning his prose.
I don't roll my shoulders uncomfortably when a former soldier writes a novel that includes sword play, or an ex-cop writes violence.
I've seen novels.stories damned because the actions and/or language portrayed did not fit the reference /cultural knowledge of a particular critic.
In spite of the plain fact that, for example, all military units or PFs or any other micro culture do not function the same way, and do change over time.
So I have to ask, how fussy are you about the presence in a novel of an occupation in which you have had experience?