Updated at 10:26 p.m. PT: Twice in the past 24 hours, readers have shared tales of top married Gannett executives getting busy with other married GCI executives -- sometimes, on company property. I witnessed that during my 20 years working for Gannett. I wonder how common it is -- and what sort of problems it can cause for the business itself?Use this link to e-mail your reply; see Tipsters Anonymous Policy in the sidebar, upper right. Or leave a note in the comments section, below. But in comments, please avoid giving any personally identifying information. I'm more interested in your thoughts on when this stuff is a problem for the business, too.
Noticed that you edited your profile and removed the statement "no axe to grind".With the approach and slant of recent posts, I'd say it was a well-timed and accurate deletion.
ReplyDeleteOn this story - I'm sure there have been hook-ups at the corporate level, as well as at any of the local sites at all levels. It's no different in Gannett than any other workplace.
Your recent posts do point out your intense need to find and dwell on the negative. As such, your credibility is zero, zilch, nada. Please adjust your Google metrics downward by one very uninspired reader.
Thank you for noticing! I deliver what readers have demonstrated they want: No management ass kissing. Isn't there too much of that going on already?
ReplyDeleteAmen to that, Jim.
ReplyDeleteThanks! Lately, my critics have not been displaying those marvelous employee "senses of humor" that CEO Craig Dubow bragged about in his annual letter to shareholders. Please see: http://tinyurl.com/2xz8s7
ReplyDeleteIf you are going to bring it up, why not name names? Why just the innuendo of impropriety? Are you going to publish the names or just let this hang out there as a smear without any backing.
ReplyDeleteI never said I wouldn't name names. I said I don't want readers identifying individuals by name in comments. I would need to verify that anyone had hooked up at work, and give them a chance to respond, before publishing that sort of thing.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if any of those that are critical of this blog and it's intentions could speak to the "good" things about working for Gannett and the wonderful things that Gannett does for the communities it serves. Looking for those that write the defensive comments to speak to all the virtues of Gannett. Be nice to know what they are defending.
ReplyDeleteOkay, this is over the top. can you spell "libel"?
ReplyDeleteC'mon, this is going too far. Who among us.....
ReplyDeleteJim, I think you've crossed the line on this one. While it wouldn't surprise me to learn of married GCI execs getting busy with one another, you can't pretend that GCI isn't the only company where such actions occur, and I would bet money that it's also happened among the rank-and-file employees at GCI and other companies.
ReplyDeleteWhat does it matter? I don't really care what the executives are doing in their personal lives. I care about what they are (or aren't) doing for the company and the industry.
This post showed that you really are just out to get GCI, no matter what. This is silly, juvenile nitpicking. You've stooped to a new low, one that I cannot respect. You're losing credibility fast.
Golly, jeepers! What has happened to everyone's sense of humor?!
ReplyDeleteIt’s unfortunate you have decided to take the low road.
ReplyDeleteIf you would have kept the “not axe to grind” policy you would be a more credible source of information. Any issues that you discuss or discover would be taken more seriously. If you are taken seriously you would increase the chance of creating some positive change in the company. (I am assuming you would want to happen as a result of your work)
By writing about “who is sleeping with who” you lose that credibility and can be labeled with some justification as vindictive, a fanatic, and a bit of a nut job. Your work will not be taken seriously and not have as much of an impact.
I urge you to reconsider and be more even handed in your approach. If Gannett only did “what people are interested in reading” then the front page would be non stop Britney and Paris coverage and you would be justifiably critical of them in your blog. You should not make the same mistake. You have the chance to do something good here, don’t blow it.
OK: Time out. First, I've tweaked the post to address some misconceptions about my intent.
ReplyDeleteI obviously must be more explicit about what I was trying to do here: I'm not interested in publishing names. I'm interested -- or, was interested -- in how widespread this is generally.
If I got 100 e-mails giving me explicit details about hook-ups, I'd consider writing a post that might say: I got a whole lot of e-mail on this, suggesting it's pretty widespread. And I might quote the writers, if they were willing, telling me why this was a significant business problem. But that's all it would have been.
Too many of you missed that point, which means I did a lousy job of explaining my intent in the first place. My bad.
You are going to call a time out now? To quote from your 12:41 post, "I never said I wouldn't name names."
ReplyDeleteEither way, what has this to do with the stock price, executive perks, or the decline in journalism at Gannett.
In fact, it has contributed to the failure of businesses. (And that's probably all I'm going to say.)
ReplyDeleteThis posting makes it sound as if you're jealous of the executives at Gannett and are desperate to rock the boat in any form or fashion. Talking about actions that are or are not taking place is fine, but talking about the personal sex lives is over the top. I'm very close to saying to goodbye to you blog.
ReplyDeleteFunny, but I'm aware of more than a few "work relationships" between managers, subordinates, etc. that have negatively impacted business decisions and employee morale.
ReplyDeleteAre those who protest that blind to the negative impact of these types of relationships or are you just afraid that you may be exposed - which doesn't appear to be the intent here?
Hence, it seems more than fair to discuss in generalities.
I work here at the Corporate,
ReplyDeletethere's really not much room for the executives to full around with each other. Their offices/conference rooms are surrounded by glass. Any enclosed rooms are monitored by security guards, etc.
This post just brings down the integrity of your blog, Jim.
I, for one, wish all the people continuing to threaten to say "goodbye to your blog" would just do so. We get it. You don't agree. There are plenty of us who do.
ReplyDeleteMe thinks thou doth protest too much.
To anon 9:45 - Yes. An echo chamber would be much better.
ReplyDeleteDude, this is exactly where Gannettblog needs to go. All the audit this, and tax returns that posts have been kinda heady. What we need is a little gossip break.
ReplyDeleteI can't say I've ever seen or heard of Gannettoids bumping uglies in the supply closet, but I sure would read about it.
I don't know about supply closets, but at my hinterlands site I've heard about parking lots, cubicles, business trips, and at home while the spouse is away. None of them lost their jobs over it, at least not officially.
ReplyDeleteIt is relevant to look at this. It's about integrity, stupid. I'm not talking morals here. Cheat on your spouse, what else will you cheat on. Not the kind of leadership I expect from highly paid executives in a company that can't seem to make one right decision.
ReplyDeleteamong other things, any time execs are doing the nasty on company time, they're depriving the company of their presumably more valuable skills -- the ones they supposedly were hired to use for the good of the corporation.
ReplyDeletealso, they may be putting the company at risk of some embarrassment and maybe even a sexual harrassment lawsuit or two.
as for other corporations, a big insurance company recently dumped an executive after finding out that he was like the proverbial sailor with a girl in every port -- he even had children by more than one such relationship. i'm not sure whether any of the women were employees of his company, but the company dumped him, basically, for conduct unbecoming . . .
Right next door to Corporate HQ is the Mclean Hilton, and it's been witnessed on several occasions of staffers hooking up and heading up to the hotel rooms. The Ritz Carlton is a five minute drive for you highly compensated employees.
ReplyDeleteJim, at the risk at imploding more ire and some distaste...you can check back at the time when Gannett was in a major acquisition mode...and expanding the number of Regional Offices, Presidents, and VP's. Since the last three CEO's are all males...and most of those named to slots were female...aside from Dickey...you've got a possible tale/tail to look into.
ReplyDeleteBut, gasoline prices are a more worthwhile trail.
Spitzer was and is not the only loose canon. Excuse the expression.
But so what, Gannett has always had a sordid reputation. Gains, revenues, and profit at any and all expense.
...and further, to make this even more dicey...you will not a single male, current or former, to comment on, allege, or allude that reverse sexual harrassment took place by a Gannett top executive.
ReplyDeleteIf you find one, maybe they should get 66 cents per mile and a few nights stay at the Days Inn in New York City.
yea right, everyones interest in this subject is only for the good of the company. Give me a break.
ReplyDelete