Sunday, April 12, 2009

Sunday | April 12 | Your News & Comments

Can't find the right spot for your comment? Post it here, in this open forum. Real Time Comments: parked here, 24/7. (Earlier editions.)

23 comments:

  1. Lenny Dykstra missed his calling:
    He should have been a Gannett Executive Editor:
    http://men.style.com/gq/features/full?id=content_8558

    ReplyDelete
  2. I just read that article about Lenny (in the print edition of GQ; I am old school and have to hold a magazine or newspaper in my hands)and considering the picture that paints of Lenny, that is a very strong statement. I cannot imagine that all of the Gannett executive editors are that stupid and disgusting, although I can appreciate that yours is (and hence your anonymous comment).

    I am not a Gannett employee but considering the pressures in traditional print journalism and newspapers in particular, do you think that that turns the executive editors into such jerks? Is it a survival tactic?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Gannett wants to own their executive editors like indentured servants. Darwinian evolution does the rest.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Illegal Mexican's are being brought in to print the struggling papers.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Editor" and "Publisher"and "Newsrooms" are so passé, people. It's so 1700s, or 1800s, or even 1900s.

    Now we have Community Dialog Enhancers and General Managers and I.C.'s. And in ten years we've decimated a profession that lasted for 300.

    But hey, it's progress. All the internet's fault.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Gotta love Mike Lopresti. He flits around from major event (men's Final Four) to major event (The Masters) while rank-and-file reporters get laid off.

    When columnists go to major events and do little else, it reinforces a widely held view that these highly paid writers are elitist and bigoted.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I agree with Chucky in Jersey. He is so right. We shouldn't allow columnists to travel and write about big events, even though people want it. We should give the people what we want, not what they want.

    Then we can become totally obsolete.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Bigoted???

    ReplyDelete
  9. Huh? That's what Lopresti is paid to do -- cover major sporting events about write opinion columns, especially for Gannett papers that can't afford to send their own staff's people to a given event. He does a darn good job of it -- he's the best writer GNS, er, ContentOne has. I'm pretty critical of Gannett, but it's lucky (and the readers are lucky) to have him.

    ReplyDelete
  10. >>>Gotta love Mike Lopresti. He flits around from major event (men's Final Four) to major event (The Masters) while rank-and-file reporters get laid off.

    When columnists go to major events and do little else, it reinforces a widely held view that these highly paid writers are elitist and bigoted.

    -------------------

    ??

    What nonsense. It's called talent. This jealous and absurd post is another reason this blog is so ridiculous sometimes. Giving voice to those who don't know what they're talking about, while those who have something to contribute get drowned out...

    ReplyDelete
  11. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Everyone aspired to be a columnist back in my newsroom days. To write about whatever struck one's interest on any particular day, enlighten the masses by expressing your opinion and being out the door by mid-afternoon was the pinnacle of being a journalist. I envied and still envy those sports columnists who travel to the premiere events in each sport, who have expense accounts to live on, who are out of the daily grind of grunt journalism. I never made it to that level but I still am in awe and envy of those folks.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Envy seems to be at the heart of the original post. But disregarding the idiocy, the broader point might be worth considering.

    How can our newspapers justify paying the top-tier salaries of sports columnists, editorial writers, food critics, theater critics, gardening columnists, database reporters, etc., when basic, local or regional news is going uncovered?

    I know that is going to sound like I'm trying to start a features-vs-news argument. I'm not. I'm just wondering what the economic justifications are for paying freelancers to write about wine while we lay off reporters who write about tax increases and business closings.

    ReplyDelete
  14. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Great Dykstra story. Thanks.

    The only difference between Lenny and a Gannett EE or publisher is that they're slightly more cultured, and don't mingle their personal finances with the company coffers.

    The whole lack of vision, scattershot planning, lousy equpment and broken promises? That's Gannett to the core.

    ReplyDelete
  16. 9:07 should be yanked, imho.

    ReplyDelete
  17. This blog is finally dying. Gannett is on the mend and you won't see Jim or anyone highlight the wins because it surely means he won't be able to beg for $$.

    ReplyDelete
  18. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  19. 9:50 "Gannett is on the mend"?

    An asset manager in Chicago bought a lot of shares in the company that drove the price up. Nothing more. Gannett didn't do anything or the stock would have made a move earlier. He smelled blood ( Gannett blood) and made a move.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Pay no mind to Chucky. He was never a journalist, and he has no idea of what people think.

    ReplyDelete
  21. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  22. 7:05

    It's not the blog that is like that, it's the whole world. Get used to it. Btw, this isn't the "we all think exactly the same" blog.

    But, that said, I also get sick of the gay and rescue and tara comments, but I generally ignore them and read the worthwhile info.

    ReplyDelete
  23. "Gannett is on the mend and you won't see Jim or anyone highlight the wins because it surely means he won't be able to beg for $$."

    If this is what you conclude, then you do not understand that people have been thinking these thoughts about Gannett when the stock was at $100 per share. The foundational structure of the Gannett company since Neuharth has been inhumane towards its employees. Back then we did not have a place to vent.

    What will end this blog is either Gannett disappears as a company, or Gannett learns "something is rotten in Denmark" by the reason that this blog exists in the first place, and thus fixes its morale problem.

    ****

    And say what you will about Tara's job performance, but to use debased terms, such as I read here, is not necessary, or productive.

    ReplyDelete

Jim says: "Proceed with caution; this is a free-for-all comment zone. I try to correct or clarify incorrect information. But I can't catch everything. Please keep your posts focused on Gannett and media-related subjects. Note that I occasionally review comments in advance, to reject inappropriate ones. And I ignore hostile posters, and recommend you do, too."

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.