Wednesday, May 06, 2009
Wednesday | May 6 | 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.)
51 comments:
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.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
How much of it really matters!
ReplyDelete(from a laid off, ousted, outta work ex-Gannetteer - or is it Gannettoid, it's not in the stylebook.)
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeletehey Jim anyword on Susan Ihne and her lawsuit against our good friends and Gannett
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete1:28, i always liked gannettnik because it keeps the accent on the correct syllable. you can take the copy editor out of the desk, but you can't take the desk out of the copy editor, i guess.
ReplyDeleteby any name, many of big g's employees were better than the corporation deserved.
by any name, many of big g's employees were better than the corporation deserved.
ReplyDelete5/06/2009 7:34 AM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hear, hear!
I am not 11:55, but he and/or she (that's a joke) made excellent points. I've always got the impression that Jim and others on here don't even know who the real players are or understand the structure of the former newspaper division, now USCP, which rules our business lives.
ReplyDeleteHow much more credible would be a blog that helps you understand that!
But all Jim says is a sassy, 'Name 5.' The tone sounds like a playgroung nanny-nanny-boo-boo.
Jim: you really need a break. How could this not be exhausting? No vacations. No furloughs. But it's got you sounding petty and paranoid.
Here's who is making the big decisions these days, all reporting up to Bob D.
At the top, Evan Ray and Michelle Krans. Both doing a hell of a good job under great pressure. Next is Kate Marymont, not a senior VP as the other two, but still with much power. Jim Lenahan is very influential. (Michael Maness is not in USCP, nor is Saridakis.) Other players, influential only in their disciplines, are Austin Ryan, operations, and Steve Simpson (marketing).Advertising awaits a new head.
They're all good people, some more than others, of course.
How about learning about them and what they're doing instead of slinging slurs at some faceless, meaningless enemy called corporate?
And don't forget the four group presidents. Very capable leaders. Can you even name them? Consider it a quiz.
by any name, many of big g's employees were better than the corporation deserved.
ReplyDelete5/06/2009 7:34 AM
=========
And many of them, my former colleagues, are still committing journalism every day at Gannett sites.
I salute their ability to do good work with fewer coworkers and other resources. They might grumble, but they're still cranking it out.
Know what I like? Taking a chance. After leaving Gannett in September as part of the layoffs, I got a new job. But that's not what I like. What I like is buying 3000 shares of Gannett at $2.35 a couple months ago. I have a sell order in on the limit of $4.65, guaranteeing a cool $6,800 plus profit after commissions. Suddenly I have no hatred for Gannett anymore.
ReplyDeleteI'm really enjoying my furlough this week. If I could do this and get paid ...
ReplyDeleteReally, Lenahan is a big shot? That's awesome! Just a few years ago he was editing a tiny startup weekly 'zine at The Courier-Journal in Louisville. Nice to see that the merit system is still alive for the rising stars out there (at least for one of them)
ReplyDelete8:56 am:
ReplyDelete1. Curtis Riddle, publisher at Wilmington, Del. East Group.
2. Michael Kane, Indianapolis, Interstate Group.
3. Carol Hudler, Fort Myers, Fla., South Group. (Note: I had to look up Hudler, because I couldn't remember her last name.)
4. Laura Hollingsworth, Des Moines, West Group.
Now, here's what I'd like: a list showing which papers fall in each of these four subdivisions.
Much better avatar,Jim, and I'm liking the font.
ReplyDeleteWell, just 5 days to go before Fort Collins shuts down printing. Then we are at the mercy of the DNA. Let's see how long we survive after May 11.
ReplyDeleteUSCP - 5 people making things happen
ReplyDelete1) Colleen Brewer
2) Bill Day
3) Jeff Bergin - until EOD
4) Jim Lenahan
5) Steve Simpson
Reason for stock surge this morning?
ReplyDeleteMCLEAN, Va.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Gannett Co., Inc. (NYSE: GCI) today announced the expiration and results of its private exchange offer for its 5.75% Notes due 2011 (the “2011 notes”) (CUSIP No. 364725AE1) and its 6.375% Notes due 2012 (the “2012 notes”) (CUSIP No. 364725AC5) (collectively, the “Old Notes”). The expiration for the exchange offer occurred at 5:00 p.m., New York City time, on May 5, 2009 (the “Expiration Date”). The settlement date of the exchange offer is expected to occur on May 7, 2009.
As of the Expiration Date, according to Global Bondholder Services Corporation, the depositary for the exchange offer, the Company received valid tenders from holders of approximately $44 million aggregate principal amount of 2011 notes and approximately $193 million aggregate principal amount of 2012 notes.
“We are very pleased with the results of the exchange offer. As a result of this opportunistic transaction, almost 25% of our outstanding bonds (exclusive of the May 2009 maturity) will have a maturity date extending into 2015 or 2016,” said Gracia C. Martore, executive vice president and chief financial officer.
Another example of how to torpedo circulation and advertiser confidence- Today, The Arizona Republic runs the usual congratulatory ads regarding growing Sunday circulation. But, ran more ads for other places to advertise or go versus the print newspaper. Full page ad for azcentral, and ads for moms site as well as the reoccurring az magazine (soon to be another failed internal magazine that will confuse advertisers and bleed cash like the previous attempts). I love when the marketing department gets their hands on some of these stupid products and applies the most unusual journalistic touches. Can you say "Biffy is wearing a smart crop top"? I'll bet you can.
ReplyDeleteThis is 8:56 again, back to award Jim his gold star for getting 100 percent on the group presidents quiz. No points removed for looking up Carol's last name; good editors do and should look up information.
ReplyDeleteBut did you see that, for just a moment, real information resulted in a more intelligent, positive dialogue? Of course, it slipped away into bitter complaining by 10 a.m., because that is a habit on here. But it could be better. It really could. And that doesn't have to mean whitewashing what's wrong with things.
To try to answer your question on division of properties:
Hudler has the South, which includes all of Florida, Louisiana, Alabama, Tennessee.
Riddle has the East, comprising Vermont, NY, Wilmington, New Jersey.
Kane has the new Interstate group, including Louisville and all of Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Indiana.
Hollingsworth has the West, which starts as far east as Springfield and encompasses Iowa, Sioux Falls, St. George, Salem, the California papers and Reno. She doesn't have Arizona or Hawaii, but did get Guam.
Still reporting directly to Bob are Phoenix, Tucson and Honolulu.
I'm not sure about the Carolinas. Does anyone know whether that area finally ended up with Curtis or Carol? (And no, I have no idea where to look that up!)
9:11 -- Congratulations. Well played. I certainly wish I'd had the guts.
ReplyDelete10:08--- Besides listing names and positions, can you point to one solid accomplishment (other than brown-nosing their ways to the top), by individual, that we could all look to as inspiration?
ReplyDelete8:56--- why do you start by posting what you are not? i'll bet on first dates you are sure to tell women "i am not a rapist", and I'm sure it's always worked for you. Anyhow, you are a hack, or are posting in Uncle Tom-Mode.
"Of course, it slipped away into bitter complaining by 10 a.m., because that is a habit on here."
ReplyDeleteIt's also a habit in too many newsrooms.
That's why most layoffs are a good thing. The people who can never succeed are removed, and the chance for a fresh start is present.
Lesson for today: Layoffs can be good.
The Carolinas and Virginia go to the East region
ReplyDeleteCritics of this Gannett Blog completely miss the point regarding what its purpose is for US.
ReplyDeleteIt has nothing to do with Jim, or with you corp folks or even with Gannett's future and issues.
This site is an outlet - perhaps the only outlet - for those of us former and present Gannett workers whose careers and lives and been ruined by this company and we just plain ol' need to vent!
It is good - but maybe unfortunate - that we have found that we are not alone out there. While sad that gannett has ruined so many, many lives, there is some comfort to us in knowing that simply - we are not alone.
We know that others have been victims of this vile, vicious, mean-spirited company with its little dictator publishers and editors who have ruined the careers of so many good journalists.
We often treat this site as therapy, as a way of dealing with the misery and scars that won't ever heal from our treatment by Gannett goons.
So no, I freely admit that I don't want to hear about, not care about ANYTHING positive about Gannett - though I cannot imagine there being much of that - and I am thrilled at poor stock performance and do not care that it has gone from $2 to $4 a share - it is still worthless to those who hold the stock.
People like Riddle, Callinan, Currie.... all whom I have met, and that idiot Clark... are all empty worthless shells.
This blog is unappologetically for us who despise this company. You company hacks.... just deal with it.
Keep this site up for us, Jim!
I very sincerely suggest counseling for 11:15.
ReplyDeleteBitterness only begets more bitterness. I speak as one who has been laid off from another major company, where I had relocated and uprooted my life for what I thought was a secure future.
And I know that, the way things are now, it's likely that could happen again. And I've been through divorce. I know the bitterness path, and it's best to get off it as soon as possible. And you very often need help – from friends, from a professional, and sometimes by cutting ties that stir it up. I submit that this blog is such a tie for you.
And, while you state what your mission for this blog is, it doesn't agree with the mission for many of us who are still with the company. We come back because, at its best, it is highly informative.
NEWS: Murdoch set to charge for online content:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nypost.com/seven/05062009/business/news_corp__studies_web_content_platforms_167809.htm
11:15 AM, I fully agree with your message and do hope that Jim does not let corporate or those jerks who pick on him get in his way. Jim, thanks so much for everything you have done, are doing and will do for all of us in the future.
ReplyDelete11:15:
ReplyDeleteHalf of the people you bitterly mention aren't even with the company anymore.
Like you.
Jim: You have split off some things geographically. Perhaps another split is needed: Those who want to make the future better, and those who are only here to complain about the past.
I'm going to quit my job and become a day trader in Gannett stock
ReplyDelete10:55:
ReplyDeleteDon't forget Mississippi in the South group......
Hey, 11:07 you creep. "That's why most layoffs are a good thing. The people who can never succeed are removed, and the chance for a fresh start is present."
ReplyDelete--
Thanks for hedging with "most" but many very successful people WERE laid off, something I hope even you won't have to face.
""""This blog is unappologetically for us who despise this company. You company hacks.... just deal with it.""""
ReplyDeleteIs this how you view it, Jim?
Because I'm one of those who believe this blog should be a place for discussion of all things Gannett, the good the bad and the ugly, as appropriate.
The very rational discussion above about VPs and such really felt useful, like fresh air to those who are tired of sitting in on this endless therapy session.
If I work at Gannett, and I believe the company has done some bad things, has even lost its way at times, but also know that it has a proud history, is full of people, including myself, doing the best we can , who don't believe every executive is a "worthless shell,'' and who are hoping we can right the ship -- is it the case that this blog is NOT for us, too?
11:15 wrote:
ReplyDeletetreat this site as therapy, as a way of dealing with the misery and scars that won't ever heal from our treatment by Gannett goons.
Obviously you're still hurting from seeing your career expectations trashed. But, unless you intend to nurse your grievances for eternity, I can assure you that your misery will lift and your scars will fade.
Nothing is forever. Not your job. Not your disappointment.
Grieve. But as the fog lifts, look around. There is work to do, people to see, deals to be made.
You're going to be OK. Things will turn out OK. You've hit a hell of a pothole. But you weren't pushed into the Grand Canyon.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete"Thanks for hedging with "most" but many very successful people WERE laid off, something I hope even you won't have to face."
ReplyDeleteI already faced that. Rather than whining, I moved on. You should do the same.
11:15 A.M.
ReplyDeleteCongratulations! You speak the truth as many of us know it.
Yeah, we can (and do) tell shrinks about it, but they don't understand the feelings. You've stated it correctly and honestly and extremely painfully. Thanks!
I am saddened by the corporate supporters that are spewing venom on this blog.
ReplyDeleteI don't read it because I have some sort of psycosis concerning Gannett, I read it because Jim is one of the best journalists I know and I learn something here.
To those who criticize Jim -- start your own damn Gannett blog and write whatever appologetic crap you want.
I don't know about its storied history, but Gannett for years purged good creative journalists from its ranks in favor of toadies...that resulted in products and ideas that were less than mediocre.
The pity is that some of these half-baked ideas were copied in the industry (by half-wits that though Gannett was a leader) helping aid the demise of the business.
Everyone in Gannett please prepare for disaster when you start charging for online content. Nobody will pay for the fluff on your websites. People will pay for quality content such as The NY Times and The Wall Street Journal. The end is near for GCI, the board and management will lie and tell you that they are well positioned to succeed when the economy recovers, bullshit! They are just figuring how to cash out with their Golden Parachutes.
ReplyDeleteWhy did Dubow toss out Craig Moon? We need him back, now.
ReplyDeleteWe need Stinson and Frey back too.
ReplyDeleteThis is what life is like outside of Gannett. I left in a buyout and am now in investment research. My bosses routinely praise my work, even if it isn't really deserved. They seek my counsel on things whether I have anything to add or not. They know my name. They pay me very well. I get 50 cents a mile for use of my car. The people I work with are jaw-droppingly smart. And every day I'm pumped about starting work. The only thing I miss, other than doing the kind of journalism that's now extinct, is not having anything to complain about.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
ReplyDeleteWhy did Dubow toss out Craig Moon? We need him back, now.
5/06/2009 5:40 PM
Anonymous said...
We need Stinson and Frey back too.
5/06/2009 6:43 PM
Yes, couldn't agree more. Obviously, under the current regime we're going nowhere!
Guys, be careful!! Gannett will not go bankrupt, however the final solution has not been found for the trouble that Gannett is in. The stock has done well, but believe me it will not go back to 2007 levels anytime soon. In fact, it will go down again. Maybe not tomorrow, maybe not the next day either but it will go back down. The next quarter will show levels of reaching the bottom but we have not gotten there. Also, we have no idea what will end up with this company. It cannot stay the same, believe me. They are trying to make the changed that are needed. They may get it done, but unfortunately they probably will not. Think about the Kodak Company and digital photography. They tried to make the changes in 2000 to deal with digital photography. They still haven’t figured it out. If I had to bet I would be against Gannett. Not because I am a hater. Let me explain my reasons.
ReplyDeleteGannett is trying to make the rapid change old media to new. They are way way late in the game. Also they are trying to make the change with old media people like Debow and company at the helm. If you are really serious about becoming new media you bring in new media management. They have not made that step and do not have the balls to do it. This is enough to be the end of the glory days of Gannett. They will not die tomorrow and they may not die ever. But they will not be a true fortune 500 company ever again. They will shrink and shrink till 10 years from now they will be a small media holding company of Hodge podge digital properties. Name one company the size of Gannett that was able to make the changes that they need to make to survive. Maybe GE, maybe ATT. Not many. Going from print newspapers to digital strategy is so much bigger then it seems on "paper" (no pun intended). And it is so much harder when you try to do it with 30,000 buck a year programmers. Chris is the only hope for GCI and rumor has it he is leaving. I wouldn’t blame him one bit. With his talent he could do better elsewhere. Back to my point. If you have made some money in Gannett lately get it out and count yourself lucky. GCI is not a long term bet. Good luck to all.
7:27 pm
ReplyDeleteIf you leave me now, you take away the biggest part of me!
I welcome charging fees to read stories online. It will weed out the non-performers from those of us who produce stories people want to read. It will give managers a concrete list of stories that are worth something to readers, compared to those that are worthless. That will inevitably result in producing only stories that people prove they want to read by paying for them.
ReplyDeleteJim,
ReplyDeleteYou have some intersting conversation brewing in Elmira Confidential regarding uses for the Elmira Star Gazette building that is for sale.
Might be some creative sense left after all up there!
Pretty funny and witty might make for good homepage banter.
C. Moon was part of a regime that cost me my job, and for no good reason. I have nothing decent to say about him or what he did at USA Today. Wonder if people like him or Paulson ever think about those of us who didn't have a golden parachute and may end up on the streets?
ReplyDeleteThe Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the Internet hearing: The Future of Journalism
ReplyDelete9:42 -- The trouble with that line of thinking is that many of us are not allowed to choose the stories we write.
ReplyDeleteI can't tell you how many lame assignments I have to field every month because some editor has decided we need to do it. Right now, you can track the popularity of stories through Web hits, and many of my least popular pieces were those I was forced to write.
Also, placement on the Web is a huge issue. You could have somebody writing great content yet getting no traffic because the story wasn't properly placed. Sadly, most of us within Gannett have very little control over any of this ... even if we are writing things that people want to read.
The one upside I can see is that a widespread model like this would make it easier to make a living as a blogger or independent journalist. If all the big media start doing it, little guys could surely tap into the system and sell their own stories on their own site.
@11:33 - you said:
ReplyDeleteRight now, you can track the popularity of stories through Web hits, and many of my least popular pieces were those I was forced to write.
--
This is really just to easy but perhaps they weren't popular because they sucked?
12:09 -- If that was meant as an insult, you missed the entire point of my post. They did suck because they shouldn't have been stories in the first place and were assigned instead of much better options.
ReplyDeleteI didn't say, "None of my stories generate Web traffic."
I was talking about specific cases where I had no control over what I was writing.
Everyone's a comedian.