Here comes The New York Times, now reporting: "The Detroit Free Press and The Detroit News are planning to stop home delivery most days of the week and print a pared-down version of their papers for newsstands on those days, according to people briefed on the plans. They will be the first major dailies in the country to take such drastic steps."
The Wall Street Journal reported earlier that Gannett hasn't made a final decision. The paper cites a source it did not identify. "But the leading scenario set to be unveiled Tuesday would call for the Free Press and its partner paper, The Detroit News, to end home delivery on all but the most lucrative days -- Thursday, Friday and Sunday," the WSJ says. "On the other days, the publisher would sell single copies of an abbreviated print edition at newsstands and direct readers to the papers' expanded digital editions."The changes are likely to result in significant job cuts, the story says. "Because the Detroit papers will continue to publish daily electronic versions, the cuts are expected to come mostly, if not entirely, from outside the newsroom, according to sources," the WSJ says.
This link might work better.
ReplyDeleteThe Detroit papers are a unique case, not necessarily a harbinger for the whole industry.
ReplyDeleteMichigan has been stuck in an economic recession for close to eight years.
The state has had eight consecutive years of job losses.
People leave the state and don't come back. Thousands of 'em. There's even a term for it: Michigration.
So naturally, business that depend on the commerce of others are going to suffer: but after eight straight years, a radical rethinking is in order. And why not? There's nothing left to lose in Detroit for Gannett.
On a tangent, if you want to curl up with a really fascinating read, check out Paper Losses by Bryan Gruley, which covers the KR/Gannett war in depth. It's the story of how Gannett began running Detroit's newspapers into the ground (in my humble opinion).
I just can't imagine Gannett or anyone else deciding not to publish two metro newspapers on a daily basis. What if Gannett tells employees on Tuesday that they are just eliminating some jobs or will publish just one on a daily basis? I know they have lost a ton of money in Detroit, regardless I'll be surprised if they "fall on their swords" in this instance. Is it possible that all of this is hype ... ?
ReplyDeleteIt's odd that Gannett would let a News Corp. paper beat them at their own story. What is going on at our company?
ReplyDeleteIt is much harder to control news stories in the age of blogging. There are just too many eyes watching -- and reporting -- now.
ReplyDelete"The Detroit papers are a unique case, not necessarily a harbinger for the whole industry."
ReplyDelete... nevertheless, good God Gannett, this feels like the slow sinking of the Titanic.
More properly called Project Peter Griffin:
ReplyDelete"Dear MacGuyver, Enclosed is a rubber band, a paper clip, and a drinking straw. Please save Detroit."
I love this idea. I work at one of the paper and I am actually excitited to be a part of history. Either this succeeds or fails, but at least we TRIED something different. The same model has been out there for decades, it is time for papers to try something new and here it is. Everyone out there needs to watch us, because this may become YOUR model in a year. Don't be surprised. Everyone said USA Today would fail and um, well, it didn't.
ReplyDelete9:56,
ReplyDeleteI feel the same way. You can't break news in a print paper delivered slowly and laboriously to someone's house. If you say, yeah but the old folks won't read the paper on a computer, I say, sure, but they watch the news on TV as they rip and read what we've reported. So we do need a new model.
We still need a print edition for all those coffee shops and lunch places, but we're killing so many trees just to throw papers on porches, it's not sustainable.
Sure beats laying off half the editorial staff.
If you want to know what happened in Detroit, you need to go back a few years to the strike that lasted from 1995 to 2000. Circulation dropped 30%: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D0CEFD61239F93AA25751C1A9669C8B63&fta=y
ReplyDeleteBut if you go back a little farther, you find two highly competitive papers with very high circulations before the Joint Operating Agreement sent sales into a downward spiral that continues to this day. If these two papers actually competed for readers and advertisers, their sales would be higher.
Home Delivery Here.....
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately this action will intensify the self-reinforcing feedback loop of: Lower Circulation >>> to Lower Carrier Compensation >>> to Decline in the Number of Carriers Willing to Deliver >>> to Poorer Reader Service >>> to More Cancelled Subscriptions >>> to reduced Circulation & Ad Revenue >>> to Lower Pofits >>> to MORE LAY-OFFS >>> BACK TO LOWER CIRCULATION .....and the ceycle continues.
The "Real" Papers will Die faster than any ONLINE VENTURE will be able to pick up the slack.
GANNETT LONG TERM STOCK VALUE >>> (to quote Dean Wermer from "Animal House," "ZERO...POINT...ZERO."
This crushing economy is not Management's fault, but over the years they could have taken organization strengthening actions and instituted better feedback (and thus morale & cohesiveness building) systems to help GANNETT survive bad times. It's really very Sad to watch the company (through the eyes of those who really built & mantained it) die.
Good Luck Everyone
Gannett is a living breathing organism not nearly as close to dying as most of its competition. Detroit on the other hand was dying and this is an option to breathe new life into the operation. To blame just the JOA on the drop in circulation is to discount the riots, the white flight to the suburbs, Detroit's corruption, a one-industry state with an arrogance beyond comprehension that that model would sustain it and the economic decline. How simplistic to blame just Gannett and the JOA.
ReplyDelete