Friday, February 27, 2009

McLeanwood Squares: Connell getting a top spot?

The powerful Gannett Management Committee, with company publicist Tara Connell added for reference, top row, far left. Current committee members, from top row, left to right: Davidson, Dickey; second row: Dubow, Horning, Lougee; third row: Martore, Moon, Saridakis; bottom row: Van Lare, Williams and Wimmer.

As CEO Craig Dubow drops more clues about ContentOne, speculation is swirling again over the role chief Gannett publicist Tara Connell might play in leading the new web news and pagination service.

Connell is now vice president over Corporate's communications department; she may report to Chief Financial Officer Gracia Martore. If Connell is formally appointed chief of ContentOne, will she be elevated to the management committee, too? And would that mean the service has become a separate operating unit, with its own budget?

Please post your replies in the comments section, below. To e-mail confidentially, write gannettblog[at]gmail[dot-com]; see Tipsters Anonymous Policy in the green sidebar, upper right.

13 comments:

  1. ugh, I'll take Charlie Weaver to block.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Connell does report to Martore, but as you print speculative crap like this, let's pray it's not true.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Tara Connell gets a bad rap on here, probably because most journalists dislike anything that smells of PR. Understood. But there are far worse people in high positions in the newsrooms of Gannett, including at USAT, who would be much worse than Tara Connell for ContentOne. For those of you who don't know her, she can be hard-nosed and ruffle feathers (a good thing in my book), but she also is willing to take chances, willing to go against the grain when it's necessary, willing identify and foster talents in others. How many editors who claim to be big and brave ever buck authority at USA TODAY? Most editors I have seen at USA TODAY and other Gannett papers I have worked for are some of the biggest frauds and ass-kissers in the business. So it almost amuses me to see people taking potshots at Connell who did have a spine when she worked in editorial. Connell has strong institutional knowledge but will not get bogged down in traditions that don't work. She'll raise some eyebrows, sure, but won't sell out her people the way some editors do around here.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I wonder what Kate Marymont thinks about this potential encroachment into her territory. But then, hell, I wonder what Marymont thinks about anything these days.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Glad to see some support for TC. She helped me out when we were both in the newsroom a long time ago. She had a way of seeing abilities in me that I didn't even always see. I was saddened to see her go to corporate because I think she can do so much more good in the other tower. Maybe she will get that chance to return to what I think she is best at.

    I also agree with the last comment that spoke of her loyalty to her peeps. I never felt she would back stab me as my current editor and others have. I always knew where she stood, as did her enemies. Frankly, with all the deceptions around here, I would welcome back that sort of honest, upfront approach to management.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I'm sure she's a lovely person.
    Can someone tell me why Gannett needs this position? In other words, what will happen if there is not a VP of ContentOne or whatever it is.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I'm stupid! Will someone please tell me what Content One is about?

    ReplyDelete
  8. By saying you're stupid, you're actually calling others stupid and underscoring how bright and witty you think you are.

    There are better, and less cliche and poorly veiled ways to disagree with concepts, or to underscore that there hasn't been enough information released about ContentOne, let alone a clear plan of how it will operate. This is Gannett. If you've worked here more than a couple weeks, you know how it operates and why we are in this mess. Rarely is there a clear, well thought out vision of initiatives. Labels seem more important than details to this company.

    However, protesting in inarticulate ways just makes our views less credible in the eyes of those in power.

    Come on people. Let's show we have a brain and are adults. Hammer the company all you want, but think a little first before pounding out something on the keyboard. It will have much more impact if it is original, thoughtful and not just a hit-and-run, silly remark.

    ReplyDelete
  9. It appears that Tara Connell is on this blog. Look at the post by 2:01pm and 2:10p,. Does this not sound like a Tara Connell type of response? Just substitute the words "Tara" and "she" for "I".

    It is sad to see that she actually has to resort to commenting on this blog to defend herself.

    Pity you Tara.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Ok, so Jim, you might be onto something. I have heard from a friend of mine (on furlough this week and closely tied to this thing) that the entire executive team and the entire Community Publishing team are up in arms about Content One.

    Dubow is trying to jam this one down and force everyone to accept Tara Connell as the new head honcho for all content.

    We already know that the USAT is not on board with this, but I am told that there is some big meeting where Tara is going in front of the executive team to basically layout her plan and interview for the job.

    I know people in my department are just as confused by this new Dubow pet project.

    ReplyDelete
  11. These photos make these people look like fat chipmunks. The bonuses must be feeding them well.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Too many boobs and cooks definately ruins the stew.........look at all the overpaid asses!!!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Tara = brave?

    Brave would be countering garbage rumors posted here with the truth, and under her own name.

    Brave would be recognizing that though she may not like Jim, he has more quality, desired audience than any copy of the Gannetteer.

    Brave would be sending out the 'cut and paste' ready-made memos to publishers with the truth. ex: Not that "our readers ask for narrower web widths" - but that we're chopping to save cash.

    Public relations doesn't have to be a horrible thing. But when the job changes from crafting the corporate message to crapping the message, well, we are paid to cut through the crap and get the real stories.

    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.