Your publisher may only be guilty of taking longer to do what most, if not all, the newspapers are doing: a restructuring. For example, The Cincinnati Enquirer has forecast it will cut as many as 100 jobs. Further south, The Tennessean at Nashville is reportedly cutting 60, through layoffs and redlining open positions. I'm guessing those are equal to 10% or more of the staff at each paper.
Bottom line: I don't see how any paper can eliminate that many positions, and not go through a redesign of how it does business -- in other words, a restructuring. So, you're not alone -- except you're going to have to wait longer to find out what it means. And that totally sucks.
On the other hand . . .
In a lightning-fast opposing view, Anonymous@7:57 p.m. agrees the situation sucks. "But the way you say that at the end makes it sound like the publisher is doing it to the staff,'' @7:57 says.
"In fact, the publisher is probably being very cautious about how the restructure will happen. He may even be buying time hoping something will change so he doesn't need to do as much. Perhaps there are some ad contracts on the horizon that might get signed. Who knows. You, on the other hand, just want to start trouble where you don't need to stick your nose."
Now, please read my latest response.
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 rail, upper right.
Yes Jim, it does suck. But the way you say that at the end makes it sound like the publisher is doing it to the staff.
ReplyDeleteIn fact, the publisher is probably being very cautious about how the restructure will happen. He may even be buying time hoping something will change so he doesn't need to do as much. Perhaps there are some ad contracts on the horizon that might get signed. Who knows.
You, on the other hand, just want to start trouble where you don't need to stick your nose.
This is why what you do pisses me off so much. You have lost your objectivity. If you don't manage your ego and learn that lesson now you will one day.
Thank you. Those are, in fact, good points. I'm not trying to cause trouble, just point to some likely realities.
ReplyDeletePostscript to my last remark. People make the mistake of holding me to traditional journalist standards: i.e., the never-seen, invisible, doesn't have an opinion, totally objective reporter.
ReplyDeleteI've never said that was my job here. And I think that's been clear from day one. I'm an advocate for the small shareholder. I've fashioned this blog after the provocative columns that once appeared in many papers -- back when papers weren't afraid of being edgy.
"Perhaps there are some ad contracts on the horizon that might get signed"
ReplyDelete7:56pm, did that happen in your dream last night? Do you think all the lying about the real circulation numbers is working. Dream bigger becasue no new ad contracts are being signed
Jim,
ReplyDeleteI hope you will regard my comments as related to the job cuts, or as the "occasional exception." Either way, news of yet another round of job cuts at The Tennessean comes as I informed Ellen Leifeld of Jay Winkler's refusal to honor a prior agreement to renew my annual, paid-in-advance seven-day subscription (expiring next month) under the terms of the current agreement. (You'll recall an earlier post, some months ago, when I requested this same consideration. What follows is an update.)
Ms. Leifeld has decided to back Mr. Winkler, so I copied this information to Gracia Martore, just to create some awareness at the parent company of a newspaper that apparently is no longer in the business of selling newspapers. No response.
While I awaited any response, the latest edition of the Sunday Tennessean arrived on my door, minus what appeared to be most of the contents of what used to be called its Showcase (local magazine) section. There was only a truncated weekly TV section and a syndicated Q-A column, similar to one that for decades was written by the paper's own Ken Beck up until Beck's recent "retirement."
I called the circulation department, which, thanks to outsourcing, is in Oklahoma, to ask if I had an incomplete paper or if what seems to be the latest reduction in the size of the paper is the new norm.
Miss Oklahoma didn't know. (Figures.) She said the best course of action was to send me a complete copy of the paper.
I guess it is cheaper to do that then to simply send the (full) section in question, though this is hardly a "green" solution.
The (second) newspaper arrived and, with it, confirmation that the first edition I received was complete.
So- after several successive reductions in content and in light of such waste, Tennessean subscribers continue to receive more paper for less money.
Despite all of this, I'm doing all I can to keep this newspaper alive (i.e., on doorsteps in print edition form) and my favorite fellow reporters (and other staffers) working.
I want to continue to be the newspaper's best customer because, if loyalty is not rewarded. we have yet another new standard at The Tennessean; one that hastens The Tennessean's becoming a Web-only option. If that.
Stacy Harris
Publisher/
Executive Editor
Stacy's Music Row Report
http://www.geocities.com/stacy.harris/
Jim, (Please post this, as corrected to make more sense, and delete my earlier post)
ReplyDeleteI hope you will regard my comments as related to the job cuts, or as the "occasional exception." Either way, news of yet another round of job cuts at The Tennessean comes as I informed Ellen Leifeld of Jay Winkler's refusal to honor a prior agreement to renew my annual, paid-in-advance seven-day subscription (expiring next month) under the terms of the current agreement. (You'll recall an earlier post, some months ago, when I requested this same consideration. What follows is an update.)
Ms. Leifeld has decided to back Mr. Winkler, so I copied this information to Gracia Martore, just to create some awareness at the parent company of a newspaper that apparently is no longer in the business of selling newspapers. No response.
While I awaited any response, the latest edition of the Sunday Tennessean arrived on my door, minus what appeared to be most of the contents of what used to be called its Showcase (local magazine) section. There was only a truncated weekly TV section and a syndicated Q-A column, similar to one that for decades was written by the paper's own Ken Beck up until Beck's recent "retirement."
I called the circulation department, which, thanks to outsourcing, is in Oklahoma, to ask if I had an incomplete paper or if what seems to be the latest reduction in the size of the paper is the new norm.
Miss Oklahoma didn't know. (Figures.) She said the best course of action was to send me a complete copy of the paper.
I guess it is cheaper to do that than to simply send the (full) section in question, though this is hardly a "green" solution.
The (second) newspaper arrived and, with it, confirmation that the first edition I received was complete.
So- after several successive reductions in content and in light of such waste, Tennessean subscribers continue to receive less paper for more money.
Despite all of this, I'm doing all I can to keep this newspaper alive (i.e., on doorsteps in print edition form) and my favorite fellow reporters (and other staffers) working.
I want to continue to be the newspaper's best customer because, if loyalty is not rewarded, we have yet another new standard at The Tennessean; one that hastens The Tennessean's becoming a Web-only option. If that...
Stacy Harris
Publisher/
Executive Editor
Stacy's Music Row Report
http://www.geocities.com/stacy.harris/
Jim, (Please post this, as corrected to make more sense, and delete my earlier post)
ReplyDeleteI hope you will regard my comments as related to the job cuts, or as the "occasional exception." Either way, news of yet another round of job cuts at The Tennessean comes as I informed Ellen Leifeld of Jay Winkler's refusal to honor a prior agreement to renew my annual, paid-in-advance seven-day subscription (expiring next month) under the terms of the current agreement. (You'll recall an earlier post, some months ago, when I requested this same consideration. What follows is an update.)
Ms. Leifeld has decided to back Mr. Winkler, so I copied this information to Gracia Martore, just to create some awareness at the parent company of a newspaper that apparently is no longer in the business of selling newspapers. No response.
While I awaited any response, the latest edition of the Sunday Tennessean arrived on my door, minus what appeared to be most of the contents of what used to be called its Showcase (local magazine) section. There was only a truncated weekly TV section and a syndicated Q-A column, similar to one that for decades was written by the paper's own Ken Beck up until Beck's recent "retirement."
I called the circulation department, which, thanks to outsourcing, is in Oklahoma, to ask if I had an incomplete paper or if what seems to be the latest reduction in the size of the paper is the new norm.
Miss Oklahoma didn't know. (Figures.) She said the best course of action was to send me a complete copy of the paper.
I guess it is cheaper to do that than to simply send the (full) section in question, though this is hardly a "green" solution.
The (second) newspaper arrived and, with it, confirmation that the first edition I received was complete.
So- after several successive reductions in content and in light of such waste, Tennessean subscribers continue to receive less paper for more money.
Despite all of this, I'm doing all I can to keep this newspaper alive (i.e., on doorsteps in print edition form) and my favorite fellow reporters (and other staffers) working.
I want to continue to be the newspaper's best customer because, if loyalty is not rewarded, we have yet another new standard at The Tennessean; one that hastens The Tennessean's becoming a Web-only option. If that...
Stacy Harris
Publisher/
Executive Editor
Stacy's Music Row Report
http://www.geocities.com/stacy.harris/