[Gannett's 13 most-senior officers last year]
Unfairly or not, aging industry leaders are accused of being out of touch with future consumers: young people who are abandoning newspapers in favor of Facebook, Twitter and other digital media. In response, you'd think, Gannett and other publishers would add younger executives to the ranks of senior officers.
But, no. A review of Gannett's annual reports over the past 10 years shows the opposite has happened. The median officer's age has actually increased since 2000.
Last year, the median age of 13 officers listed was 57, according to the just-published annual 10-K report. (See chart, above.) In 2000, the median of a much longer roster of officers -- 35 -- was lower: 54 years, according to that year's annual report.Does age really make a difference? Please post your replies in the comments section, below. To e-mail confidentially, write jimhopkins[at]gmail[dot-com]; see Tipsters Anonymous Policy in the rail, upper right.
[Photo: Chairman and CEO Craig Dubow, appointed in July 2005; he is now 55 years old]
Age matters in the work world, just like sex or skin color used to. I don't think a person's level of chronological giftedness should matter one hoot, though.
ReplyDeleteI took at shot at picking which ones would be the top 13 in the year you mentioned, and the median was the same: 57. I would guess if you added another 20 to the current list, the median of that would be as low or lower than 53.
ReplyDelete2:30 pm: Entirely possible.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I've just updated this post: the median for 2000 is actually a year old: 54 years old. I discovered that after noticing the list of officers in 2000 didn't include CEO John Curley, 61, and President Doug McCorkindale, 60.
I don't think age matters. I do think mentality age matters. Some of the most creative thinkers I've known have been older folks. The key difference with those people, however was how they tackled their lives. Most still were just as active as they were when they were 18.
ReplyDeleteAge certainly matters to those of us laid off by these decision makers. Try being 60+ and getting a decent job these days. You would think that, with this average age, this team of crack executives would have had some sensitivity when slashing and burning. But usually older workers cost more in both salary and benefits - so - off with their heads to save Gannett.
ReplyDeleteHow old is Kate Marymont, the vice president for news?
ReplyDeleteThis is one time I part opinion with you Jim. Ageism is as bad as sexism or racism and that kind of broad brush "opinion" that "generation gray" is out of touch is as bad as saying "no broads in the newsroom." I'm a 50 something, however I'm on myspace and facebook and have used them to crowdsource stories. And this is independent of any corporate mandate. But to listen to you, this gray beard should be out on his wrinkly ass. I hope rethink such sweeping generalizations before your fingers hit the keyboard next time.
ReplyDelete11:57 pm: I don't mean to suggest I'm favoring only younger workers. Look at me: I just turned 53!
ReplyDelete