Part of an occasional series about yours truly.
Q. If you did, in fact, take a voluntary layoff, then why continue this farce of a blog? I could see if you had found out some things about Gannett while you were working there and wanted to clear your conscience. But now you are just throwing open the doors for people to kick and scream after any layoffs, and ordinary managers who are doing their jobs are being criticized by people with questionable motives. Your motives also seem questionable at times.
A. I disagree with the premise of your question. This blog reports exclusive news and information; it's not merely about "throwing open the doors for people to kick and scream after any layoffs.''
Indeed, if it weren't for this blog, the newspaper industry wouldn't even know these six company-wide layoffs have taken place. Corporate doesn't want that information out, and it sounds like you don't, either.
Got a question for FAQs About Me? 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.
Tuesday, November 09, 2010
25 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)
Funny coincidence, but I was thinking before clicking over to this blog about what happened in the old days before this blog when everything was handled behind closed doors. I know employees who were persuaded to sign secrecy agreements promising not to bad-mouth Gannett or talk about their former employer forever in order to get a severance. Corporate doesn't want this stuff out, which sure is good enough reason to me to publicize it in gory detail. Some say we shouldn't air our dirty laundry in public, but I disagree. All I am looking for is fair warning that my job could be in jeopardy, and I'll postpone buying that new car or contracting for the addition on my house. I find out more about what is happening in my workplace than my manager shares with me, even though we are supposed to be buddies. If you don't like to read this stuff, don't come here. No one is twisting your arm to come here and read for yourself what this company is up to. It is a free country. If you don't like it, don't look at it.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteIf you don't want the information 11:43 PM, don't come here anymore. It's really that simple. Why wasted your time reading and posting on a blog that you don't think is credible? I sure wouldn't do it.
ReplyDeleteAs far as why or how Jim left Gannett, I don't care about any of that. It just doesn't matter. What matters is that this blog is just about the only way to get information about what appears to me to be a very secretive company.
HOPKINS FOR GANNETT CEO!
ReplyDeleteLet's start a write-in campaign!
We could be the journalistic "Tea Party"!
HE is the leading news and information source.
Not Gannett.
Following is an edited version of a comment posted at 11:50 p.m.:
ReplyDeleteThe typical Jim response: If you disagree with the methods, then you don't want the information to be known.
I know I will be bashed for saying this -- and that is partly what is wrong with Gannett culture, B-U-T ... Jim has found a niche and used it to create a business. What the f--- is wrong with that? Hasn't Gannett attempted to find a variety of niches in which to make money? Hopkins is serving an interest group. Gannett leaders need to take a page out of the small business handbook if they want to ensure that this company is around in a decade.
ReplyDeleteWell I got fired today! They said that I should be able to do all of my work in 22 hours per week. I argued and said that it is not even possible. I then proceeded to question management through data and general knowledge. If you like your job then don’t do any work or argue and never question legalities! Also never think that because you gave the people a chance that they would stand up for what they believe in or bitch about every day. Even when you get everyone a raise they will forget about it quick like and never care or fight for themselves or anyone else! I am very happy right now and sad as well. Oh yeah FU regional I know nothing about IT manager DD Goober!
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to a fight I lay my life on the line in front of everyone!
ReplyDeleteI take exception to your premise 1:29. If the blog was a business Jim would be out of business. Even Jim would admit that. The dirty secret of the web id few if any such endeavors make any money. Yes a few do but most don't. Advertising doesn't pay the bills and you the reader would go away tomorrow if Jim put up a pay wall. It's a real problem. The revenue model doesn't work. If Jim Sked you to pay $5 a month you'd run screaming from the room. Don't believe it? Ask yourself what sites you pay fir now.
ReplyDeleteSince you are questioning Jim's motives, I have a question about your's. Why did you come to this blog, since you obviously hold contempt for it? Are you paid for this task? Is it an assignment to visit Jim's blog as part of your job? Do you regularly post responses to items you believe are questionably motivated? If not, why not? Thanks.
ReplyDeleteKeep up the great work Jim. Heaven knows that we get very little information from upper-level managers and publishers and when we do it's a very incomplete information and colored around the edges.
ReplyDeleteThe drum roll to continue to do more with less, less, less is wearing thin. I've never seen morale lower in a newsroom - oops, Local Information Center - than it is now.
Clear, factual, concise details about the company's goals and objectives would be great. It will never happen. I'm still waiting for an explanation of what Contest One is.
8:17 if you are questioning me, 6:28, you are barking up the wrong tree. I didn't get on Jim's case I challenged the premise of another poster who indicated the blog is a great busienss model. It serves a different role. I htink Jim would be the first to say you can't live in San Fran or anywhere else on less than $10,000 a year. Why do folks like you attack whatever you disagree with? This is a free country isn't it? Or do we all have to agree with you?
ReplyDeleteThis is all about letting the employees know what the heck is going on at their company, which in this case happens to be Gannett.
ReplyDeleteYep, the communications giant likes to keep its own dealings under wraps, away from the public eye. Corporate culture has produced a generation of nasty, self-centered managers who care only about their own bonuses. Ass kissers is what they're called.
Gannett doesn't want "outsiders," particularly the Wall Streeters, to know what an inept gang runs the place.
Well, now they know.
Keep up the great work, Jim! Don't let the trolls get in your head. If it weren't for you, GCI employees would know next to nothing until it was too late. Now that they can clearly see what's going on company wide and how little they're valued, they can plan accordingly.
ReplyDeleteI wish someone would start a blog about the company I work for, which in many ways is even worse than Gannett. Blogs like this are of great value. Gannett employees should really appreciate Jim's efforts because it keeps people at the top somewhat in line. If left to operate in total secrecy, there is no telling how much more Gannett heads would try to get away with. This blog is read by the board of directors who would never have an inkling of what the average employee was thinking or experiencing if not for Jim's efforts. Those directors make key appointments. Those appointments set the tone. Transparency is a good thing. I think everyone within Gannett (other than the selfish people who are trying to fly under the radar) should be thankful for having an open place to share news, insights and info the company doesn't want you to know about -- a site run by a former insider and journalist and not just some crazy, whacked out nobody.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the premise of the question. I agree that this venture can't support someone in SF and other globetrotting locations (written like you would about a co. exec). I agree that constantly whacking GCI about lack of vision/savvy and then crowing about this blog is inconsistent. I have always been bugged about Jim's love of bashing people who make lots of money, and then being coy about whose money allows this blog to continue (no, I don't buy that you saved wisely - if you did, could you let the rest of us in on the secret?). I also agree that this is the only game in town for company news. That's why it flourishes. I learn things here almost every day. But I also agree that a huge percentage of the comments here are personal venting (good for you, but I skip past them) or just factually wrong. It's the latter that some serious journalists are so offended by. Yes, you get layoff news here and nowhere else. And I hear tidbits of news on people and initiatives here that I couldn't get anywhere. I will keep coming back because of that. But I have known Jim for years, and having to wade through the venting/ranting/personal attacks/factually wrong information day after day means that I lose a bit of respect for Jim every time I stop here. Simply put: many of us who knew you thought you could produce the best of what's here without succumbing to the worst. But the bad/wrong here far outways the factual.
ReplyDeleteKeep up the good fight Jim. Don't let the doubters get you down.
ReplyDelete"But I also agree that a huge percentage of the comments here are personal venting (good for you, but I skip past them) or just factually wrong."
ReplyDeleteThat's the money graf there. There will always be mindless drones like 10:25, 9:35, 9:08, and 8:17, but they have nothing to contribute. I assume they were dumped in one of the early purges.
11:23 - I'm 10:25 and I support Jim and all his efforts here. How you would think anything else from my post is beyond me.
ReplyDelete10:20 you are absolutely right. I am sure we will both be removed when Jim returns from lunch.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteHey, 11:23 a.m....So what do you have to contribute beyond criticizing other posters? And don't assume anything. Some people, believe it or not, do not have to purged from Gannett. They get fed up, leave and find better jobs and lives elsewhere.
ReplyDeleteIf you're still with Gannett, well, I wish you the best of luck. And don't lose sight of the escape hatch!
I think some people are missing the point, which is not surprising.
ReplyDelete10:20 has a lot of good points. Jim won't grasp them because he winnows down all criticism into some sort of corporate spy tactic so it can be rejected by him or one of his drones.
Some people aren't getting those points, though, so I'll restate the main one. There might be some factual information, but it's eclipsed by the inaccuracies, the endless piling on, and yes, the whining.
There is more to say, but this has to be kept short so the people with low attention spans can hold focus.
Hell, I like the whining! :)
ReplyDeleteThat initial question was written by some Gannett lackey. No way a victim of Gannett wrote that mess!
ReplyDelete