Friday, November 12, 2010
Week Nov. 8-14 | Your News & Comments: Part 3
Can't find the right spot for your comment? Post it here, in this open forum. Real Time Comments: parked here, 24/7. (Earlier editions.)
61 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)
For Part 2 of this comment thread, please go here.
ReplyDeletegoodbye matt davies, journal news pultizer-winning editorial cartoonist. and while i'm at it, goodbye bob fredericks, the paper's hard-news-charged deputy managing editor.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThere was an informal Journal News gathering last night that brought in a few dozen current and former employees. I can honestly say that the ones who were gone seemed happier than the ones going through the constant uncertainty.
ReplyDeleteEasy to see why.
It's hard to know what the future holds there. It was a vibrant suburban paper just 10 years ago. Now the newsroom is a ghost town, and many of the best writers and editors were cut or left in the waves of layoffs earlier.
Some very talented people remain, but are demoralized by the quality of the product now. There literally aren't enough bodies in some departments to staff every shift from now through the end of the year.
What is the end game here? Given the slim profit margin, Gannett could choose to get out of the market entirely. Copy editors know their jobs will go to New Jersey next year. The AOL website Patch is making some inroads but pays fast-food wages. The journalism job market is so poor that many can't find other jobs, or have opted to stay local for family reasons rather than apply for NYC jobs.
The leadership at the paper is very weak. Expensive ventures like NewsCenterNow tanked and siphoned off resources for two years. I could go on.
But it is hard to see proud professionals who thought they had found a place to grow watch it all disintegrate around them.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteCartoonist layoffs (I had to roll down to the bottom of the page to find the text):
ReplyDeletehttp://voices.washingtonpost.com/comic-riffs/2010/11/pink-slipping_political_cartoo.html
Still no word from Detroit and Phoenix?
ReplyDelete"What is the end game here? ... The AOL website Patch is making some inroads but pays fast-food wages. The journalism job market is so poor that many can't find other jobs, or have opted to stay local for family reasons rather than apply for NYC jobs ... But it is hard to see proud professionals who thought they had found a place to grow watch it all disintegrate around them."
ReplyDeleteThen don't work for fast-food wages. Stay where you are if you have to. As indicated in prior post, it's a virtual world now and there is a living to be made as a skilled communicator if you crawl out of your "journalism" box and realize there's a ton of content jobs out there (contractual and otherwise) that DON'T pay fast-food wages.
The end game for newspapers? Game over. Especially if you still work for a GCI product. Find a new game before it's too late.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteis there anyone left in advertising at the journal news? edi? classified? design?
ReplyDeleteAny news on Courier Post. Cherry Hill New Jersey
ReplyDeletetalking layoffs again ?
I spent only 18 months at the Journal News in the early '90s, so I won't claim to be an expert on the paper or the market.
ReplyDeleteStill, it does seem amazing that Gannett couldn't thrive as a local news franchise in one of the nation's wealthiest suburban areas.
10:23 -- Be realistic. There are communications jobs out there that don't pay fast food wages, but there aren't a ton of them. Writers and editors have been devalued for years (often by themselves because they're willing to work for the love of it), so it is not a lucrative trade for most people.
ReplyDeleteIt's certainly different for folks on the sales side because they can move out of newspapers and sell something that isn't on the verge of death. But let's not try to make all the out of work journalists feel bad by telling them there are all these jobs out there that they just aren't smart enough or clever enough to find.
You may have been able to move onto something else that pays well. If so, congratulations. Nice work! There are not, however, a ton of good jobs out there in any industry. In case you hadn't noticed, unemployment is at record highs and that's not because everyone in the country is too stupid to find all the jobs that you talk about.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteCherry Hill is NOT making money. The leadership is nonexistant. You don't have to be a handwritting expert...Resumes are being updated and the staff members are making plans to individually survive. It's sad since the local market is fairly healthy. You can't abuse a newspaper for this long and not expect a disaster. I'm sure we'll be a Harvard case study on what not to do in the near future.
ReplyDeleteI worked for Westchester for 17 years and it was always a CASH COW for Gannett until Gary Sherlock arrived.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete1:12, I'm not saying it's a piece of cake but the content jobs are there -- and I'm not talking about resorting to the $15 per 500-word content mills that are devaluing our profession. I'd like to think that the content produced there is so horrible, that it will be unsalable and eventually these mills will die. Unfortunately, because bottom-feeders now like USAT are more than happy to buy and publish that god-awful content, this isn't going to happen anytime soon.
ReplyDeleteOK, that's the bad news. The good news is that you don't have to resort to these mills to keep working. I'm also not implying that anyone who isn't getting better-paying jobs are too stupid to find them. Maybe just not looking in the right places. Maybe not opening yourself up to the many possibilities outside of traditional journalism, places where traditional journalism skills easily transfer to.
I'm also not implying that these are necessarily full-time jobs. But the contractual work is there and, in my experience, the people providing the work don't care where you live. (The people who pay my bills and keep coming back to me every month, week, etc., have no idea what I look like.) Maybe it just takes time to get into a rhythm where one content job leads to another and the another, etc., and one good repeating gig from one editor leads to another one from another editor in the same content-production shop. But this dynamic does exist, and the work more often becomes repeat work, over and over again. Yes, there is an element of "make your own breaks" here. But what opportunity isn't? And since when as a journalist did you have success shrugging your shoulders and telling yourself, "Ahhhh, it's utterly bleeping hopeless"?
I'm not trying to make anyone "feel bad" that they're not getting this work. I am trying to offer encouragement that -- if you get laid off or you feel the pressure of joblessness forthcoming -- you do not have to sit around all mopey-looking with the perpetual "I got screwed/woe is me ...' vibe. But you got to hustle and find out what's out there that people are paying real (i.e., not $15 a story) money for solid work.
It's not a long-term solution either for most folks. But it's a solution for now, and it demonstrates that you kept working even when you were out of work. Your next full-time employer will respect that.
For The Love Of God-----USAT is reporting on a SPAM debate regarding that cruise ship situation, but I still can't find out if the cruise line will have to reimburse the taxpayers for delivering food to the vacationers. If anyone from USAT is reading this, would you please make a simple call, and ask. You'll be glad you did. That kind of information is what people (taxpayers) want and need to know.
ReplyDeleteAlso, if I missed the information about who is paying for delivery (cruise line or taxpayers), would someone one here please tell me where I can find it. Thanks.
I would think that tea party group would be all over this one if the government delivered that food for free.
Call the Pentagon 703-545-6700 and ask yourself, 6:27. Why should others do your work for you?
ReplyDeleteI certainly hope 6:56 PM is not a USAT employee. If that's how readers like me are treated, no wonder that place is tanking.
ReplyDeleteUSAT isn't alone.
ReplyDeleteI just searched Google News for articles containing the word "Spam" and "Carnival" during the past 24 hours. Result: 1,932 (and rising).
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete@5:22 -- 1:12 here. Thanks for your thoughtful reply. I agree with all of what you say. It just seemed to me that your first post indicated that there are all sorts of opportunities out there and that journalists aren't finding them simply because they aren't looking. In reality, I think it's pretty hard to find jobs of any sort right now.
ReplyDeleteThat said, you make a really good point that there are opportunities for writers that most journalists have probably never considered. It's really tough to make a living as a contract writer, but it can be done. And if you're really good, really aggressive and lucky, you might actually make more than you would at a metro. I would argue that most journalists will not be able to do this -- because there's only so much work to go around and there's a lot of out of work folks. Still it's definitely something to look into.
Thanks again!
I heard Cherry Hill Publisher said after layofs that the paper's net income before taxes was down 2000% from last year.
ReplyDeleteJust for the record, USA Today reporters (and others I'm sure), have been pursuing how much the Spam Cruise assistance cost and have gotten no estimates from the Pentagon as of yet.
ReplyDeleteIt is not a number they would give out that quickly, nor do they probably know yet.
Reporting takes far more work than a phone call. Hopefully the price tag will emerge at some point.
10:18 p.m.: 2000%?
ReplyDeleteIf net income fell just 100%, that would mean it hit zero. Any higher percentage would indicate an enormous loss.
You're welcome, 9:17, and glad we had this exchange. My optimism countered with your realism probably provides the right balance here.
ReplyDeleteI would love for one person to convince me that making $40K per year at age 25 with full benefits (al a average Patch journalist) is "fast food" wages. Really?
ReplyDeleteWay to spell out the obvious, Jim. We count on you for that.
ReplyDeleteActually, I should clarify your statement might not be obvious to some here. I base that conclusion on the benefits discussions here, which prove that some people have no idea how some areas of business work.
Let's hear some more details about Patch.com and wages, bennies, in particular, as well as working hours and terms. Any Patchers out there? They are hiring.
ReplyDelete11:08, I am skeptical of the $40K pay. But you should know that some Patch people are working some serious hours close to 7 days a week even to approach that figure.
ReplyDeleteSo if you break it down to an hourly wage, it would not be high. In summary, you are wrong.
I write for the broadest audience possible, which means never assuming readers know all the ins and outs of business.
ReplyDeleteI like my readers. I don't look down on them. And I believe that's why I have such a large audience inside Gannett.
"Reporting takes far more work than a phone call."
ReplyDeleteSure does. Too bad no one told this to the geniuses at USAT who decided editors will come in earlier to post stories to the Web. We can't get most stories before late afternoon as it is. How is this suddenly going to change? Because Hunke wills it?
From all I've been able to find out, Patch is a great opp for 20-something and maybe a young 30 something with no real life responsibilities. Sounds like bennies are good and treatment (so far) is very good. But the pay is in that small/small-medium circulation newspaper ballpark. It may be $40K for those in bigger markets and higher responsibility jobs, but the bulk of the hirees to cover all of those openings you see posted are going to be lower than that, I'd suspect. But I could be wrong. Best way to find out is apply and check it out.
ReplyDelete11:13, your act gets more stale with every posting. Talk about the incessant whiner who is tone deaf to his own voice. If what Jim does offends you so, then just slide into your comfort zone -- maybe curl up to a book titled "Everything You Need To Know About Leading With Inspiring Vision," by C. Dubow perhaps? -- and stop insulting Jim for doing great work.
RE: Naming names isn't an invasion of privacy especially when we are talking about newsroom leadership. These jobs include being public figures. Journalists make it their job to name names when news happens at major companies, if they can get them.
ReplyDeleteIf you still think that is an issue, keep in mind news stories have been written about some layoffs that name names. The cartoonists somehow don't enjoy the same anonymity you asked people to keep ... because why? It is the same with some bylines, but they are protected against being named here. Why the double standard? If I'm your average reporter without awards, my privacy is protected? If I'm an award-winning journalist, I'm not? I'm all for protecting personal attacks, but naming a name that is a fact isn't an invasion of privacy. I suggest the latter isn't as true for people without a newsroom role.
You have to take your licks as a journalist. It comes with the job.
12:12 so anyone who posts a comment you don't like is a jerk or a trill. It amazes me how folks in our profession are all for free speech until that speech disagrees with their point of view. If this is a blog only for the unhappy then you go to the top of the list. If it is a site for information and spirited debate then you are put of line. A plate of Lemming Trollp please!
ReplyDeleteFor its new Life vertical, USA Today is touting "New today in Life: Doctors go high-tech to get informed consent." It may be new to USA Today, but it is an AP story that already has been printed several days ago in several publications, including the Washington Examiner and the Canada Post.
ReplyDeleteThe Life vertical has drained a huge staff and as we know, had a month to settle in to their new tasks. Yet they are relying on AP for exclusives that we all know have to stand up for the weekend.
I guess we are no longer emphasizing USA Today exclusives, or staff production for that matter. Gives the staff more time to laze around at their desks, I guess.
With so many of Gannetts'smaller ,community papers and shoppers failing,I am wondering why there are not reports of new start-up
ReplyDeletenewspapers/shoppers.
I would think that if given a choice, and there was a local, well put together and well circulated,well run ,local shopper, the advertising base of businesses would be choose to advertise and in that publication and not the evil Gannett pubs.
Why send their advertising money to Virginia or where ever Gannett keeps their money now, when they can keep in a local bussineess and local economy and with ownership and people they know,instead of the mega corp Gannett who just cares about taking their money and their bottom line.
Makes some sense and I am surprised it's not happening .....
Thanks 10:37 PM.
ReplyDeleteMy question now is why was that not made clear in the Spam-cruise ship stories? In my opinion, that should have been the lead, in the very least,in a sidebar. In other words, if the Coast Guard and Navy is spending time on cruise ship problems, taxpayers have every right to know that.
Sadly, Patch isn't hiring in my state, or I'd have a look.
ReplyDelete$40K isn't bad, depending on the number of hours. I don't make $40K even after 25 years in journalism.
Patch is hiring Full time based out of Marlboro NJ for surrounding towns. Its on Media Bistro Jobs
ReplyDeleteHere's what the AP is saying about the cost of the food deliveries to the Carnival ship:
ReplyDeleteThe incident will be costly for Carnival, but it won't have to repay the Navy for delivering food from the carrier. The Reagan was nearby on a training mission, and responding to the ship was nothing more than a "minor distraction," said Chief Petty Officer Terry Feeney.
That wasn't too hard, was it>=?
I think 40K might be for a regional editor at Patch, but not for a writer. Most of those who have bylines are freelancers, without bennies. I've heard from a half dozen or so former Journal News colleagues who inquired about jobs at Patch but didn't pursue because they couldn't have paid the bills. And $40K is starting salary for a TJNer, so it can't be nearly that.
ReplyDelete6:24 a.m.: Regarding identifying by name the political cartoonists who lost their jobs. I make the exception here because the two cartoonists agreed to speak to The Washington Post, so (apparently) didn't mind seeing their names in public.
ReplyDeleteWhat I do not want to do is identify laid-off people by name without their permission; I continue to be concerned about their privacy.
However, you make a good case when you talk about newsroom leadership -- or leadership in any department -- at the most-senior level.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeletexxx With so many of Gannetts'smaller ,community papers and shoppers failing,I am wondering why there are not reports of new start-up
ReplyDeletenewspapers/shoppers. xxx
Wake up. Print is dying. The Internet has provided new ways of reaching consumers that are more profitable than running ads in a newspaper or a shopper. The proof of that the business model is broken is that no replacement newspapers are emerging.
Anon 12:05 needs to talk to managers and publishers of non-Gannett, smaller newspapers and shoppers and/or get in touch with some of the professional groups that serve that segment as if they did they’d learn how many are doing better.
ReplyDeleteGannett struggles due to many of its own choices…here’s a few highlighting why: significantly raising production costs of one group of weeklies by forcing abundant color despite advertiser’s lack of interest and/or desire to pay more for it; notably raising rates while significantly cutting delivered copies; mismanaging compensation plans -- using arbitrary minimums especially now, making sure new managers don’t make less than their most tenured direct reports, hiring employees at agreed upon rates only to have them raised for being below minimums; sales comp plans paying reps more for selling less; continuing to give away unique, local-only print content online for free; playing games with “paid” copies which ABC is soon ending; still too many “thinkers” not enough “doers”, etc., etc.
All have led to more people being let go than necessary in recent years because common sense wasn’t used. That, and because Gannett’s top leaders still encourage a culture whereby its safer for people to be silent than to speak up.
And contrary to what 12:05 and some others may believe, print and online competition will emerge in various markets…timing is everything.
Print may reemerge, but no time soon. Why? No money. Go into a bank today with a loan proposal to launch a newspaper, and you will be laughed out of the office. It is the same with venture capital, especially after the "can't lose" money that poured into San Diego and Daytona.
ReplyDeletePerhaps in a few years, money will loosen up to the extent that some can finance new newspapers. Or, what I think more likely, successful Web sites will set up print operations, like Politico has done in Washington. Political is publishing 30,000 copies of the Web product every day, but currently limiting circulation only to Capitol Hill and lobbyist offices. It is getting ads and is a success.
Actually, experienced regional editors at Patch make in the 60s or higher.
ReplyDeleteJim: Here's the latest from Crain's Detroit Business about the offer from the Gannett-run JOA that the Detroit unions will vote on this Sunday:
ReplyDeleteUnions vote Sunday on new contract at Detroit's daily newspapers
By Bill Shea
| | | | | |
The unionized workforce at Detroit's daily newspapers will vote Sunday on a new contract that would see fewer of the wages and benefit austerity measures sought by management.
The Detroit Media Partnership originally sought from The Detroit News and Detroit Free Press staffers a 12 percent pay cut, wage freeze, a shift for all employees to the same health insurance used by management, and a 3-year contract.
Instead, the unions will vote on a 2-year deal that includes a 4.5 percent pay cut for employees earning less than $35,000 and a 6.5 percent salary reduction for employees earning $35,000 or more.
There also will be a 2-year wage freeze and a variety of changes to health insurance. The new medical coverage details are a blend of management-union compromises.
The unions represent roughly 1,400 employees at the partnership, which oversees the joint business operations of the News and Freep.
The partnership declines to discuss labor talks as policy. It has said in the past that the newspapers are losing money.
"We are satisfied that the claims the company made about its financial condition are true and some concessions are required," the union said in a communication to members.
The union told its rank and file that an economist from the International Brotherhood of Teamsters analyzed the partnership's financials.
Examined were revenue, advertising revenue, circulation revenue, core newspaper revenue, non-daily print revenue, on-line revenue, cash flow, assets, liabilities, and profit or loss, the union said.
The original contract expired Oct. 15 and was extended to allow for negotiations.
The Metropolitan Council of Newspaper Unions is comprised of Newspaper Guild Local 34022, which represents about 130 Detroit News editorial staffers and 170 at the Free Press.
Other members of the council are Teamsters Local 372, GCIU Pressmen Local 13-N and Detroit Typographical Union Local 18.
To 12:05 Concerning new start-ups :
ReplyDeleteI know of at least one .
They have now been publishing for than a year
and a half in a very small market.
I believe the last 12 months ad sales were
near $400,000 and with 5 employees. Not bad for first full year after start-up of a small business in a very small area.
So 12:05 you may eat your words as you really do not know it all.The publishing business is
not dead,it just has to have good leadership
with intelligent decisions being made by owner/
publishers who have their own money on the line.
And not run by leaders who are over paid by millions and who don't give a damn about the community or the advertisers or the readers,or the employees ,or anything else for that matter, except the bottom line.
5:59, you may well be the first on this board to describe GCI as a company with "too many thinkers." I know what you were trying to say. But, please, let's not accuse GCI managers of having actual, original thought. Most GCI managers I worked with went along with what you accurately described as a culture "whereby its safer for people to be silent than to speak up."
ReplyDeleteGiven this dynamic, not too much of a chance that the managers in the room would be considered thinkers, no?
Are layoffs complete? What happened in Ohio and Wisconsin?
ReplyDelete12:12, I could not care less about your redundant call for anyone who disagrees to just go away.
ReplyDeleteLike it or not, Jim points out the amazingly obvious far too often. Sometimes he doesn't even grasp the obvious on the first response because his knee-jerk reaction is to accuse people of not wanting the information to be published.
The discussions here about benefits and other business issues are humorously non-factual and inaccurate. Just look at this thread. No one knows or bothers to confirm what a Patch editor makes. With all of the information available online, we still have people making claims and citing no source. We are just supposed to trust them. Sorrles, Charles, but I don't.
One more thing: The people who constantly make typos, express incomplete thoughts, or just flat-out cannot write should realize their credibility suffers. Saying "We're not journalists" means nothing. This concept is something that's covered in early high school business classes. If you don't want to iron the flaws out of your posts, that's your choice, but then own the mistakes and the lower credibility and stop making stupid excuses.
What's obvious to a relatively small number of very well-educated readers is hopelessly complex to a lot of rank-and-file employees and other small shareholders. I write for them. And if that's writing about the obvious, I'm delighted to continue doing so.
ReplyDeleteFor Part 4 of this comment thread, please go here
ReplyDelete10:40 p.m. I believe all the layoff notifications were to be made by the end of this week. But who knows? There may be some stragglers.
ReplyDeleteFor the most up-to-date rundown on layoffs by site, go to this spreadsheet.
Except, Jim, they make no effort to understand the details. All they do is insist they are right and then continue ranting.
ReplyDeleteThese are the people you say you write for. Are you really delighted with that? Seriously? You're nothing more than a court jester for a bunch of fruit throwers if that's the case.
Something must be about to explode!
ReplyDeleteTrolls are a dead give away every time!
Gannett refuses to implement quality ideas and reinvest to at least maintain - or even improve - the content of its products. That's why it's a sinking ship. The market has changed, yet the plans remain outdated and stale.
ReplyDeleteYou can only milk a cow for so long until it goes dry. You must have a real plan. Cutting and slashing every few months does nothing to help, especially when the suits continue getting raises and bonuses for a failing company.