An independent journal about the Gannett Co. and the news industry's digital transition
For Part 4 of this comment thread, please go here.
FYI: Within the past hour, Gannett Blog recorded its 7 millionth pageview.
Appleton named top Wisconsin daily paper last night, now 6 of 7 years. (Green Bay won the other one.) Contrary to a comment on the story, Gannett only runs 10 of 34 daily papers in the state, not 80%. Judged by the Colorado Press Association.http://tinyurl.com/484j5xg
On the USA wrap...I for one had a 15 % increase in returns. Not much in the grand scheme if things but multiply that out by how many single copy carriers across the country? Can USA really afford any drop in sales anymore? Obviously thay don't care as long as the ad revenue comes in but as stated..it sure shows the public where the priorities are. Why even print a usual front page when it's covered up? Even covering a front page with a 1/2 wrap or a post it ad just shows the loss of pride in the product by the people who are supposed to care. Why then should the public?
Has anyone else noticed sales reps bailing in record numbers? I'm at a midsize print site, and they're all saying adios.
wow, I cant believe it...the priority of a company it to make money! Shame shame shame, thanks for bringing that to our attention 7:58! Now we all know that Gannett isn a horrible company becuase thier priority is to make money!
9:36 Pro-Gannetteer,Yes, Gannett can do no wrongin your mind.Guess what? There are ways to make money and keep integrity as well !Of course being pro-Gannett,you probably don'tknow or care to hear this.7:58 is just pointing out the fact that integrity has left Gannett and a corporationthat used to to treat editorial content and paid advertising as separate entities has now abandoned that philosophy and anything for a buck now rules.
9:36 a.m. isn't too far off, actually. People who think a company should work for the employee, rather than the employee working for the company have it backwards. Companies work to make a profit, plain and simple. If, as an employee, you're uncomfortable with that, or uncomfortable with the approach the company has to take to get to that end goal, you should go work for a non-profit, or the government, where making a profit isn't the end-all be-all goal. But, as long as you CHOOSE to work for Gannett, it seems piddly to sit here and complain about the way the company treats its employees. I worked for Gannett for a number of years. I hated it. Even back then, before the real big cuts came, the company operated in a way that was more about the bottom line than it was about good journalism or community service. It has had that reputation in the newspaper industry for decades. Why now do you people think it should change its ways? Why do you think it will? History and tradition tell us that Gannett is operating in the same way that it always has.Get over the complaining and get out. If you're one of those people who say "I can't leave, I've tried, no one will hire me." Well, then, I guess you only have yourself to blame for your current lot in life. You chose to work for a company that had a reputation for doing what you are now complaining that it is doing. You chose to stay there. You chose to never pursue a different path or a parallel path with a different company. You chose to stay. Yep, you chose to stay. Now, after making the choice to stay, despite good information that indicated you shouldn't, when the stuff really hits the fan, and the company sees its revenue continually drop year after year, and it starts making cuts to personnel to keep its profits up (what a company does) you come here to complain that there is "no integrity" left in Gannett. That complaint indicated there was ever any to begin with, which is the fatal flaw in your shallow, selfish, ignorant complaints. You all knew what Gannett was when you took your jobs, when you kept your jobs, and when you watched your jobs or the jobs of colleagues around you be lost. Only now, though, you start to complain about Gannett being what Gannett has always been and act as if its breaking news. I feel sorry for people who lost their jobs and are going out there and working hard every day to get a new one, who never come here or anywhere else to blame Gannett for their own mistake of staying too long. They are good people who understand their position and they deserve better. For those of you who come here and play the victim, who blame Gannett for your poor choices in life, well, I guess life has a funny way of making sure you get to sleep in the bed you made. Sweet dreams.
Very good 11:19.I agree wholeheartedly. I left over a year agoand am doing well.The co-workers that I hadwere complaining continuously back then,and they are all still there,and still complaining even worse than before.I know,I have a friend in close contact with them.Life is choices,if you choose to stay with Gannett,you should be praising them daily and thanking them for the paycheck.You are a workerfor their corporation and they make the decisions.You are not asked for opinions or considered important in those decisions.The Gannett top leaders have one thing in mind,profit ! And they should !You, as an employee, are just a replaceable or disposeable part of the system.If my former co-workers get laid off ,I will not feel sorry for them. They are hanging on and dealing with the incredible stress and work overload for whatever reason,even though, for now,this area has job openings.They could have chosen to leave as I did .They too,could now be thriving in a new situation and greatly enjoying life after Gannett.
Excellent post, 11:19. Now the whiners will come in and accuse you of being a corporate shill.That's how it works here at Gannett Blog. All the whining, none of the accountability.
Most Executives have a good track record "RETAINING AND RECRUITING" great talent. Let's take a look at Gracia Martore's record since she has been in President's office and focus on some high profile senior level jobs.1. Craig Moon, President USAToday- Resigned2. Kurt Wimmer, SVP & Chief Counsel- Resigned3. Chris Saridakis, SVP & Chief Digital- Resigned4. Andrew Ellenthal, CEO QuadrantOne - Resigned5. Sang Kim, CEO Ripple6 - Resigned6. Jason Tafler, CEO Pointroll- Resigned7. Matt Ferguson, CEO Careerbuilder- ResignedWell, I am sure there are more people, but I think that makes the point. Now let's see where she found the replacements for these "critical' jobs...1. David Hunke, Internal, former Detroit Free Press blowhard2. Todd Mayman, Internal, former legal clerk3. Apparently she claims they are still looking for a Chief Digital Officer, Not Filled yet.4. Mario Diaz, some former sales rep from a sleazy email company called Datran5. No replacement for Ripple6 yet. Business is claimed to be shuttered after CafeMom debacle.6. PointRoll has no succession plan and Gracia Martore is still trying to convince and pay off current management team to stay until she finds replacements for cheaper.7. No word on Careerbuilder, but Matt Ferguson has not been seen since the last UBS conference.So, it seems like Ms. Martore really does not have any ability to "retain and recruit" when you look at her choices for replacements. It seems like she acts very desperately and then will try and convince internal staff to take on these roles.It is not surprising that no one calls her out on this since she also oversees HR for Gannett. It seems like she has done a poor job "managing"
I just heard the current Pointroll management team has really extorted Gracia Martore and bent her over the other day when they had their "take it or leave it presentation". Seems like she was really desperate and caved to their demands. Good for the Pointroll team. She deserves to pay as she has no respect for Pointroll. It seems like she is paying an enormous retnetion bounus for the top people at PointRoll that is well over $1mm EACH!!!Now I am really going to quit this place after hearing this crap!
This company needs a Revolution
No, 12:35. 11:19 is stating a hard but true version of reality. Why would anyone object to what he/she has posted? Same for 11:44. It's essentially the same message as the "start your own engine" folks have stated, folks who went on to their own business or another career. Posts like 11:19 and 11:44 only serve to validate this blog's value, not diminish it. Bit of a reach here, 12:35, to try to turn these posts as some way to discredit the wealth of folks who turn to this blog for insight. Most of the "whiners" you speak of are simply hardworking people who believed in this company at one time and are now just confused and anxious about their futures, and how they're going to take care of their families.And to those people, I'd like to confirm the posts from 11:19, 11:44: There really is a life beyond Gannett, and it's a far, far better one, and you can get there. But not if you sit in your cubicle jail cell there, slave away every day to line Craig's pockets, and fail to assemble your own game plan. Don't shirk and say 'there aren't any jobs out there for me.' You're responsible for your career.
I see what 11:19 and 11:44 are saying, but it's the tone that bothers me. Sure there are jobs, but if there are three jobs posted and 50 applications, 47 possibly very-qualified people are going to be disappointed. They then have no other choice than to continue to "choose" to work for Gannett. Just because people are forming their escape plan and it hasn't panned out doesn't mean they're shallow, selfish and ignorant.
When the focus is money and nothing else? America's corporations seem to see nothing else but dollar signs. For Gannett apologists (and corporate apologists in general) the follow article is a must read.Here's a column by Bob Herbert in Today's New York Times; "When Democracy Weakens" http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/12/opinion/12herbert.html?_r=1&hp
When there's record unemployment, the choice is to work for the devil or sleep under a bridge. Those who can find a quick escape are getting out. Those left behind will have to be professional, but they don't have to be loyal to an employer that treats them like dirt.
Let's see...making money the number one priority without any self respect. Hmmmm. What does that sound like? A skank off the street downtown for one.For the record I still believe in what a newspaper used to be...what it still ought to be. I'd love to see the newspaper business get back to where it used to be, but with people like the ones who only see green and go around patting themselves on the back while the business goes down the toilet, there ain't much hope.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Hey 4:03p...Saridakis is hiring. I just spoke with him this week and asked him for his advice. If you are in Conshy, then you are lucky since his office is a few miles away. Send your resume to his HR Executive... firstname.lastname@example.org They have a bunch of companies that are hiring big time.I am now working on a Pointroll campaign for a large client at the same time I am cleaning up my resume for shipment to GSI Commerce!!! I will be out of here very soon.
Following is an edited version of a comment posted at 4:03 pm:I have worked at Pointroll for many years...through two CEO's and now this mess has really created a big void. Notwithstanding Jason Tafler's mistakes, the current management team has done nothing to rectify the problems. All they have done is threaten employees.The fact that Gannett would pay these immature executives any more than they deserve is unconscionable. Clearly it shows Gannett's desperation.I am glad we are seeing the all these people leave. It is only a matter of time that all the good people leave for greener pastures.
12:41, that was a particularly telling comment. Couple that with the number of the publishers who left in 2010 (I think that it was around a dozen), and I suggest you start thinking about your analogies involving sinking ships.
11:19 here. To 1:57, I guess all I have to say is we agree... most of the way. I know there are many people who are unable to find something else. If they go about their business, work hard to achieve a different path, and still get no where, than, yes, I feel bad for them. But, to come on to this blog, or any other outlet, and complain that Gannett isn't treating them well, that Gannett is laying people off to keep up the bottom line, that Gannett is acting the same way Gannett has always acted... that is where I draw the line and say "Shame on you. Shame on you for staying with a company that had the reputation that it does for so many years while thinking "It will never be me" while they watched so many others get thrown overboard. Now, when it's their turn to get the heave-ho, or they are being overworked when left in the ruins of a under-staffed newsrooms, they start complaining and bitching about Gannett, as if their current situation is only the fault of the big bad corporation that they chose to work at, they chose to stay at, and that they cannot leave now. Yes, unemployment is high today. Recent Dept. of Labor statistics say that for every open position in America today there are 4.1 applicants, twice the rate of three years ago. Nobody, including myself, is saying that jumping ship is easy today. All I am saying is that to place blame on Gannett today, for being what Gannett has always been, is shallow and passes the buck for people's current situation off of their desk and onto someone else's. If people continued their employment with a company that has a reputation of cutting staff with a second's notice just to keep the bottom line in tact, if they chose to never seek a different path when times where better and there were more options than today, that was their choice. They are feeling the consequences for it now. And, if they work hard and blame themselves for trusting a company that has proven again and again that it cannot be trusted, if they accept responsibility for their situation today, no matter what it is, then, as I said in my first post, I feel bad for them. But, to those who come on here and blame Gannett for their own poor choices, for their own lack of foresight, for their own willingness to stay employed for a company that has a solid track record of putting employees last and profits first, it's hard to have any sympathy for them. They are the ones who are trying to blame a corporation for being what a corporation is, playing the victim, while never once stopping to ask themselves, "Gee, why didn't I get out when I could? Why did I stay here even though I knew the company was bad? Why didn't I make a better choice?"Instead, they come here and complain that Gannett has no integrity (implying that it had some to begin with) and get mad at the fact that it is doing what companies do when revenue gets low (lay people off at the price of the product's quality). It's the passing the buck that I find so offensive. Are all Gannett employees doing that today? Of course not. Many are going to work, taking more work for less pay, and trying (maybe unsuccessfully) to find another opportunity. But, they aren't blaming Gannett for their life's bad choices. To them, I say "Good luck. You will do well if you keep your hopes high and your efforts on track." To the complainers, well, I don't feel bad for a second that your bad choices in life have led you to be so miserable. I am sure your situation won't change one iota. And, when it doesn't, I am sure you will blame your spouse, your neighbors, the government, the company, the world for it. Anybody but yourself.
I found Jim's post at 4:38 to be particularly enlightning. I thought my site was the only one where management is incapable of fixing the underlying systemic problems. Generally thinking that if they just keep threatening everyone with termination we'll suddenly become a first rate company.Is this SOP for all of Gannett management? From Jim's post i gather that it starts in Mclean and trickles down to the individual sites. I actually kind of feel bad for my management now. Then i come to my senses and realize that they're just perpetuating a cycle of abusive behavior.
Posted at 11:19, in part:"People who think a company should work for the employee, rather than the employee working for the company have it backwards. Companies work to make a profit, plain and simple."I strongly disagree with 11:19's premise. At good companies, employees are valued, listened to and respected as individuals. Smart employers understand that employees can make or break their companies. The very best companies even share bonuses with all when business justifies it. I even believe that good employers truly care about their employees and their families. That is especially true in creative, professional settings.GCI's cut and slash approach says loudly that it does not value its employees. It is apparent that GCI sees employees as easily replaced cogs in a machine. GCI's cold-hearted dismissal of hundreds of senior employees lifted GCI's veil, revealing a once-proud news organization being run in the ground by a small group of never-been-journalists.So please stop talking about Gannett as if its practices are widespread. They are not. Only the worst of the worst take competent, inspired, productive employees for granted.
Re. Ripple6/Pointroll. Noticed changes to Ripple6 Web site... Click on "Community" and instead of the blog entries (beard contest and thanksgiving feast, anyone?) and bios of the staff, it goes straight to Pointroll. Rest of Ripple 6 Web site appears stripped down, too.
Anyone else totally sick of these Pointroll whiners, or is it just me?
6:31 p.m.: You're right. Which just goes to say that you inherently agree with 11:19's entire point. Everyone knows that Gannett is a bad company that cares only about profit. It will lay off employees, those from first-year reporters to people who have given 20 years of their life to the company, in a second and not think twice about it or have any remorse. Everybody, inside and outside the company knows that as it has been Gannett's reputation for decades. So, 11:19 is correct in saying that people who come here and complain that Gannett is *all of sudden* acting in the way that its reputation has outlined for decades, and that they as employees are being treated unfairly, really have no one to blame for their situation but themselves. I think 11:19 could have more grace and tact in the way he/she is saying what he/she is. But, it's funny that you in your post saying you fundamentally don't agree with their point that you end up proving it to a T.
11:19 talks of companies, not specifying Gannett, that take employees for granted. He/she suggests all such relationships are strictly for the benefit of the employer.That's my gripe. Gannett's approach is not representative of what good companies do. Your suggestion that I actually agree with 11:19 suggests you dabble in sophist philosophy. Better read both posts again after the drinks wear off.
That stat about 4 applicants (the president often says 6) for every available job does not apply for journalists. Try multiplying that by a factor of at least 50, and sometimes 100. I am not kidding. I was a finalist for a management job back in journalism and they got 400 applications. Another job I was a finalist for, also in journalism management, had 200 applicants. It would take 4-1 or 6-1 odds any day of the week. It is brutal out there. I have sent out more than 90 applications all over the country for journalism/PR jobs in the past three months. It is killing me not to be able to practice my profession and I HATE being on unemployment, despite what some in the GOP would have people believe. It is awful. My advice: Keep your job as long as you can while you continue to look for something new/better as hard as you can. Get a new gig, and THEN leave. Unless you have a spouse or significant other on whose salary and bennies you can depend, it is very difficult to quit and find a job in journalism--if that is where you want to stay.
I feel very badly for 8:38 and the situation this person is in currently. The advice given by this person is correct. Don't be stupid. If you are still working for a Gannett property, devote as much time as you can toward getting another job and do as much of that work that you possibly can on their clock! Remember, Gannett does not give a crap about you or any other employee and will take the opportunity to screw you over as soon as they can. Even if your personal work ethic and morals have always been to give more, you best start rethinking about yourself because you will get the shaft. It is just a matter of time. Get going now on getting out and don't give this company anything extra. Gannett is an evil and rotten company run by a bunch of selfish, pompous and incompetent idiots.
8:38: No doubt, there are more people looking for journalism jobs. But, why jump from one sinking ship to another? PR on the other hand might be a better option, but, you're right in that there are many people looking at each opening. It's tough out there. No easy answers. I think we all have to expand our horizon of options to include jobs we never considered before. Open a frozen yogurt shop, teach, get your realtors license, go back to school, sell insurance, work at Starbucks... I know any alternative to journalism, no matter what it is, won't be as good, or use your skill set in the way you had hoped or dreamed, but there are other options out there. It's easier to type than it is to put in action. I know. It took 25 months of being miserable in a Gannett newsroom before I decided that my only dream in life, to be a journalist, was not realistic for myself and for my family. It wasn't a realization that I magically came to one day. It came over time, lots of time, and after a scary jump to a new job that, initially, offered far less pay. But, today I am making more money than I ever could have as a journalist and I am far happier....But, I would be lying if I told you that I don't miss the days of being a newspaperwoman. It's tough out there folks. I feel for all of us. I wish things were different. I wish I could have finished my dream career in newspapers. But, life isn't fair and sometimes, for the good of our health, for the good of our family, for the good of plain and simple sanity, we have to take ourselves down different roads. I am on a different road and I can tell you I am happier. It took some time to make the adjustment. I still miss newspapering. But, I don't regret my (very scary at the time) decision to leave. In hindsight, it was, and is, the best thing I have ever done. It that sense, it's funny how life works out. For all of you out there who are struggling to find work, keep your head up. For all of you in Gannett who are looking for something different, stay positive and keep your options and your willingness to do something totally different and totally new open. You might just be surprised how happy you can be even while doing something that one or two or five years ago you would never even have imagined doing. Finally, I have to agree with 11:19. He (assuming it's a he because woman typically have more grace) is pretty rude and uncaring in his tone, but his point that lies below the surface and between the lines is not too far from the truth. The longer people place blame onto other people for their situation, the longer they act as if life is something that happens to them rather than something they have control over, the longer their current situation well continue being what it is. If you have sent out 400 applications for jobs in journalism and PR and can't break through, maybe that is life's way of telling you that you need to move on and try your luck somewhere else. Good luck to everyone out there. You all gave more than you ever got back.
The reality is that all companies should be trying to make a profit. I cannot fault Gannett for that. If a company does not make a profit, it goes away (quietly, messily, whatever).That said, the choices made by Gannett to show profitability and improvements in revenue are short-sighted and, ultimately, suicidal. **There are better ways of doing things.**I have come to believe that the Gannett that will survive these times will be a ghost of its former self and it will no longer be a world-class organization. It does not have the leadership talent to make decisions that will preserve the business because it has laid off most of its best employees. The practice of eliminating positions (and the people in them, regardless of how capable and talented they may be) is going to make it virtually impossible to recover as a company. I give it five years to drive the company into the ground. When you sell off or get rid of your main assets, there's nothing left to rebuild with.
This must be the Valentines Day mood, but you guys on this board sound all like some rejected lover who has discovered she really never loved him at all. Well, grow up. Gannett never loved you. We are all whores in this business and it is a commercial transaction where they give you a paycheck for certain services. There's no love or loyalty involved, and you really don't have any say in the long-term nature of this relationship. They can dump you anytime they want, for whatever reason they want to come up with. So get over it. Pocket the money you earned for your services and move on.
Pointroll is now being asked to fire a whole bunch of people in order to pay Rob Gatto, Sandy Dondici and Sarah Ripmaster their multi-million dollar bonuses.March 15th is the day that all these executives get paid their bonuses from Gannett and they are all running around laughing their asses off at how they were able to get away with taking so much money from Gannett.This is all happening as we are having great people leave the company. We still do not even know who is taking over for Jason Tafler.
Looks like Pointroll is a critical part of Gannett. These people have every right to whine as much as they want. That is the reason why Gracia Martore caved in on their demands according to Rob Gatto.
Seems like David Hunke is in bad shape. Apparently, he is disagreeing with Gracia Martore about the potential sale of USAToday and the related number of layoffs that will need to occur to make this business look attractive.Myron Maslowski is working on the "details" and is presenting it soon.
"Talent Management for Gannett Companies" 12:41p posted above brings up some great points. Gracia Martore has done a horrible job bringing in new talent into the company. For example, what ever happened to replacing the Chief Digital Officer? We, at Gannett, know that Pointroll is an important part of our earnings and yet, there is no one on that management team that appears to be worthy of leading the company.Vikram Sharma ha proven himself to many people within Gannett Digital as having the ability to lead Pointroll and ShopLocal. Two ciritical parts of the Digital equation.It seems like Gracia really does NOT have any leadership skills. What President cannot find great talent? Seriously Jim! This is at the heart of the problem. The newspaper world has lived in a bubble shifting people from one city to another.Clearly the Digital world is very different and we have a leadership team that just shifts the deck chairs every time there is an unwanted departure. In the end, the Board should take a look at her record and see if it is worthy of any bonus. I remember Dubow received a large bonus for bringing Saridakis on as the Chief Digital Officer. Did he lose that when Saridakis left?
Observations of various comments here:* "Finally, I have to agree with 11:19. He (assuming it's a he because woman typically have more grace) is pretty rude and uncaring in his tone ..."No, he (he?) isn't. He's just being candid and blunt. And he's 100 percent dead-on. This is the real world folks. You are in charge of your career. Stop looking for decency and integrity and a company that "cares about employees" when, for years, GCI has demonstrated the exact opposite.* "It took 25 months of being miserable in a Gannett newsroom before I decided that my only dream in life, to be a journalist, was not realistic for myself and for my family. It wasn't a realization that I magically came to one day. It came over time, lots of time, and after a scary jump to a new job ..."Yes, indeedy, folks. Time is the factor here. If you attempt to relaunch your career or start a business, plan on at least a year to get off the ground to the point where you can kiss GCI goodbye. Yep, that means doing this while you're feeding the Dubow beast. (Yes, this is what I did before being downsized. Many co-workers doing the same because we all knew what was coming. It was all above board and our bosses knew and even respected us for doing it.) It's hard, hard work. Are you ready? * "It is killing me not to be able to practice my profession and I HATE being on unemployment, despite what some in the GOP would have people believe ..." Then why on earth aren't you working? Nothing is stopping you from practicing your profession. If I got an application from a journalist -- for a reporting, editing or even PR job -- and I saw that the journalist literally did nothing for two, three months or longer except fill out applications and collect unemployment, I'd pass to the next candidate. Why? Because there are a gazzilion freelance gigs posted in multiple online outlets. Or cough up $100 and subscribe to freelancesuccess.com (started by a former GCIer). You'll make your tax-deductible money back in a month (if you're any good). You don't need to freelance for newspapers. There are countless trades, corporation-produced pubs, online outlets, trade associations, etc. Oh, and don't forget about pure corporate writing/PR. And agency PR. And non-profit pubs/PR. Many of these jobs pay well. Can't find one or don't want to 'cross the bridge' into corporate/PR work? Fine. Then suck up the lousy pay and write for a Demand Studio or other content factory. At least you're working and writing and staying active in your profession, which makes you far, far more appealing for full-time work than sitting at home collecting unemployment.
Questions to anyone who may have an answer for me. I'm an employee of USAT for the Minneapolis Market. I love watching "Meet The Press" on Sunday mornings. That being said, why have I never seen any of our people appear on the program? Seems strange considering we have some of the best in the business.
@7:56 PM: I see you know how to use the word "sophist" in a sentence. Kudos! Now give "ad hominem" a shot.
Best post of the week 11:14. I placed 7:56 PM's comment into the same light as you but your response has more wit than I could muster.
11:51 brings up a lot of good points. And, yeah, like her, I miss being a "newspaper guy." It's the best club I ever joined and I'm surprised I was allowed to keep going to the clubhouse for as long as I did. But let's face it: It's not exactly a "grown up job" (and that's why it's great). There comes a time in life where you evaluate where you are/where you're going and make some choices about your next career. Fortunately, your journalism skills are actually very good and valued in an open market (if you were good, that is). And they're highly, highly transferable. So take heart. Think outside of conventional paths. Take advantage of the fact that the current business environment shifts at the speed of light thanks to technology and every shift creates an opportunity.Oh, and to provide another boost of confidence: Professionals really, really cannot write in pretty much every industry except journalism. (Make that really, really, really can NOT write!) They hate writing. They fear it. They have difficulty presenting even the most simplistic concepts in words. So that makes former journos all the more valued, whether fulltime or on a 'gig' basis.Keep your heads up, spirits high and walk into those interviews with confidence and optimism!
Web E-BusinessAdmire Moyo, portals writerNewspapers worry over AppleApple is being warned against trying to squeeze cash out of the newspaper industry by controlling subscriptions for iPads and iPhones, reports the BBC. The European Newspaper Publishers' Association (ENPA) says it is concerned by the company's plans to direct online sales through iTunes.If that happens, the ENPA warns, a large cut of their profits would go to Apple. However, the technology giant insists it wants to give customers choice.Not for nothing, but - WONDER IF THE ABOVE "WORRY" WILL ALSO BEGIN TO HAPPEN IN THE USA...... hey, I'm just wondering....
@9:59 a.m.: Obviously you are still employed and have not been out looking for a job in this market. Even PR gigs insist you have X number or years in PR or corporate work. It is not like it was back in the day, when PR firms loved hiring journalists. And they, too, get hundreds of applications for each job now. I am willing to move just about anywhere and take a pay cut in half, and I still have not been able to find anything for 2.5 months. I almost always make it to the second interview, but when places are interviewing 15 people for the second time, well, they odds are still tough. It used to be that if a newspaper flew me in for an interview, I ALWAYS got the job. Now it is second and sometimes third interviews, writing tests, editing tests, etc., for less money than I was making 20 years ago. And they want to hire 25-year-olds. It is true that the people at most corporations do not know how to write, have horrible grammar, etc., but they are not welcoming journalists with open arms the way they used to. In this economy, they are just making do.And I would rather take the time to send out quality applications for jobs that I am qualified for than spend my days trying to cobble together gigs that pay pitifully less than unemployment. At least for a little while longer. And I live in a state where the unemployment compensation is among the lowest in the nation.
Anon@1109A: The Sunday interview shows don't want on anyone from USA Today or non-Beltway news. These shows go strictly for the ruling-class media -- NYTimes, WashPost, WSJ, Time, Newsweek, TV networks.
3:50 I have noticed how bloggers from Politico, the Huffington Post, etc., are replacing USA Today reporters on these shows. They seldom invited people outside the Beltway, but now are freezing out anyone from GCI even if they work on political stories. I guess that shows how much clout Gannett and USA Today has lost in the last three years.
Do you wonder whether Gannett would resort to trying to shut down Gannett Blog due to its disruptive nature to the company's strategic plan? If GM made the case that Gannett Blog torpedoed the CafeMom deal, or that My Boss has had an affect on hiring or retention, would that be cause to try to shut the Blog down?I know that Yahoo faced lawsuits based on anonymous posting. Is it possible here?
5:37: You posted this in the Layoffs thread. What's the obsession? Or are you feeling lonely that nobody acknowledged you?
5:37 may have reposted this question because I forgot to provide an answer earlier.I believe this blog has SOME impact on Corporate, but I can't quantify it. In any case, I do not believe Corporate would try to shut down this site -- nor do I know how it could, even if management wanted to.
Jim, no one would want to shut down the blog. It shows daily how stupid the employees are who were thrown out. Yes, that means you, too, Jim.Every day we see the same things here -- awful writing, crazy conclusions, insults, innuendo, and libel.I laugh hard at people like 2 p.m. who still believe newsrooms had stacks of good writers in their employ. Wake up -- many of them sucked.11:19 has a great post, but it does not go far enough. Gannett had too many people with skills limited to things like changing the appearance of the flag of the newspaper. No company can succeed with tons of dead weight focused on trivial matters.Those people have been thrown out. No sane company will look at that skill set and bring them on board. Those people can complain and swear about Gannett here, but that changes nothing.
Anyone notice how we are being replaced by media that is put together almost for free. Posters on the Huffington Post aren't paid, yet AOL was willing to pay $315 million for it. Facebook, which also counts on free posting, is being shopped for the stock market at a valuation of $50 billion or so.So if corporate is indeed intersted in USA Today, what value would it carry? There are hefty production costs for the newspaper and reporting staff that can't possibly compete with the Huff Post's cost-free staff.I think this new media points the direction we are all going: work for some media company if you want, but it will be working for free. If we are heading towards 15,000 employees as I read it, will the 15,000 be paid employees or unpaid. I am sure GCI would like to follow in the footsteps of the Huff Post and produce all that copy for nothing. Welcome to the new world.
Corporate couldn't shut down this blog even if they wanted to. Gannett is a public company, and as such invites detailed scrutiny of anything it does because its investors need to know. It can't control what it wants disseminated and what it does not.
2:29 It has already happened in the United States. It is Apple's machine and they can direct it through whatever software they chose. If you want to use their software to reach Ipad readers, then you will have to pay a cut of the revenues you get for that use.
Hey, I want to hear more about this rumored USA TODAY sale. That sounds like such a left-field idea, bizarre even. So, what -- GCI becomes mainly a broadcast company? I can see where that makes sense and where print is only dying and we don't have any real hope of resurrecting the community newspapers or USA TODAY. But as a USAT employee I'm pretty interested in hearing more from you folks up in the Maslowski/Motiff wing of the USAT hierarchy. You're the ones who really know what's going on.
Just a note on the suggestion that USAT might be sold. The same item by My Boss suggested it might also be spun off, which I take means making it a separate company. I don't believe they will find a buyer, so spinning it off may be the only option. But can USA Today survive on its own and without drawing on the resources of the community papers? I would like to see what happens, if only to lay to rest the periodic comments on this board that USAT is a drain on USCP properties. Spinning it off might be a savior for the community papers. Also, if it is spun off, where will its offices be once it separates from Gannett's McLean headquarters, and what happens to the Crystal Palace?
I recently was in Florida and saw Florida Today. What struck me was the amount of USA Today copy it carries, while publishing USA Today copies on the same press each day. I go to Florida each year to see relatives, and don't recall seeing so much USA Today copy in Florida Today in previous visits.
Josh Resnik will be resigning this week. He has been telling his staff that he found a job locally and is leaving end of the month after his bonus payout.
Quoting 2:36 from the previous thread:"As stated, there is not a print version of Metromix. It is tied into the young reader publications at each site. I assume that is whatyou mean, Jim? I've never understood why they need their own staff for this publication. It could easily be sent to a design center hub alongwith everything else or as stated, have just an online version."Where do they have a separate staff for a Metromix publication?
Josh is a nice person, but just not a VP level in Digital. His team (me being one of them) have not been impressed. We thought that since he was Gracia's lackey we would see more respect. That is not the case.Sorry to see people leave us, but for Josh, not so much!
He should get praise just for tolerating fucksticks like you, 9:28.
9:23 PM If a property already had a young reader print publication (like they do in Wilmington, Nashville, and Des Moines) they just co-branded it with Metromix logo and content from the website. Wasn't a new product and no additional staff to produce it.
10:27Go back to Jr.High ,you fool.
i'm PRAYING that our AD is one of the ones who gets the ax....
As predicted, Peter Lundquist has succeeded in killing what little is left of HighSchoolSports.net. They announced today to the 20 remaining staffers in Wheeling, WV that the office would close at the end of March.No reports of adding additional staff to the Taj-Mahal Lundquist had built in Bridgeville, PA (allegedly with a $325,000 buildout).There is little information left in the painfully slow site.
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 in a reader