An independent journal about the Gannett Co. and the news industry's digital transition
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
9:23 you hit the nail on the head, but nobody will notice. JZ thinks they are the future of Gannett and supports them all the way. Did you think they meant what they said about "World Class"? And they wonder why morale is in the tank. They ask questions, but they don't like the answers, so you're moved on or out.
Jim, 9:23 was not offensive. Why was it removed?
I agree. There wasn't any name calling in that post.
It called out four people by last name.
But in no worse way than Hunke or Dubow or Martore are "called out".
I know Hunke's, Dubow's and Martore's track record. I cannot say the same for the four AZ people named in that post.
Are you the only one that can judge track records?
Do you really know Crotchfelt's record? If so, you should know more about the others mentioned, as she hired them.
12:15, this is Jim's blog and Jim's rules. If you want to doing your own judging, build your own audience: Free blogger software available at www.blogspot.com.
12:45, nobody is busting Jim's chops at all, just trying to understand the distinction. Crotchfelt's name is mentioned all over this blog, and the question was real, if you really know Crotchfelt's record, you should know about the folks in the post, because she hired them. That's not calling anybody out. And I fully support Jim's efforts here, and am one of his biggest fans. Not meaning to offend Jim at all, just asking questions. Little touchy?
I hear Craig was seen on Martha's Vineyard perhaps giving Barry some advise?
Well, that's some intelligent commentary, from the gent suggesting others build brains.But, on the subject of names -- it's obvious that some people within in the company are considered "public figures" and some are not. Gracia gets mentioned by name all the time, of course, and probably can't be libeled because of her standing, but if someone posted a specific story of corrupt behavior and named a specfic entry-level employee -- say, a sales assistant -- that might be actionable.So the question -- at what point between the sales assistant and the COO does Jim allow names to be named? It's probably not something he wants to put in writing -- because god knows, if he's specific and misses some comment somewhere, you people will jump all over him -- but I'd say it goes something like this:Corporate execs: Fair gamePublishers: Fair gameOC members: Fair game, almost all the timeNon-OC department heads: Fair game, most of the timeManagers: No namesNon-exempt employeers: No namesWhether you agree or not, is that something you can understand the basics of, or do brains need to be built first?
James, this shit's getting boring, and boring content drives off readers. I know a company that excels at that already... Yahoo!Please delete the garbage quicker so fewer people pile on and serial posters can't agree with themselves as much.
1:46 thank you. I don't have a hard-and-fast rule. But if I did, it would be very, very, very close to your suggestion.
Jim & 1:46, thank you for the clarification. That makes sense. Appreciate it!
Jim, 3 of the people mentioned are OC's members. Just an FYI.
Why did you delete my post that just said Crotchfelt?
3:56 I can think of very few one-word comments that constitute a meaningful contribution to a thread. That is not one of them. It would be just the same if you posted only the word "tree," or "accountant." I would remove those, too. My readers have said over and over that they want me to edit comments thoughtfully, so they don't have to wade through a lot of nonsensical stuff. That's what I'm trying to do: provide a good service to readers.
1:46 here with a quick addendum: I actually had typed something to the extent of "of course, Jim can't be expected to know the name of every OC member in he country and might sometimes err on the side of caution if it's not mentioned," but I erased it be because it seemed blindingly obvious.Oh, and someone ADMITS to being the person who just posted "Crotchfelt?" Brilliant. Go look up "deliberately obtuse" somewhere.
3:56 I should add that, for I hope obvious reasons, I'm especially sensitive right now to how people's names are used here -- including Karen Crotchfelt's.4:41 Gannett easily employs 300 or more operating committee members -- those people with titles including publisher, general manager, executive editor, vice president of advertising, production, etc. And that's just among the 80 or so U.S. community newspapers.I recognize the names of many if not most of the publishers, and quite a few of the top editors. After that, I have to look up names.Then there are the leading managers at the 23 TV stations; the 17 U.K. newspapers; CareerBuilder, PointRoll and the rest of Gannett Digital, plus all the senior executives at Corporate's HQ in McLean, Va.GCI is, indeed, a very large company.
4:41 I simply type Crotchfelt to see if Jim would delete it. And sure enough he did as expected. Somehow there is an alliance between Jim and Crotchfelt. Maybe he is giving her special treatment for information she is providing to him as a bribe.
12:45, no one needs to create a blog to criticize Jim. There are several links out there already with that criticism.Try to do your homework next time.
Jim, I seem to remember comments regarding Gracia and her mustache and yet you did not remove any of those posts. This further solidifies your solidarity to Crotchfelt.
OK boys, if you want to seriously discuss the Indy Star, call the publisher by her first name and last initial and stay on topic.
6:02, good morning Karen C.!
8:51, I'm 6:02. I don't even know who Karen C. is, let alone be her. But as a woman, I'm more than a little disgusted by the immaturity displayed here. I'm willing to bet I'm not the only one, which is why whoever is posting the infantile wordplay keeps doing it.
Buncha deleted comments to wade through make me not want to waste time reading the rest of this blog.
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