 |
| Romenesko |
That’s a long story, but let’s start on July 6, with this e-mail . . .
Sunday, November 20, 2011
Romenesko: Why that marriage couldn't be saved
That’s a long story, but let’s start on July 6, with this e-mail . . .
23 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)
I think Romkenesko will do well...I already dumped the old Poynter bookmark and have his new one. I will click on his advertisers. And I've gotten off Poynter and NewsU lists.
ReplyDeleteOn thing many of us can all relate to. Romenensko, an extremely private person, revealed that he has diabetes and how difficult it was for him to find insurance on his own.
I wish both Jims (Hopkins and Romenesko) all the best. As media companies collapse, LIE to and fleece employees, they help us get to the truth.
I noticed that diabetes disclosure, too.
ReplyDeleteNot selling insurance, but Aetna also was the only provider I could get to insure me after my layoff because of blood pressure.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteI know I am probably in the minority, but what is Romanesko?
ReplyDeleteJim Romenesko edited a blog for more than 12 years that focused on news in the media industries -- TV, newspapers and magazines. It was hosted for most of that time on the Poynter Institute's website.
ReplyDeleteIt became a very influential site within the industry because Romenesko offered a highly readable selection of news about media. He showcased work from other sites -- including Gannett Blog, which extended my site's influence and spread more news about Gannett.
In this story about him, you'll see that Romenesko at one time had 100,000 individual readers -- making him an important gatekeeper of information in a very powerful industry.
He didn't really "offer" those things, though. He took items from other sources and linked to them. That's different from getting the news.
ReplyDeleteOf course, Jim relies on rumors and gossip here, so he probably doesn't understand the difference.
6:01 For someone who once railed against anonymous posters for being cowards, you've certainly changed your tune.
ReplyDeleteRomenesko will succeed beyond the level he achieved at Poynter. As a result of all this- many readers will see Poynter for what it has become, much like most Gannett new sites. The difference here is that this talented individual will very easily continue to do what he does, keep his readership, gain advertisers (many of whom will leave Poynter for his site since he was the reason they advertised there in the first place) and pretty much leave them in his dust. Good luck to him. Those idiots at Poynter- and that's really what they are, will realize they made a mistake- a big one. Don't underrate talent- it's what readers and advertisers want!
ReplyDeleteJim, regarding your 6:36 post: Any time you want to have an open discussion at another site with stricter guidelines than the ones you have here, let me know.
ReplyDeleteUntil then, you have no leg to stand on. As always, you are unintentionally humorous. Were you a court jester in a previous life?
8:43, you're rather unintentionally humorous yourself. Is the CP that desperate to pay you for posting such uninspired comebacks? How much is the going rate these days, btw? $20 a post? Either ways, it's (sl)easy money, right?
ReplyDeleteDespite what he says on his blog, I still think what happened had to do with money. Hal Holbrook was right, follow the money, or lack thereof.
ReplyDelete8:43 is not a paid poster.
ReplyDelete12:05 I can absolutely believe that he was tired of doing the same sort of blog for so long, that he wants to do something different.
Now, in the end he may wind up richer than if he'd stayed at Poynter. But I don't think that's his intention right now.
Romenesko made $170,000 a year blogging for Poynter. He was willing to give that up to launch his own site. I really doubt that he expects to make $170K a year with his new site. To me, it's a pretty clear case of being burned out and wanting to try something different.
ReplyDeleteNotice that Jim Brady was consulting with Poynter on adding longer aggregated content to bring people back to site (not out to links) and adding more contributors, all of whom are mediocre? Maybe Gannett should get him next. He wasted millions on TBD and is helping run Journal Register into the ground.
ReplyDelete12:05 here.....
ReplyDeleteI should have been more precise. I meant money on Poynter's side, as in "Holy crap, we pay him how much and he's going to take advertising dollars away from us. We need a way to make him quit."
Not to spoil the party, and I'm a big admirer of Romenesko, but his new blog is tedious and off-putting.
ReplyDeleteIf he is going to keep his supportive audience he needs to do better than asking readers how to find out this or that.
Very odd. He's jumped the shark!
9:51, why does that surprise you? He is an aggregator, not a journalist. You and many others need to start grasping that concept.
ReplyDelete9:58 He's a journalist. Aggregating -- that is, thoughtful aggregating rather than robo-aggregating -- is editing, and that's journalism.
ReplyDeleteIn addition to story selection on his blog, he also did a lot of copyediting, including headline writing.
What's more, before becoming a full-time blogger, Romenesko wrote for Milwaukee Magazine, and then for the St. Paul Pioneer Press.
Julie Moos would be a perfect fit for Gannett. No feel for appearances or handling people. Just someone with a title pushing people's buttons with little thought to the consequences fallout.
ReplyDeleteJim @ 1:49. Your defense sounds like someone defending their brother in law. "He WORKS. REALLY."
ReplyDeleteThanks for posting this, Jim. I used to read Romenesko daily, but fell off for a few years after leaving daily journalism. Good to rediscover him. I've already bookmarked his new site.
ReplyDeleteJim, he may have done some work to choose those articles he aggregated, but he took a lot of shortcuts after that.
ReplyDeleteIf, in your world, editing means transferring a lot of text from someone else's name to your name, then it's a good thing you're no longer in the business.