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.)
Wednesday, December 28, 2011
40 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)
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteGood morning everyone!
ReplyDeleteThird!
ReplyDeleteShut er down and get it over with.
ReplyDeleteWhy bother printing in 2012?
Again, I'm a Jim fan but ...
ReplyDelete... You can only push this 'universal standards' argument so far. Every property should be treated as its own, unique brand and not homogenized as one. (Which is the great mistake of the multi-million dollar campaign ... To make it seem like every media form available to the local consumer is all part of one huge conglomerate -- especially when that conglomerate comes with the reputation of low quality/minimal investment/minimal creativity, etc. as is Gannett.)
Let's put the bikini girls aside for the sake of this discussion, OK? When you call for some kind of universal standard, then apply that thinking to editorial standards at community newspapers v. USAT v. USAW v. Sports Weekly ... Or even standards for one editorial dept v. another.
And don't kid me that there aren't different "rules" for covering a sporting event/team v. covering the White House/Congress. Or that community newspapers, USAT, USAW and Sports Weekly all abide by the same "standards" when it comes to attribution, the literal use of quotes and other journalistic functions.
Hell, look at a typical USAT cover story: 15 to 25 people quoted within a 40-inch space (well, that certainly takes the chore of attempting to actual write a story out of the equation). Does Sports Weekly or USAW do the same thing? Hell no, and they shouldn't. (Frankly, neither should USAT. But that's an argument for another day.)
The point is, Jim, that attempting to push some kind of "universal standard" for all publications is the exact kind of myopic thinking that led to the ghastly, national marketing campaign: Just as readers are begging for their local products to be local, Gannett gives them the exact opposite.
How great is it that Murdoch can own properties that are so uniquely their own as are the NY Post, WSJ, Fox Sports and, yeah, even Fox News? What about Conde Nast and the distinction of Vanity Fair, the New Yorker, Vogue, Wired, etc.?
Do you think someone from up above is trying to cram "universal standards" down the editors' throats there, Jim? Or do you think Conde Nast and Murdoch are smart enough to say, "Hire good people and leave 'em the hell alone ... It's about the individual brand, not the corporation."
So let the bikini girls be. But get rid of that eyesore of a corporate logo at the top of the page. Let individual properties be individual.
While I appreciate the company's efforts to make money, is anyone finding anything worth using from Deal Chicken? At our site, most of what I've seen seem like indulgent, non-essential things like what used to be called "yuppies" would spend their money on. I guess I'm just getting too old.
ReplyDeleteOr too poor, 11:19. Happy furlough season!
ReplyDelete9:33 is right. The whole point of buying niche publications is to serve those audiences, not to provide them mush for the masses.
ReplyDeleteNo local editorial in the Cincinnati Enquirer today. Two guest columns, one syndicated column and letters to the editor. The Enquirer braintrust has had absolutely nothing to say about anything for 11 straight days.
ReplyDeleteGeesh, even the daily Northwestern in Wisconsin writes a local editorial every day. And they're at 14,500 on weekdays. What's Cincy's circ?
ReplyDelete12:49 The Enquirer's weekday circulation is 140,877. Sunday's is 285,345, according to the ABC's handy lookup database.
ReplyDeleteJournal Sentinel in Milwaukee making the switch to some paid online access. The price seems reasonable, and at least this newspaper has interesting stories to read.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.jsonline.com/business/js-everywhere-digital-subscription-plan-launches-jan-4-l23jdgd-136288653.html
9:33, it is rare for a usa today cover to have more than three or four sources in, tops. Thats especially true for Life and Sports. So what's your point? that reporters are actually talking to sources and getting their opinion? Isnt that what they are supposed to do, or would you rather have them aggregate information and source it elsewhere without verifying accuracy? What a silly post.
ReplyDeleteColumnist: the sheriff consorts with felons. Sheriff: the columnist IS a felon...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.news-press.com/article/20111228/COLUMNISTS02/312280017/Sam-Cook-My-duty-shine-light-will-never-dim
Over the past couple years, there has been no shortage of people like me who may be in their 50's talking about the changes in the industry and complaining about them. There has been no shortage of apparently younger people telling us older people we deserved to be out at Gannett as we're not accepting of change. So I have one question for all the new, young newspaper related people- How's all that change working for you?
ReplyDeleteIMO, Gannett should quit farting around and go for full nudity, complete with videos and personal ads for hook-ups. Might as well go for the big money.
ReplyDeleteMost of Florida Today's editorials have been from Tallahassee, Ft. Meyers, DesMoines, etc. Once or twice a week there's something called thumbs up, thumbs down from the ex watchdog writer. I guess it's their way of putting a bunch of little editorials in one place. Most public's reaction ranges from I don't care to who wants to read what other papers think. Even front page stories are coming from other places...not even AP. Our once great local "space coast" paper is becoming an irrelevant hodgepodge of everyone else's news. Yuck.
ReplyDelete1:51 does that include full frontal nudity from males- they just always have that strategicly placed pillow or piece of furniture in the way, nudity for the ladies. sick of only t n a! How about some d***!
ReplyDeletehttp://www.wisinfo.com/includes/newspaper/links/6x3_MomsLikeMe_Magazine22.pdf
ReplyDeleteNice to see them pushing the November issue 2 months after it was issued.
Most of Florida Today's editorials have been from Tallahassee, Ft. Meyers, DesMoines, etc. Once or twice a week there's something called thumbs up, thumbs down from the ex watchdog writer who says Jim sucks. I guess it's their way of putting a bunch of little editorials in one place. Most public's reaction ranges from I don't care to Jim eats his own crap who wants to read what other papers think. Even front page stories are coming from other places like Jim's rectum...not even AP. Our once great local "space coast" paper is becoming an irrelevant hodgepodge of everyone else's news. Yuck.
ReplyDeleteFlorida Today is the best newspaper on the Space Coast plain and simple.
ReplyDeleteThe space coast is economically desolate now (except for Big Al's beachhouse), as is FLAT.
ReplyDelete6:29 I wouldn't say that too strongly! I actually can't find anyhting to read in the paper anymore since they changed the format-very boring and not worth a dollar- unless you need newspaper to wrap up something. These days Florida Today isn't that interesting of an item, like the old days- too bad.
ReplyDelete6:29 You said it, plain and simple! And it is about the only newspaper on the space coast.
ReplyDeleteBut that can be changed, just like the space center
FT supporter, Good attitude hope it lasts!!!!
ReplyDelete6:29 you can't find anything to read since they changed format? How simple are you? If you were still here I would sit down and read it to you.
ReplyDeleteI am a minority it would seem, because I actually like the new (lesser) format. A year ago I didn't have time to read it with my morning coffee, and only got halfway into the 2nd section before it was time for me to leave for work. If they could print it in a tab format, then I would be a happy camper.
ReplyDeleteAbout the content of Florida Today, or lack of, it is a natural evolution. The newsroom was stripped of columnists and editors, so there really isn't manpower enough to put together a paper the size of what it once were.
This will not last. Soon enough the Monday edition will be gone, followed by Wednesday, then Thursday before Tuesday is finally pulled, leaving it a 3-day-a-week publication. Perhaps a year or two after that, USA Today will be the only offering (delivered from the Orlando Sentinel), making Florida Today present in web form only.
The once majestic building, with its numerous awards, will be gutted and split for parts, leaving it a shell of its former glory. With the inventory stripped the thousands of square feet will be a hard to sell for anything but a storage facility.
This little story could be about any of the mid to small sized community papers Gannett own. If the people in charge had any shred of decency left and cared for the employees who are left at these facilities, they would cut the cord to the mothership, and let those papers throw out a for sale sign.
Each community has room for a newspaper, but not in the one size fit all formula currently deployed. We used to have a very good product, both print and on the web, but those days are gone forever, unless someone with a vision comes in and steer the ship in the right direction. The current lack of foresight, interest and capability by the almighty corporate mob squad will soon strip the locals from their once loved #1 source for news.
My timeline guess for the above is: 2012 Monday gone, 2013 Wednesday and Thursday gone and 2014 Tuesday and the weekend gone.
This leaves me more than a dozen of years from retirement age in 2014.
Stereotyping anyone over 50 as being unable to make the transition to digital news plays right into the hands of Gannett, which is always looking for a (legal) reason to get rid of senior editors, reporters and others. This actually was the case long before the economic downturn. So I would ask my colleagues -- young and old -- not to help Gannett grow that myth. There are people of all ages who aren't tech whizzes, but what 50 and 60somethings bring to the table can't be replaced by technology anyway. So in a way, the whole argument/myth is moot.
ReplyDeleteBottom line, Gannett will target anyone making "too much" money, using any means to smear their reputations and justify their being pushed out of the business. Unfortunately, that usually means more experienced employees get the boot and, because of the state of the industry, will never find a way back.
One other thing... Some of those so-called over-the-hill oldsters laid off by Gannett have been fortunate to find jobs at companies with, get this, with digital-based operations. Guess they were able to learn what they had to and those new companies also got a vast amount of other important skills in those Gannett castoffs to boot -- qualities Gannett never values, like integrity, accuracy, ethics, perspective, etc.
8:57 the newspapers are near worthless in terms of selling them (unless you sold their websites and that ain't happening). The cash you'd get wouldn't be worth the effort. I think Gannett is probably on the right track: Wind them down, shift resources to on-line and squeeze as much revenue out of the papers as you can until the websites are profitable. The value is in the on-line brands that are tied to the soon-to-be-gone newspapers.
ReplyDeleteYour FT scenario -- starving the paper of resources, cutting back delivery etc. -- sounds on target. Newspaper ad revenue is shrinking at an ever-faster rate. That acceleration will only continue in 2012 and getting rid of overhead makes sense.
Other things I'm certain of in 2012 are more consolidation of copy editing, photography and reporting; more consolidation of printing; more sales of real estate as it becomes much cheaper to relocate a much smaller staff, devoid of printing presses and most production employees, into a much smaller, rented, workspace.
Gannett will be out of the newspaper business within 5-8 years.
10 pm I'm Exhibit A in the case for many 50- and 60-year-olds making the digital transition. I'll be 55 in February.
ReplyDeleteAgain with the digital or nothing sentiments. Digital is it's own entity, and it's own enemy. Print has, and can be again, a much more in depth form of reporting. I believe the only ones who are trying to hasten the death of print are the ones whose livlihoods depend on it. You may be trying to forecast the end of Florida Today but there are an awful lot of us who are trying to keep it alive in spite of all the stabs in the back Gannett, and sometimes FT itself, is giving it.
ReplyDeleteI know for a fact that at least a half-dozen more paywall "test markets" are being announced within the next few weeks. The changes will be radical in their pricing strategies and will also include major single-copy price increases along with dual pricing for print/online subscriptions. Local stomachs are turning as the announcement dates approach, fearing that advertisers and readers are not at all going to embrace the changes. The new models will be different than the three markets that have been testing over the last couple years. Watch here for more, coming soon.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThe Enquirer's brain trust has had nothing to say since Carolyn Washburn arrived a little less than a year ago. No opinions, no newsroom morale, not watchdog journalism except the quick and dirty type because they don't have the staff any longer.
ReplyDeleteIt will not be worth keeping the print at FT. We all wish you the best, but we look at the whole picture and we just don't see the fit. You have to be able to sell a product that has interest to the public. Drop in ad revenue, bad format, not as personable of a space coast newpaper will be it's down fall! And yes they will downsize to a smaller building for digital only. Print will either transfer out or go away all together.
ReplyDeleteGood luck and keep your chin up-but be weary of the blinders. This comes from a business that went thru the same transition. Don't let it be a deer in the headlights affect.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteI am also one of those older people, now retired, who looked with disdain on the new digital age. We are just as tech savvy as everyone else but we saw that all that tweeting, live streaming, blogging etc. can't replace good reporting. We have been proven correct.
ReplyDelete