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.)
Monday, January 02, 2012
32 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)
How is this deal chicken initiative working out? I hear that theres a struggle to fill pipelines across all markets.
ReplyDeleteSo word is out on the street about Florida Today raising their Sunday price to $3.00. Word back from carriers and anybody else with an opinion is some pretty bad backlash happening. Even other vendors are laughing at us. "Who do they think they are...New York Times"? "Why do they want to put you out of business"? "I'm cancelling my subscription"? "A dollar more than Orlando (Sentinel)? Guess I'll be buying them". Just a few quotes coming in. I understand raising the price since they have been $1.50 for 18 years or more, but more than the competitor? Think maybe Florida Today/Gannett would rethink this and come to their senses?
ReplyDeleteAnd for you digital only phobes...you will be the death of newspaper companies...not the print editions. There are mony more people who do not have PC's, let alone lap tops or I pads, ro ever will have. You will just drive people back to watching TV for their news...and we all know how unbiased they are!
9:40 you're kidding right? Lots of people without PCs or mobile devices? That's just ignorant or a joke. My 70 year ok'd Mom has both. Cone on man!
ReplyDeleteDigital is the future. It will be a painful transition with more jobs lost in circulation and press and production rooms. Some presses will still operate, printing other products, but many will go dark or be dismantled for scrap. Many are so old they are worth zero. W/ more and more people using smart phones and tablets, from ages 5 to 85, we must change our business to accommodate these consumers. Newspapers are OLD and outdated. Today's consumers want their news NOW. If it happens on Monday, they want to read about it on Monday, on their laptop, desktop, smartphone or tablet. By Tuesday morning, that is ancient news. I can see one scenario where we keep a Sunday magazine in print for long form journalism and projects, but the day is coming when we retire the 7 day per week printed product. It costs too much to produce and the news is SO outdated by the next morning.
ReplyDeleteId-jits focusing on whether digital or paper matters... the delivery medium does not really matter, its the CONTENT that matters. And no matter how much we scream about it, if the CONTENT sucks, then no one, not even Mom with a phase-shifting particle re-generator, will bother.
ReplyDeleteAnd with newsrooms in NEWSPAPERS getting gutted, the result is that Gannett content now sucks. The future should be focused on BETTER CONTENT, not necessarily better DELIVERY of content.
Three cheers for Gracia Martore and Vikram from shoplocal. This guy Vikram has fooled another executive into thinking he is actually smart.
ReplyDeleteGo Gracia!
Digital is the future for Gannett if they produce an online product worth buying and figure out how to make a decent profit. To date, Gannett hasn't accomplished either.
ReplyDeleteIMHO "Digital is the Future" is right that printed page is passe. But the fact "Digital is the Future" is ignoring is that the concept of news is also evaporating. No one's going to be paid $50 or 60K to tweet from school board and city council meetings. Oh no, those smart phones will be for sending pics of hot chicks who are NOW at local bars. All you cats are crazy who think that this technology is intended for you to be the 21st Century Edward R. Murrow.
ReplyDeleteGannett entered the digital arena years ago and has had ample time to become successful. If upper management was as strategic as they think they are, the company wouldn’t be in such terrible shape. How much more time do you think they need in order to launch something truly successful?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete10:23 am....Maybe you're better off than I. A lot of people I know might have PC's but they don't use theirs to read news. Younger ones I know have phones but can't afford the charges to hook up "online". And if you're one of those who are writing to this blog while you're supposed to be working...that says it all doesn't it. And no, I'm off work, at home.
ReplyDeleteDigital and print can and should coexist.
Yesterday,Jim talked of layoffs ocurring in January, is there any info on which locations
ReplyDeletemight be effected and how many?
Try to name one Major success Gannett has had in the digital arena. So far they've managed to only peck around the margins.
ReplyDeleteThe printed edition has survived prior technological advances in the past such as TV and radio. To think that it is digital vs print is just naive. Where do you all work? Who puts the bread and butter on your table ? A newspaper and you should not forget that no put down your smart phones and get back to work we have an edition to put out tonight.
ReplyDeleteI was thinking about the additional round of the mandatory furloughs ... I thought of a business option that may help the employees. Perhaps a blogger, with business-law experience, would know if this idea is attainable:
ReplyDeleteMany of Gannett employees receive a sizable amount of paid vacation days, throughout the year... Would it be possible for employees to decrease their paid vacation-time, in lieu of a furlough? It would have to be an option, of course, since it may not be the best solution for everyone. However, it may give some people more financial stability.
2:15, several things:
ReplyDelete(1) I think he said he didn't have that info. But I didn't read too closely because:
(2) He didn't cite a source. No source = gossip. And ...
(3) He's throwing things at the wall again to see what will stick. New quarter = Jim seeking handouts.
3:02 My source is a reader who has tipped me off to pending layoffs since the summer of 2009. And they have been correct every time.
ReplyDeleteHere's a summary of a comment I posted yesterday:
Last I heard, there's a layoff scheduled for this month at some U.S. newspapers. I don't know how many jobs nor how many papers, unfortunately.
As always, any layoff is subject to change -- in this case, including any better-than-expected fourth quarter financial results.
2:49. Probably a no-go. Gannett does what benefits the company, not employees.
ReplyDelete2:49 your plan doesn't work. If you give up vacation and work that week there is no mo wu savings. If you don't work and do t get paid it's a furlough
ReplyDeleteBig layoffs coming for USAT HQ production staff this week. Wish us all good luck and happiness! Stop by and say goodbye before Friday.
ReplyDeleteAu revoir USAT HQ Production...
ReplyDeleteIci, c'est une citation d'inspiration pour nous sur votre départ : "la justice est accessoire à la loi et l'ordre"
How many remain with USAT Production now?
ReplyDeleteNarito ang isa pang quote: "bobo ay bobo ay."
ReplyDelete10:06 PM,
ReplyDeleteA Filipino version of a Forest Gump quote.
Re: 10:06PM
ReplyDeleteAppropriate since I papers will soon be laid out in the Philippines.
print will continue? you are so in denial.
ReplyDeletea few things, like special small and lucrative audiences, could survive. like the magazines, some of them, if gannett could learn how to do them. but this is a big, inefficient company that turns slower than a hippo. no innovation survives. change or anything different is threatening and "wrong" in the newsrooms. at corporate, seen as too risky - and not the point.
those left behind near the top are here to manage it to a close and turn off the lights. it's sad but true. i was there. now i'm gone. you will soon be too.
Unfortunately in the print world, Borders Books is gone and Barnes & Noble typically closes eight to 12 stores a year.
ReplyDeletePaywalls; pay walls -
ReplyDeleteNever the less, one gets the gist!
11:39 So, someone is going to take a five hundred, dollar reader to the beach, where it can be easily stole, filled with sand or water, so they can read the daily newspaper?
ReplyDelete02:10 You sound like a fool. Even the CHEAPEST phones have the 'net; T-mobile has $1 a day non-committal contracts that have websurfing options. Ever try to get a computer at the library? It's like an hour long wait - everybody is hip to the library 'net. Meanwhile, get a half assed laptop and lay up in Panera - or did you not realize that's why people are in there.
ReplyDeleteIf you are committed to print, be committed to print. But don't make up crap to support your idea.
The bottomline is that two things are shutting down newspapers: Webmarketing and niches. Study webmarketing for even a day and you'll leave not only knowing that print will NEVER win, but you'll probably wonder why anyone would even think about advertising in print.
Meanwhile, with more specific information increasingly available and more and more easy to find, people can become more and more niche-oriented. Why would I go to a general interest newspaper site when all I want to read about all day is cats? Annnnd the advertisers will spend their money there, since they are guaranteed to get the eyeballs of people who like cats - not casting some wide net in print or on a generic news site.
These are the REAL ISSUES. As long as people keep wanting to be "on that bullshit" as I call it, the boat will keep sinking.
10:54 I agree with your general point, but you ignore the fact that every study shows that web ads don't even come close to print ads in terms of stickiness. Advertisers will spend money there, but only in relation to the small amount of return they get on their investment. Web ads are very easy to ignore and almost everyone does ignore them.
ReplyDeleteDigital versus print. Really, is our content so wonderful and deep that someone will pay and go to our newspaper sites (paywall) at an increase to $300+ a year to get exactly what they need? Or, if they have digital access, will they cherry pick from espn.com, a preferred stock site, local free television sites, etc. to get what they need at no charge. Will someone that has been digital, now pay $300+ to now get a printed paper along with their access to newspaper site. It is going to hurt both sides.
ReplyDelete