That's according to Reuters media columnist Jack Shafer, who just tweeted the following:
"Joan Biskupic is coming to Reuters as legal affairs editor-in-charge, a big title for a very talented journalist. All hail Biskupic!"
That's bad news for USA Today, where she's worked since 2000. Biskupic, who has covered the Supreme Court of the United States for 20 years, is one of the paper's more high-profile correspondents, appearing often on national television, including the PBS NewsHour.
She's also the author of a new biography, American Original: The Life and Constitution of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.
 |
| Biskupic |
That's bad news for USA Today, where she's worked since 2000. Biskupic, who has covered the Supreme Court of the United States for 20 years, is one of the paper's more high-profile correspondents, appearing often on national television, including the PBS NewsHour.
She's also the author of a new biography, American Original: The Life and Constitution of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.
Good for her. Everyone else at USAT and the Big G needs to abandon ship asap. I respect her staying in news, but I'm looking to get out of the news business.
ReplyDeleteGreat for her but sad for USA Today.
ReplyDeleteThe Supremes are kind of an elitest group anyway, the Court doesn't show up on anybody's Passion Topic list. Probably can leave that position dark or part time it - they're only in session for a couple months a year anyway.
ReplyDeleteWe want the people to know that we still cover 2 out of 3 branches of the government, and that ain't bad.
We'll be able to replace her with three technojournalsts. More photo galleries and video!!!!!!!! More clicks!!!!!!!!
ReplyDeleteIt was already a part-time gig, believe me.
ReplyDeletePound your gavel on the newest BNQT gallery, "The Sweeties of SCOTUS".
ReplyDeleteI was about to ask for a SCOTUS Spotted gallery, but 6:26 beat me to it.
ReplyDeleteGood for her, hoping (in an idealistic fashion) that quality reporters leaving sends a message to the higher ups....
ReplyDeleteYes, the message is we will now save nearly $200k a year.
ReplyDeleteSo happy for her. Can't wait for my story on the blog as one of the success stories to get out....
ReplyDeleteIs not their a former law clerk of Justice Scalia who works for the law firm that Gannett used?
ReplyDeleteI am baffled. So another long timer with credentials is leaving. What was her big contribution to the paper on an on going basis. Other than her rep. Anyone?
ReplyDeleteGood copyeditors are far more important in the overall scheme of things.we do thing every day, big and small, that no one notices.
I used to dislocate my elbow patting myself on the back for catching advertising mistakes in composing, but then my job went to Des Moines.
ReplyDelete"Far more important in the overall scheme" is great until someone changes the scheme on you.
I've come up with a way to cover the Court after Biskupic leaves. Let's get Justice Scalia to give us his top 10 fitness ideas for 2012 and we can cover it in Your Life. Now THAT's a passion topic!
ReplyDeleteFor anyone thinking of starting a career at USAT, you should pay a lot of attention to the mass defections (some forced, some not) of the last three years. Says a lot about that place more so than most failing newspapers with much smaller pots of gold.
ReplyDelete'Mass defections' is right. The talent drain from USAT in the past few years is jaw-dropping. I can't think of another paper in the country, with the possible exception of the Los Angeles Times (which has a much larger staff), that has shed so many talented veteran journalists.
ReplyDeleteAs one of those who left in last three years of the talent drain, I can't believe the ignorant comments here and the glee that usat just lost one of the best SCOTUS reporters in the country. If you want to know why people are leaving, it's all here.
ReplyDeleteNot so much glee as gallows humor.
ReplyDeleteWe wish we could expect a strong replacement, but we know that if she is replaced, it will be with someone cheaper with less experience or talent.
11:38,
ReplyDeleteYeah, right. The blog drove her out.
I always have to laugh at the faux praise heaped on those who leave. It's one thing to have a great reputation. It's another thing to be considered so special that past accomplishments are the measure that defines success. I've seen her on TV and I know about her books. Despite her vast knowledge of the court and her obvious expertise, she was essentially a part-timer drawing a huge salary.
ReplyDeleteIs the Supreme Court a more important beat than, say, healthcare, the banking sector, the economy or any number of areas that we ignore or cover so poorly?
Joan is a great reporter and huge asset to our staff at USAT. Her departure is a huge loss for us. Anyone seriously involved in the journalism business in Washington knows that.
ReplyDeleteAnd yes, it's not too much to ask of one of the largest newspapers in the country to devote a reporter to covering the Supreme Court. It is one of three branches of government. If you don't know how this institution affects you, please enroll in a 7th grade civics class. You clearly have much to learn.
There are still some of us at USA Today that strive for good, solid journalism. Joan was one of them, and we will miss her.
A huge loss ? Really ?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteI would rather see the limited Money staff beef up its business coverage than replace the Supreme Court reporter.
ReplyDeleteAP does a reasonably good job of court coverage. Since the paper relies on wires for most of it's web content and much of it print space, I say let the wires handle coverage and use the savings elsewhere. How about a couple more copyeditors?
ReplyDelete