Nearly three months ago, USA Today's No. 2 executive, deputy publisher Susie Ellwood, announced a national search to replace John Hillkirk, who abruptly stepped down as the daily's top editor Nov. 30 to run the investigative team. Executive Editor Susan Weiss has held the job on an interim basis since then.
Now, as Gannett Digital assumes more control over USAT during a period of masthead turnover, here's my latest idea for a candidate as editor: Mitch Gelman, who was named Digital's vice president of products in August. He's a former CNN.com producer, with a background in newspapering.
To be sure, lots of other names were floated in the dozens of comments on my original post about Hillkirk's exit.
Earlier: In Duffey, an intriguing stealth hire for Digital (and USAT?)
 |
| Gelman |
To be sure, lots of other names were floated in the dozens of comments on my original post about Hillkirk's exit.
Earlier: In Duffey, an intriguing stealth hire for Digital (and USAT?)
Ellwood's title isn't Deputy Publisher. And before you ask, get it yourself
ReplyDelete6:46 That's her title, according to the Gannett Blog Stylebook.
ReplyDeleteEven USAT wouldn't use her actual, long-winded title: executive vice president and general manager.
Remember: "An economy of words. A wealth of information."
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DeleteGelman is one of the few new execs who seems to have a strong sense of reality and can get things done.
ReplyDeleteWhen will Banikarim replace Hunke? That's when the real search will begin.
ReplyDeleteWhy wouldn't Susan Weiss assume the role?
ReplyDeleteHeather Frank I'm sure has her hat in the ring. Isn't she being groomed after her tenure with USA weekend?
ReplyDeleteWhat would reality look like? Nothing like the Gilligan's Island we're on now I nope. If Gelman can change the culture, count me in.
ReplyDeleteWhere is Hillkirk going? Or more important why is he going?
ReplyDeleteHeather is just as qualified to run a newsroom as she is at running a Sunday insert. And as she was overseeing Your Life and the Verticals.
ReplyDeleteI vote for Mindy Fetterman.
ReplyDelete1. Smarter hires.
ReplyDelete2. Get some meaningful production from under productive reporters.
3. Editors, see no,2
4. Get experienced journalists to run and staff on line.
5. Make Money and Life staffers part of Sunday rotation.
6. offer buyouts to those who qualify under Gannett plan for minor league teams.
7. Persuade Hunke to retire.
8. Adopt mentoring program for young journos.
9. End silly Colton memos.
10. End silly Susie memos.
9:11 When I was at USAT, Money reporters took turns working on Sunday. That's changed?
ReplyDelete9:11 - A good number of Life/Entertainment editors and reporters work Sundays - in fact, many work Sundays AND Fridays, as well as whenever they need to deal with digital products. And yes I'm using my name on purpose.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteEveryone is working hard, but the Life Department especially has been non-stop for several weekends with awards coverage, the death of Whitney Houston.
ReplyDeleteTaking a shot at Life and the digital staff shows how out of touch the self-righteous complainers are with what is really going on.
Awards season is SO taxing. Not to diminish the effort or reader interest in fashion and self absorbed entertainers, what do most Lifers do that is so demanding the rest of the year?
ReplyDeleteDeck chairs...deck chairs.
ReplyDeleteYou can always get the latest entertainment news in the Life section two or three days after it's been in WSJ or NYT or on TMZ or Entertsinment Weekly.
ReplyDeleteLife section is nothing but a rehash without any focus or purpose. And let's not overlook those great Top Tens lifted right out of the latest travel magazines.
Yeah, really sweating it out in the Life section. Whew.
In fairness to Life (and Money) staffers working weekends, Life has two reporters and Money, one, covering the Whitney Houston funeral right now. A third Life reporter is listed as a contributor.
ReplyDeleteThere are many staffers out of sight, out of mind, in the bureaus, in the main office. Sitting around doing nothing all day must be exhausting, no matter what department you're in. I don't know how some of you can look yourself in the mirror.
ReplyDeleteDear anonymouses, do you SEE anything when you look in the mirror? Sack up.
ReplyDeleteI really don't trust anyone who thinks they know who is working and who isn't.
ReplyDeleteAs if they are the only ones working hard.
Sounds like a persecution complex to me.
There is all the difference in the world between "putting in" a bullshit 10-hour "shift" at USAT socializing, sitting in on to pointless meetings, going to the gym, going for long walks/chats with friends and/or going off-campus to eat a meal -- and working a goddamn non-stop, can't-catch-your-breath eight-hour shift of constant reading/editing/writing without a HealthWorks break, and choking down a salad at your desk when or if you get a moment to do so. So many people from USAT who comment here seriously need to shut the fuck up about how much work they think other people allegedly aren't doing.
ReplyDeleteSounds like you can't handle it, 12:47. You should quit now so someone who can handle it would replace you.
ReplyDelete>>>So many people from USAT who comment here seriously need to shut the fuck up about how much work they think other people allegedly aren't doing.<<<
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't say it so harshly, but yes, I agree.
There are some desks where people are literally working all the time. That doesn't mean other people don't have a similar intensity, but all this finger pointing is really messed up.
Are a few people coasting? Probably, but they are very few and far, far away.
@ 2/17 7:25 Please name one thing that Mitch has gotten done since he came to Gannett.
ReplyDeleteYou can gauge reporter activity easily with byline counts and type of stories worked on. Productivity among editors, especially those in post transformation roles, hard to measure. I think sentiment here also reflects the "workloads" of verticals managers and others throughout all departments who carry important sounding titles and little more.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteHere's an edited version of 3:05's comment:
ReplyDeleteGel man seems to get exciting by news stories, at least in the meetings he occasionally shows up for. He has a news background. So somewhat of a known quantity. We don't know if he's a jerk, if he has decent management skills, if he can judge talent or is willing to shake things up. But we don't know what kind of whiz kid without a clue Hunke and Susie are thinking about. Weiss would be fine as a caretaker and has people skills Hillkiirk laced. But there is little respect for her deputies, who are gathering more power than they deserve or warrant and are not providing direction a 24/7 operation needs.
A bigger problem is the website. gel man should be orchestrating an overhaul of web managers now instead of focusing on how the site looks. . . . Morale is awful.
3:05 raises interesting questions:
ReplyDeleteAs Gannett Digital overhauls USA Today's website, what authority will Payne & Co. have over the site's web staff, where many jobs are held by journalists, and call for news judgement over what content appears -- and doesn't appear.
Can you completely divorce function from content? Are Payne & Co. leading a simple redesign of function -- or are they in charge of a fundamental reconception of the site? Who will have the final say? Weiss or Payne?
Will the permanent top editor -- if not Weiss -- have much of a role in the redesign of the site?
How much more advertiser-friendly will the site become with the involvement of Gannett Graphics Creative Director Augusta Duffey?
Also, I've been told that a Gannett Digital executive was recently making editing decisions about USA Today-produced graphics. What does that say about the authority Digital is amassing over content?
Gee, Jim. you removed the name of a high ranking manager of the website, whose name is listed on usatodays website. the post included a much agreed upon view of his competence and management sytle. why remove the name and commentary?
ReplyDeleteTeeuwen is indeed on the masthead.
ReplyDeleteThe broader question is why arent actual reporters hired to produce for the website? Mayb MB can hire some consultants to tell us before she takes it over in yet another power grab.
ReplyDeleteDave Teeuwen?
ReplyDeleteDavid Teeuwen is in way over his head.
ReplyDeleteWeb and mobile traffic are driven by news and the latest entertainment fluff. instead of short circuiting the process and waiting for print side editors to react, the website needs its own experienced journalists to make faster decisions and match what competitors are doing. There is a serious disconnect at the paper and website, and a definite void in leadership. Cosmetics from a redesign dont fix the problem.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, hunke and ellwood have no unfwrstanding of newsrooms, traditional or otherwise. hillkirk wasnt the answer, but why demote him w/o a replacement? makes no sense. but when have any of their decisions?
ReplyDelete@6:35 -- "the website needs its own experienced journalists to make faster decisions and match what competitors are doing."
ReplyDeleteThere were experienced, highly regarded journalists at USA TODAY who were very interested in assuming leadership roles in the daily management of the website, but when some dot-com jobs came open during the reorganization the other year, Teeuwen went with the kiddies from the awesome Gannett Talent Development Program. Hugely demoralizing for the people who should have gotten the jobs, but from a quality standpoint, well, let's just say "you get what you pay for."
There are talent program grads all over us at. Andria wu, page 1 editor, for one. A new money reporter, Hadley Malcolm, a few others. Teeuwen has nothing to do with stockpiling them on the website. As someone mentioned earlier, his news judgement and managerial skills are almost non-existent. The youngsters who work for him cower at his intimidation tactics. I guess that's what Gannett wants from its leaders.
ReplyDeleteAndria Yu (not Wu) participated in the Gannett LEADERSHIP Program. The Talent Development Program is basically a pipeline for former interns to bypass earning the skills and experience necessary to actually work at a place like USA TODAY, and since most of them are, quite literally, children, it's no wonder a non-entity like Teeuwen can intimidate them.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteLeadership program. Right oh. How does one get selected for that? Criteria? Who decides? Does anyone get to apply?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteAmazing jim keeps removing comments about teeiwen, who has a great deal of power and is listed on masthead of the paper. why are you protecting one of the most reviled managers at the organization?
ReplyDelete