An independent journal about the Gannett Co. and the news industry's digital transition
As Q2 winds down, I suspect we'll hear more about those long-rumored publisher RIFs.Cutting from the top is the best way to reduce expenses; manpower won't be affected.
Pointrolls SVP of business dev was just let go
Pointrollover now has 37 less VPs than Gannett Corporate.
2:19 Maybe he is publisher RIF. Good thing for someone so out of touch with employees and community. We publish a paper in Shreveport and he decides to live in another city. Shreveporters recognize this and resents it. GO AWAY DB!
We are witnessing the slowest and most painful death at Pointroll. Either shutter the doors and get it over with or get rid of the bloodsucking wastes of air (gatto and team) and see if pointroll can be resuscitated. There is zero motivation to work for these thieves. Gannett, please do something soon.
should be, 37 fewer.
How about those GPS allocations? Sites have so little actual employees to get the work done, however the overhead at the hub newspapers, along with the overhead from random beautiful USA Today offices and the corporate offices could pay for a lot more of the $20,000 a year site employees that actually do the work.
Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway just bought Media General for $142 million. It doesn't include the Tampa Trib.Guess Tampa will be looking to hire soon for those editing jobs that went to the hub on the East Coast.
Is there any more information on the upcoming layoffs?Will they be widespread or site by site.The ROP advertising inches at our weekly has diminished to about 50%of what it once was.Weekies have,for some reason,been spared the cutting board,does this still continue?
Anon@859: Berkshire Hathaway is actually buying most of the Media General newspapers. In turn, Berkshire Hathaway will provide financing to Media General and may get a seat on the latter company's board.Media General now emphasizes TV and digital, a business model Gannett is reluctant to adopt.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
I've got to wonder how a paywall that can easily be bypassed either by clearing cookies or using private browsing mode is going to make Gannett money, especially given the outrageous monthly rates they are charging.
Just tested it out on http://www.jconline.com/. A simple practice of private browsing (on Firefox) and clearing cookies seems to bypass the system. Also, if you have multiple browsers they appear to count articles separately.
Has anybody in the 14 percent who were eligible for the EROP but not offered it thought of suing Gannett?
When I was a young man and had an opportunity to leave the newsroom room to get on a publisher's track with a small chain of papers, I turned it down. I loved journalism too much to get involved too heavily on the business end. I didn't want to slash and burn as many publishers were doing to newsrooms back then, similar to what they are doing now.Strange that USAT's new publisher is blindly perceived as a content guy and a lover of journalists. You don't leave the newsroom for an executive position unless you have some ice (and less ink) in your veins that allows you to make some decisions that are contrary to good journalism.Frankly, I don't trust anyone in a position of power in this company anymore, and that includes LK. I would definitely temper the optimism with a healthy does of journalistic skepticism. Until LK answers the tough questions and backs up his rep with actions, I see no reason for USA Today folks to be celebrating this hire.
This one statement says it all. Translation, do what we wa t, leave us alone and get rid of the editors we don't like. Oh and dont expect me to change because I'm really good at what I do
We arent celebrating. were just anxious to get on with the inevitable sturm and drang. there is hope, however, that the shakeout will shed management bloat throughout the organization and bring fresh, smart leadership to a newsroom in serious need of a wakeup call.
Offer buyouts and they will leave.
11:46,We are not "celebrating" Larry Kramer. But, let's face it, after three failed years of Dave Hunke, we would have welcomed Cosmo Kramer.
Is it me or does Pointroll need an editor for the opening statement on their home page-"PointRoll, a Gannett Company, has the tools brands and agencies need to engage consumers and execute digital ad campaigns that get results. Connecting consumers, creative and distribution channels, PointRoll "ads" value."
Great post, 12:51. People here could not and would not adapt.
People adapt if they know what they have to do and know that if they cant/dont, they are out of here.
By now you know that "Donna Summer has died" USAT reported that Diana Ross died. Does anybody out thier in USAT land, know WHY this mistake happen?
I remember Larry Kramer from when he was a reporter at the San Francisco Examiner and he enlisted a bunch of us from the UC Berkeley journalism school to help get comment from people at the polls on election day. He was viewed as kind of a whiz kid then, with infectious enthusiasm and a lot of talent.I hope he can bring forth all that enthusiasm and smarts in his new gig. I would work for him again, for sure.
He seems like a smart guy.hope his bullshit detector is on high alert as he wades through the waist high muck Hunke is leaving.
I wish there were some way with blogspot to assign a number to an anonymous poster at least.It would still be anonymous, which is necessary, but the same numerical ID popping up might cut down the number of lamely immature posts by the blog participant who keeps deriding everyone else who uses this blog as "a bunch of whiners" and "a bunch of losers" -- generally the disdainful attitude of Gannett toward its own employees.The poster might be a decent person "in person," but on this blog the only thing so repeatedly expressed which given the repetition is a seemingly deep-rooted inferiority/superiority issue -- oddly, another hallmark of the Gannettized types: dismissal of grievances.The poster naively presumes all the anonymous posts are from a static cadre of disgruntled employees. This is not the case. The people who find this blog of some value (yes, even with its rumors but also with its facts) comprise a constantly changing membership.There are some diehards, sure, still stuck in the past. That's only natural given the different ways different people process trauma. "That's O.K. with me," as Philip Marlowe says.But the fact is, Jim Hopkins' blog could not survive with a readership and participation rate cast in concrete: it's a living flux as evidenced by the different writing styles.And that fact, this endless supply of pissed-off people, is a fairly valid indictment in what shitty treatment Gannett has afforded (and still affords its workers, and what a shitty place Gannett has become -- the royalty sniffing at bonfires as if we're here to sing "Kumbayah."Are people fools to stay? No. Leaving Gannett was the best thing that's ever happened to me. And, no, I don't have my own business, and no, I'm not making tons of money.But everyone has a different situation, and the only thing in common is that Gannett screws everyone.
To 3:42Harvard is a private university and doesn't receive direct funding from the government (other than grants). Keep munching on those paint chips.
translation of 3:53Harvard doesn't receive government money, except for grants of government money.
And the journey continues for this EROPer trying to access my pension account. According to the separation papers, should have been able to do so 2 to 4 weeks after April 13. Told by phone last week would be able to access online by Monday (5/14) night. Here it is Thursday morning and site tells me I'm not eligible to sign on. Pension people can't explain why. They say they will investigate and get back to me. Is it me, or does Gannett seem to intentionally make things harder?Take Newsgate, for instance. In the old software system when you created a story you hit Ctrl C and you created a story. In Newsgate it's what, 10 clicks to create a story, name it, name the content, and add everybody's name that needs access to it? And do that repeatedly throughout the day. It's so time consuming for a business always in a hurry.
Harvard doesn't receive government funds—except the tens of millions in grants, financial aid, and tax exemptions.
It is nearly impossible for Kramer to fix USA Today as the vertical corporate strategy (aka Buesse and Sports) diminished the brand completely.It's one big Gannett muck-up....not a unique USA Today brand.Let's pray his first action wont be to pay millions for "consultants". Like Banikarim did. Any senior executive worth anything knows how to set his own vision and does not rely on consultants.
Donna Summer died today -- and USA Today tweeted the wrong singer. Jim Romenesko got a screengrab for all to see.
Thanks to the user who posted the March 2012 ABC data. Does someone happen to have the March 2011 ABC data? Unfortunately, it's hard to compare the data in the file given the 2011 data is broken out by print vs. digital. Does anyone have the March 2011 ABC data file handy? Thank you in advance! PS, this blog is great!
Donna Summer...Diana Ross...Seriously??? This is the best we can do?
Re. "one big gannett muckup": USAT seems to be depending more and more on the USCP sites (and designated USAT reporters) for content. A recent series on national parks is an example. The parks chosen for the series were assigned to reporters at the USCP properties in or near the states of the parks (in addition to the stories/projects they're producing for their sites). Interestingly, some of the stories are moving on the AP Wire, not just appearing in USAT.
9:15,That's great. A once-proud news brand is publishing many stories these days from local USCP newspapers. Quite the powerful national brand we have become.But, hey, it's cheaper.
My new, non-Gannett job is a revelation. The goals of the organization and they way they expect to get there are spelled out crystal clear. I don't hear incessant "no money in the budget for that" when people ask for things to get their job done. I'm empowered to do what I need to get my job done without jumping through a bunch of hoops. It's also clear the employees really do have a sense that they have a stake in how well the company does. They're not focused on doing things cheaper, they are focused on doing things better. As a result of all of this they are growing.
In the old days, Thomason Newspapers often dragged people in off the street to be reporters, paid them nothing and counted on mid-level "sergeants" to do the heavy lifting. Apparently scared by readership and ad declines during the 1991-92 recession, Thomson changed gears, raising pay, increasing benefits, and investing in plant and equipment. After five years, Thomson bailed almost completely on print journalism to on data services such as Reuters, Jane's and Westlaw. Thomson sold its papers to, among others, Gannett. Is there a lesson for Gannett-heads there somewhere?
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 in a reader