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.)
Friday, October 19, 2012
47 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)
The above-the-fold portion of this morning's USA Today front page in print is certainly . . . uh . . . busy.
ReplyDeleteBusy to say the least. Of course, the variety of fonts and the ridiculous blue ball doesn't help. And has USAT lost the ability to indent the first graph of stories? God, what a mess. I feel for whomever the page layout editor is who is dealing with this new design. Hard to make chicken salad out of chicken sh...
ReplyDeleteHow much does Detroit Free Press pay for the marathon? It's this weekend.
ReplyDeleteHow many Thursday sports sections have no ads in them?
ReplyDeleteI'll start with the Green Bay Press-Gazette.
Courtesy of The Chicago Tribune ...
ReplyDeleteThe free ride is over for online users of the Chicago Tribune. Four months after launching a redesigned Web site requiring registration to view premium content, the newspaper is putting the "pay" in its pay wall, charging for full digital access beginning Nov. 1.
The plan, outlined in a memo to employees Thursday, offers digital-only subscriptions at $14.99 per month. Seven-day print subscribers will continue to have unlimited online access at no additional charge, while home delivery customers who get the paper on fewer days can add a digital subscription for about $2 per month more.
Jim: I wonder why they didn't replace the basketball in the Hoosier player's hands with the blue ball.
ReplyDeleteOr a red one.
What a hot mess. all this pinball machine crap for just 3 frigging stories on the page.
ReplyDeleteWhat happened to the blue ball being some kind of graphic that changed each day? Wasn't that the big deal?
ReplyDeleteOne of the "early retirees" from April here. I drove by a breaking news story Wednesday and thought I'd be helpful by calling the former employer to give a heads-up. It only took 18 hours for the story to make it to the Website. Two competitors posted it to their site less than three hours after the event occurred. It saddens me to say I'm not surprised.
ReplyDeleteFYI about The Montgomery Advertiser headquarters.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/article/20121018/NEWS/121018023/
Agreement reached to sell Montgomery Advertiser facility
Anyone know how long USAT has run the D3 sports sites (D3Football.com etc)? It was just pointed out to me the other day. Hope they don't screw it up.
ReplyDeleteJim.........I agree that the cover is busy today. But it's hard to be perfect and or appeal to everyone 100% of the time. I think overall, USAT is doing a much better job and making steady improvement. In my opinion, the content and layout have definitely improved.
ReplyDeleteSioux Falls website publishes story that George McGovern died. But he had not died. Paper blames technical glitch.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.argusleader.com/article/20121018/UPDATES/121018014/Technical-error-mistakenly-announces-McGovern-s-death?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|Home&nclick_check=1
Cahill is out in Des Moines. Shocking news for the leader of a team that appeared to be having some success. Does anyone know if he really is taking a new gig or if he was pushed?
ReplyDelete9:43, care to share some specifics? Or should we just accept your opinion?
ReplyDeleteWhat a worthless post you made.
USA front...and I especially like (not) the double sized ad strip at the bottom. How long until it covers a quarter of the front page?
ReplyDeleteAnd don't forget the full page magnifier so you can read the stories!
I would like to know the subscription fallout from the Tennessean's endorsement of Romney. It's the oddest editorial I think I've ever read.
ReplyDeleteBREAKING: Gannett sells Montgomery Advertiser building:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bizjournals.com/birmingham/morning_call/2012/10/gannett-will-sell-montgomery.html?ana=yfcpc
Des Moines tanking?
ReplyDeleteUnusual to hear anything out of that site.
11:57 - I couldn't agree more. Very, very strange.
ReplyDeleteGannett's land sale extends to Vermont, where the Burlington Free Press is selling 7 buildings and leasing space in some of them. The Free Press will keep 5 other buildings for its pressroom and mailroom. Bids are due by the day after New Year's.
ReplyDeleteYeah, that Tennessean presidential editorial is the most flaccid endorsement I've ever seen. Before I got to the end, which is where the endorsement finally came, I thought they were going to say "none of the above."
ReplyDeletehttp://www.tennessean.com/article/20121018/OPINION01/310180040/Tennessean-endorsement-President?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|Opinion|s
NEWS: Gannett buy Rovion -
ReplyDeletehttp://finance.yahoo.com/news/gannett-acquires-rovion-150000022.html
RE: Montgomery.
ReplyDeleteThey plan to sell the building, it has not been sold.
Please read the articles before you post.
Which is the quainter notion: Newspaper endorsements, or cancelling a subscription as if you cared about a newspaper endorsement?
ReplyDeleteI didn't find the endorsement odd at all. It was a lukewarm at best endorsement of Romney. What's wrong with that? Not all endorsements have to be slam dunks. If the paper wants to give an endorsement while listing the many points of both candidates that cause trepidation, so be it. Perhaps some people are dismissing it here because the newspaper didn't endorse the candidate of their choice? If so, too bad. I'm not voting for Romney either. But I'll respect the newspaper's right to endorse whom it wishes.
ReplyDeleteAbout said "endorsement" -- think "avoiding a race to the bottom." Or "the lesser of two liars," given both have accused the other of "lying."
ReplyDeleteLot of unhappy people, in a crappy economy. Consider this: the "loser" could make tens of millions in speaking fees, after "losing." Nice work, if you can get it.
I think we can all agree this blog has over stayed it's welcome. Useless comments, lame attempts to drum up some controversy, Jim's irrelevant posts and commentaries and a significant drop in any readership. No one really cares any more to read or comment. So long.
ReplyDeleteI'm LOL at 6:03's "no one really cares any more to read or comment."
ReplyDeleteWhat about you?
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete"People here know you are too lazy and dumb to see if those details are true."
ReplyDeleteIs that like the word "terror" in a presidential debate?
Said previous poster has never been on the Yahoo! Finance chat pages about GCI. Now, there's some wild stuff! By comparison, this is the equivalent of "The New York Times."
Keep it going, Jim. Watch over the pension fund.
6:12 Any variation on the word "retard" gets a comment removed.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete"Keep it going, Jim. Watch over the pension fund."
ReplyDeleteI laughed pretty hard at that. Very funny, yet unintentional, joke there.
Chuckles, when a pension fund is at 70% funded, it is no fucking joke. Any more slippage, and the feds call. It is not a fucking happy call.
ReplyDelete9:07 you're stirring up shit for MO reason. Do you read the financials? Do you see the cash flow? Do you know the government guarantees your pension? Do you realize you have nothing to worry about? Do you realize if you leave today you will get your money in a few months? Do you know of one person that earned their pension and did t get it?
ReplyDeleteWrinkles (9:07), you have no idea what you are talking about.
ReplyDeleteYou fit right in here with many of the others.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteDear Gracia,
ReplyDeleteYour posts, and the posts of your stooges, are getting much better. Way to go! Now, fix the dining-room mess in Cinci! Thanks!
Here's an edited version of 10:33's comment:
ReplyDeleteWow, [XXXXX], you missed 99% of reality about GCI pensions and the tight-wire that they are on. Congratulations! You can replace Gracia!
" .. Do you know the government guarantees your pension?"
Right -- the potential loss of at least 50% of an original total is some kind of bloody focking guarantee --
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pension_Benefit_Guaranty_Corporation
Notice how underfunded PBGC is. Do the math, [XXXXX], if you can. Duh.
Ask the steelworkers what it was like to lose 50% of their pensions, in a bankruptcy.
Stupidity and Gannettoid-ism. There is no substitute.
FULL DISCLOSURE - PENSION
ReplyDeleteGCI's CEO has been 100% clear, the pension issue is "material," of concern, and being worked on.
That noted, pray like heck, it gets fixed. At this economic pace, it could take 7+ years. GCI is not the U.S.S. Nimitz -- more like the RMS Titanic, as it is trying to turn away from the ice-field.
As for alleged "government guarantees" -- the Gannettoids must be stupid, beyond all stupidity. Look at this --
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2012/10/19/us/19reuters-uaw-veba.html?hp&_r=0
The New York Times
October 19, 2012
UAW Retiree Trust Reports Larger Shortfall in 2011: Filing
By REUTERS
"DETROIT (Reuters) - A healthcare trust for retired U.S. autoworkers was $33 billion short of meeting obligations to cover medical costs of those retirees at the end of 2011 .."
Then again, for Gannett bloggers, this kind of stuff is full employment.
Let me get this right. The pension fund is 70% funded. Okay, they must be doing poorly with investments, because the annual statement had it 85% funded. That's would be a loss of millions of dollars in an up market. Somehow that does not compute. Sounds as if people are making stuff up.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteHey, 9:49 -- "up market?" Ever heard of bonds?
ReplyDeleteLOL, ROTFL, LMAO
Lay off the vodka, old-timer. It is not helping.
Good luck, you'll need it.
It seems something is in the works. Either layoffs or more. When the comments on here get worse and critical of Jim you know Gannett has something planned.
ReplyDeleteTime will tell
11:41 The third-quarter financial report last week was better than expected. Unless momentum has shifted, and I don't think it has, there's no reason to expect more big, broad layoffs.
ReplyDeleteThe better question: Will the first quarter of 2013 be the first since 2008 to pass without furloughs? That's a tougher call.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete