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.)
Sunday, January 06, 2013
31 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)
A couple years after walking out of the newspaper and deciding driving a garbage truck and sleeping in a cardboard box would be better than spending another month at Gannett, I checked my LinkedIn page and noticed our former executive editor had been checking it out. If you're curious, danny boy, I and most of the other baker's dozen who left on your watch probably wouldn't come back if you doubled our salaries. Check your shrinking circulation list and see that most of us won't even subscribe to that rag at the 50% former employee discount. You'd better realize you and the incompetents you've promoted and protected are in a world of hurt.And yes, your former employees are doing fine.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the tip. I checked my LinkedIn and saw an editor had accessed mine, too. Don't they have enough to do babysitting the young ones? Hope they don't want us back...I'm better off financially, physically and emotionally since I walked out.
Delete7:46 does make a valid point. Even in the worst of environments, good leadership goes a long way; however, once one is saddled with the kind of bad, detached leadership that is sadly so endemic at Gannett's "yes man" properties (even as content gets more and more amateurish), it can come down to a question of sheer sanity.
ReplyDelete”The fiscal cliff deal has no effect on Gannett's operations. Not sure how you make that connection. writes 1/03/2013 3:41 PM to another poster.
ReplyDeleteActually, one has to ask how 3:41 is unable to MAKE that connection as it WILL negatively impact Gannett’s advertisers and subscribers (one editor shared the hit they’re taking in a meeting this morning and what their considering cutting as a result).
All wage earners will see their taxes go up by 2% (FICA rate restoration), top earners will pay higher taxes and deductions are reduced for even lower incomes. Of course, that’s on top of the Obama’s Affordable Care Act’s taxes that kicked in January 1, including the slashing of FSA’s to $2,500 regardless of income level.
Hence, anyone thinking those higher taxes and costs won’t impact consumer and advertiser expenditures with Gannett are either delusional and/or just flat out being dishonest as they will.
Management is playing a new game on us. Push, question, demand better than a 1% raise and you end up with a PIP. Is nobody out there concerned about how employees are being treated? Is any of this bullshit legal?
ReplyDeleteWhat is Expose Gannett? This just came up on my google alerts under Gannett.
ReplyDeleteMaryam Banikarim – Senior Vice President and Chief Marketing Officer – Gannett Co
Maryam Banikarim
Senior Vice President and Chief Marketing Officer
Maryam sits on several boards including Advertising Week, Promax, Mt. Sinai Adolescent Healthcare Center and Prep for Prep. She has lived and worked in several countries, including Argentina, Brazil, France, Iran and the United Kingdom, and currently resides in New York City with her husband and two children.
Her apartment is estimated at $13 million. Here’s a map of it.
413 W 21st St, Apt 1
New York, NY 10011-2951
Home (212) 691-7999
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DeleteIt appears to be a wing nut diatribe sparked by Westchester's goofy printing of data about holders of gun permits.
Delete"interesting" day in the office. we're all checking out Expose Gannett new site thanks to an advertiser asking us what it is about.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.facebook.com/pages/Expose-Gannett/263882850406622
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteAz republic gives up manning for raises
ReplyDeletewhat ! tell me they didn't do that ! dumb mistake.
Deletelet me explain ! top priority people get more money ( these are the older, sicker, lazy folks), bottom people lose jobs. company pays a bit more but saves LOTS more from reducing staffing. it's all about money to corporate. good luck ! reject the contract and think about it. so much for union brotherhood !
DeleteAppears to be more fallout from the gun permit database. The first entry mentions Westchester.
ReplyDelete8:06 I remove comments that make fun of someone's appearance.
ReplyDelete8:14 Comparing someone to Hitler gets your comment removed.
Jim . . . if you're going to remove references to Hitler, you ought to at least make reference to Godwin's Law. Or Leo Strauss. God, I'm OLD . . .
ReplyDeleteAt last! Humor!
DeleteFront page story in today's Wisconsin group. "Packer fans predict close win over Vikings."
ReplyDeleteYou don't get journalism like that anywhere else. You just don't.
Not even the New York Times or Washington Post have this story.
Yeah Gannett, keep on charging more for the paper and cutting cost so you can give away more ads.
ReplyDeleteWestchester staff now getting "visits" at home from groups of "survey takers" about gun issues. Knock Knock....Who Is It?
ReplyDeleteSo 1:48 do you advocate the terrorizing of rank and file employees because they work at the JN? What kind of sicko are you. These are our friends and colleagues you're talking about. What's wrong with you?
ReplyDeletemaybe someone will post the names and adresses of gannett employees from westchester on facebook.....turnabout is fairplay.....publishing the info for all of those legal gun owners...just because you can do something, doesn't mean it is the right thing to do..
ReplyDeleteHave advertisers reacted to the Journal News decision? I did see Target's response and was plenty disappointed. Have the publisher and editor of the Journal News had further comment passed the comment where they said they interned to publish more names and addresses?
ReplyDeleteOn your ethics question, Jim, I agree with you not bringing minor children into the mix. On the case of adult sons/daughters, it may be worth mentioning only if there is a stink about nepotism or an unfair labor practice in parents pulling strings.
ReplyDeleteRegarding the story/database itself. I found it to be lazy journalism. There are many, many public databases available. Journalists are supposed to add context and meaning. Due to this "just plug it in and let if fly" approach, I hope the Big G is willing to pony up money to fight the First Amendment backlash, such as Putnam County officials refusing to make their database public.
As for the "expose" blog, I'm not a fan.
I appreciate your being transparent about who you are. Keep up the good work and keep asking thoughtful questions. Thank you.
Gannett has put up the money for legal fights over open records before. Given how firm the JN has been about this issue, I'd be shocked if they don't sue to get the records Putman County is denying them access to.
DeleteEmployees of The Journal news and their families are now the target of gun nuts knocking on their doors AT HOME. Silence so far from the bosses.
ReplyDelete7:20 that's BS, there has been a ton of communication from the publisher.
DeleteAll this proves is that some "gun nuts" are just as upset as some "reporter nuts."
DeleteIt seems that some first amendment practitioners are being just as irresponsible with their right as some gun owners are with theirs.
Two wrongs still don't make a right. Both amendments have their place.
157 I don't think that was 148's intent at all. I think I read that far differently than you did. Tone is so hard to imply and infer over the web, but pretty sure 148 was not mocking employees there.
ReplyDeleteNew York Times coverage of the Journal News gun mess: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/07/nyregion/after-pinpointing-gun-owners-journal-news-is-a-target.html
ReplyDeleteTerrorizing 1:57? Seriously? When Journal News staffers show up at the door of someone who lost a loved one hours before, is that terrorizing too? Oh- I forgot, that's "news gathering" and the "public's right to know". Get over yourself. Nobody is terrorizing you.
ReplyDelete