Digital First pursuing Gannett

We all know newsroom staff cuts are coming at Gannett and it’s sad that many senior editors in their 70s opted to hang on rather than take the package and retire this month. I’m not an age elitist but I’d have thought some of these folks would go with the hopes of saving some of their younger colleagues.

 

1) There are senior editors in their 70s, and they didn't take a buyout? Seems very hard to believe.

2) Why would someone sacrifice a job to "save" a younger colleague? That younger colleague will have a much easier time finding a new job, and there is no "saving" here. The only long-term move is to get out.

 

The only reason Gannett keeps a few people around in their 50s and 60s is to stave off the age discrimination lawsuits.

 

I don’t think that’s true. Sure, the company is more interested in journos who work on the cheap than in maintaining institutional knowledge. I won’t dispute that. But some of my colleagues are in their 50s and 60s and have developed a massive readership over the years. They’re also not making ridiculous money, I’m quite certain, and I’d like to think that the company legitimately recognizes their value.

 

Gannett revenues were down nine percent in the publishing division of the third quarter. So if employees that have salaries that represent nine percent of the salary expenditures do not take the buyout I think there will be layoffs.

 

I am not trying to defend anyone but evidently the circulation for the Gannett paper referenced in Salinas is 4,700 and dropping. I would think a paper that small would be close to converting to a weekly. Does anyone know what the rule of the thumb is for the minimum circulation size for a daily paper to survive?

 

I'm sure some of those have developed a massive readership, but it seems notable that almost every round of layoffs is significantly made up of those between ages 40-55. It would lead one to believe the young ones don't get laid off because they work cheap, while the older ones don't get laid off because - as was noted - they would get nailed for age discrimination (and possibly because of their institutional knowledge - but a number of great journos in that 40-55 range also have huge leadership and institutional knowledge).

Rarely does someone take a buyout to save a younger colleague. Often, the thinking is "take the buyout now or stay and take the risk of getting laid off and getting nothing but a small severance later."

 

I'm not sure there's a minimum circulation size -- it's just wherever the costs/revenues cross. I do expect that you can see more papers start to reduce frequency of publication/delivery this year.

 

From my experiences, Gannett rarely cuts to the point it needs to. They tend to kick the can way, way down the road.

If revenues are down 9 percent, they won't be cutting 9 percent, only to find itself in the same spot in another 3 months or 6 months and offer buyouts and lay people off again. They'd be more likely to cut 15 percent, at minimum, so they can say they don't expect to have more buyouts and layoffs for the rest of 2019.

 

Decimation of daily newspapers sets stage for potential Star sale | 2019-01-18 | Indianapolis Business Journal | IBJ.com

 

If this goes through, I could see Salinas getting absorbed into the Monterey Herald, which is already covering the whole county. But it's the usual DFM problem (as in Santa Cruz), the print product is almost secondary. Both print in the Bay area and deadlines are early, so at least in the dead tree edition, Tuesday's preps don't get in until Thursday. Forget late city council or other breaking news as well.

 

Obviously. I don’t disagree with any of that because it’s common knowledge. I was disagreeing with the notion that the only reason ANYONE in their 50s and 60s still works for Gannett is because the company fears age discrimination lawsuits.

Maybe that’s the case at bigger shops, where salaries are bloated, but I don’t believe that’s everywhere. I don’t think Gannett, a company I’m quite familiar with, would get rid of every single employee over 50 if it could without the risk of a lawsuit.