1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Los Angeles Times cutting 74 positions

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by Mr. X, Jun 7, 2023.

  1. Mr. X

    Mr. X Active Member

  2. Tarheel316

    Tarheel316 Well-Known Member

    No kidding.
     
  3. WriteThinking

    WriteThinking Well-Known Member

    I wonder, why was this a Zoom meeting?

    It seems very cowardly and cold, and frankly, unlike the LAT newsroom, the vibrancy of which has always been espoused, and is usually felt, from the top, right on down to those frustrated, angry staff members.

    I remember being amidst a couple of exactly those types of meetings -- an earlier round of explanations of similar layoffs/cutbacks and The Staples Center advertising issue come to mind -- and the top managers were always there, in person, facing their newsroom personnel and its questions, in the same tense, emotional, sometimes combative situations.
     
    HanSenSE and TigerVols like this.
  4. TigerVols

    TigerVols Well-Known Member

    No offense but anyone in this day and age who is giving their heart and soul to a newspaper company is a moran.
     
    HanSenSE and BurnsWhenIPee like this.
  5. BTExpress

    BTExpress Well-Known Member

    Am I the only one stunned that 74 positions is ONLY about 10-15% of the newsroom?

    Even at the L.A. Times?
     
  6. wicked

    wicked Well-Known Member

    They've hired up pretty good. I'd say outside the Post, NYT and WSJ, they're the biggest "legacy media" newsroom in the country.

    I'm assuming Merida, who just started there, had to know this was coming. If he didn't, he should be pissed, I feel like that's a warn-new-exec-ahead-of-time situation. If he did and took the job anyway, he can handle the arrows.
     
    SixToe likes this.
  7. BTExpress

    BTExpress Well-Known Member

    I believe at their peak they had more than 1,200 in the newsroom, which was about double the Chicago Tribune newsroom at the time. Which was just part of the L.A./Chicago resentment that simmered when the "smaller" Tribune Company took over the Times-Mirror papers.
     
  8. SixToe

    SixToe Well-Known Member

    "Do more with less."

    How?

    "Be robust."

    SMH
     
    tapintoamerica likes this.
  9. wicked

    wicked Well-Known Member

    My girlfriend mentioned the "do more with less" phrase the other day. I forget the context. I told her of the PTSD journalists had when hearing that and explained how it was used in the newspaper world. Her reply: "That's stupid."
     
    2muchcoffeeman and SixToe like this.
  10. SixToe

    SixToe Well-Known Member

    I first heard it about 30 years ago from a state official I was talking with. His agency had been hit by budget cuts but he was promoting the "we'll just have to do more with less" stupidity.

    Fucking morons. At some point the tired, angry people doing more with less give up, leave or both.

    It reminds me of coaching staffs at bowl games when half the staff leaves for another school. GAs become assistants for a month. An assistant coaches three positions. The consultant gets a quickly updated contract. And then they lose by 2-3 touchdowns while still trying to recruit and do more with less.
     
    wicked, Batman and JimmyHoward33 like this.
  11. Mr. X

    Mr. X Active Member

  12. wicked

    wicked Well-Known Member

    I got my years confused. Oops.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page