Black Monday - Is this the worst day for print journalism?

This isn't just Black Monday or Black Tuesday for print journalism. It's annus horribilis.

 

Anyone heard anything from the L.A. Times? I saw a sports copy editor was laid off yesterday in their latest purge, but any other names?

 

"If you believe that, you are completely clueless."

I posted for the first time in six months yesterday. I believe it.

I'm also clueless, having long ago lost touch with this place. So, yeah, you're right!

 

What's say we also call her a laughable ass, because if the paper is no worse for losing those employees, then it was no better for having employed them. Which means that a) she was achieving some major fail as a boss by spending all that money on their salaries and benefits for no apparent gain to the product while they were around, and b) she was guilty of corporate malfeasance for using company funds -- and shareholder money -- for basically charity work, providing newsroom jobs to people who weren't actually helping the product in any way.

Right? Her logic that this represents NO loss means that those people's presence represented NO gain.

The way I see it, either the publisher's head or the heads of some top editors must roll over this.

Yeah, that'll happen... :

 

From WFAE:

Thirty newsroom workers are being laid off. Observer Publisher Ann Caulkins would not say who they are. But she says the quality of reporting will not be affected by these latest layoffs.

"We continue to be a top notch news gathering operation as a matter of fact after we had a couple of rounds of buyouts we still produced the series 'the Cruelest Cuts.' We did the series on the United Way, we've done incredible watchdog journalism with a lot less journalists," says Caulkins.

If you want to call her a liar, her e-mail is acaulkins@charlotteobserver.com

Have at it.

 

Isn't there a medicated cream for that?

 

I understand the concept of keeping with company policy but do they actually think that they're doing quality work with fewer journalists?

 

I have:

Had to get that off my chest.

 

Not bad. Not bad at all.

 

Believe it or not, she wrote back:

 

Damn. That was quick.

And wow. Lessen the workload to keep the quality of journalism? Which means less coverage, which hurts the ultimate quality of journalism.

Is she effing serious?

 

Her response makes it sound like she hates this just as much as we do. But she's also looking out for her job. It's shitty, but understandable.