Blood in the streets of Hartford and Baltimore

This is a running theme on a lot of these threads, and this certainly isn't personal, cb, but I just am not sure why people get so worked up over these titles. He's going to be paid and doing a job as "print platform manager" just as well as if he were called "print editor" or simply "editor." I guess they're delineating between print and online.

I think more to the point is that this Levine guy is apparently over him now, based on what I could tell. And MAYBE it's an indictment of how well he was doing with integrating print and web. But to me, these titles are irrelevant.

 

They did something like this in Denver, I believe. Get out by 5 p.m. or else.
Maybe it has to do with liability or something. Maybe they're afraid somebody will get a hernia carrying out his or her belongings and sue them. Maybe they want to make sure you don't take some sticky notes with you on the way out.
Most of the security guards who have to do this perp walk probably don't like it any better than anybody else. Most are just working people themselves. There are probably a few who get a charge out of it, though.

 

It's as close as many of them ever come to any real "action." Beats the hell out of walking around rattling the doorknobs of locked closests and conference rooms.

 

As angry and upset as I am by all of this, I still think the security guards are among the last people we need to blame. My experience of these folks is that they help hold the door and carry boxes are awfully sympathetic.

 

From David Simon's Facebook page:

So, like I did above, Simon expresses the hope that he would have the integrity to quit or be fired rather than carry out this execution (actually, I expressed hope I would be able to do that; Simon seems pretty convinced of his own righteousness). I like that. But his words also remind me of the way he held up for national caricature and humiliation Bill Marimow, who did indeed walk away from The Sun rather than make cuts he found untenable. Cuts, by the way, that seem laughably minor when compared to yesterday.

 

People continue to be shocked that the newspapers are acting if they don't care about the future of the product.

The next few years are the going out of business sale, the winding down of the assets. They are squeezing every last dime they can get until the inevitable closings. The suits know this.

 

I agree with you about this, SF.

In trying to figure out the reasoning, though, I wonder if it might have been done this way just because of who all these people are. It's getting down to the nitty-gritty now, apparently, and this is one of the largest groups of editor-level, high-ranking people that I've seen being asked to leave at one time.

With these being higher-access people, would there be more reason or urgency to chasing them out? And, would it all be done at once just so that, well, so it was all done at once, and people could be better tracked, and, in theory, contained, if that turned out to be necessary?

I don't know, by any means. I'm just trying to think of/suggest the possible reasoning for this from the corporate point of view. Now, why I'm doing that, I don't know, exactly. I guess I'm just trying to figure out these people, and these horrible, disgusting situations, a little bit, that's all.

 

I think it's got more to do with concerns somebody might go postal.

 

I'm cancelling my subscription to The Sun.

I know lots of people the read the Sun everyday, for free, on line.

Why buy the cow when you get the milk for free.

 

I think I heard the same names you did... WTF? Two columnist gone?