gannett plans to layoff 3,000 by december.

Yeah, math is bad 3,000 across 84 is an "average" of 35-40 per paper. Figure bigger papers (Phoenix, Detroit) will take a bigger hit.

 

I think it's also safe to guess that USA Today will not see as many cuts as everywhere else.

 

So should I take this as a sign not to send a resume & clips to USA Today anytime soon? :-\

 

I have a former co-worker who is the SE at a Gannett paper that is slightly more than 100K circulation. He has a staff of 14. He's been told he is likely to lose 5-6 of them.

 

Well, I can't see how Louisville fills the two spots that were mentioned on the Jobs board here.

 

5 or 6 of 14 seems like a lot more than 10 percent. But my math's not so good.

 

A lot of papers have staffers doing double-duty with "niche" pubs. Figure those people are safe since those revenues are going up. And I'm not aware of any niche pub aimed at male readers.
Couple of ideas. Shrink the circ area again. Pull reporters off of beats involving outlying communities, combine city and county government beats, drop health, business and environmental stand-alone beats, cut state government to a half-time beat or rely on wire, drop columns in favor of "voice of the reader," everyone else, except for the education reporter, is a GA.

 

and investors rallied behind the stock when they heard of the upcoming layoffs ... jesus christ.

 

Exactly why I refuse to invest in anything.

Assholes. Cocksucking assholes.

 

and, for my money, it only proves that our industry is DOA, and we're the last to figure it out.

it seems as though only the bottom feeders are investing in newspapers now ... picking the little bit of meat left on the bone. how else can you qualify buying stock in a company that's weaking its own product with layoffs?

 

and to anybody who works for gannett: i'm sorry.

this really has to suck to be out on a limb for a month.

 

Yes it does