gannett plans to layoff 3,000 by december.

Reminds me of this:

In September, Ketzel Levine, a senior correspondent for National Public Radio, came up with an idea for a series about how Americans were handling economic pressure. Called “American Moxie: How We Get By,” it began in early December. The subjects were people like an Illinois farmer who loved tending to his cows, but was having to sell them. “My idea was to look at how we adjust, how we change, what we have to dig deep and find in order to do what it takes to get by, and that’s where moxie came in,” Ms. Levine said.

Ms. Levine and her editor didn’t want a series of unconnected stories. “We came up with the idea that each person should be connected with the next somehow, and that was the best part for me,” she said. “I’d go on a story and have absolutely no idea what the next story would be — I’d have to find it while I was there.”

But there was an unexpected ending. Midway through her reporting, Ms. Levine found out that she had been laid off as part of a 64-employee cut at NPR.

Ms. Levine, who has worked at NPR since 1977, said she decided the final episode, and her final piece for NPR, should be about her own situation.

Ellen McDonnell, the director of morning programming, was not immediately sold on the idea. “I had some natural hesitation,” she said. “As a reporter, you never want the story to be about you.” At the same time, she said: “I also recognized a very unique opportunity for Ketzel to tell a story that lots of people can relate to. She found out in a very personal way what it’s like to have to start over again and to have that moxie she spoke about.”

The end result “was kind of eerie,” Ms. McDonnell said. “The whole concept that one person in the story would lead to another, and then it would all end with her, was not something any of us anticipated.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/29/business/media/29levine.html

 

Note to self: Don't suggest to my editors working up this type of linked-chain series on, y'know, cancer.

 

"In another cost-reduction move, tipsters say, Gannett is about to announce that U.S. newspaper workers -- as many as 30,000 -- will be required to give up a week's pay in the current quarter. If true, the unpaid furloughs could be one more ingredient in the rumored February payroll cut. Another unknown: Whether any of this applies to Newsquest, broadcast or other businesses."

http://gannettblog.blogspot.com/2009/01/are-you-ready-to-take-one-week-pay-cut.html

If I worked at a Gannett paper, I'd be ready to walk my ass out the door.

 

Oh, and everyone else at all the other chains and shops are home-free, huh? What's their genius?

 

I guess we should all pretend like Gannett is adding to its workforce, improving the quality of its newspapers and giving readers what they want.

Crap, I cannot find the sarcasm font ...

 

We read you loud and clear.

 

The problem isn't (or wasn't) the product, but market share. Newspapers went from being the big fish in a small pond to being just another fish in the ocean of information now available to everyone. If you're the owner of the big fish, being in the pond makes your fish more valuable. It's simple supply and demand economics. The fish isn't going back to the pond. I don't think the answer is a single company owning several papers in different geographic regions, but newspaper co-operatives in specific geographic regions (Northwest, Southeast, Southwest, Great Plains etc.) with management experienced and focused serving those specific areas. Ditch the fatal car crashes, two-alarm house fires, high-school sports, human interest, photo galleries of pets and instead concentrate on government, health and education issues, the economy, recreation opportunities, and broader themed stories. A national enterprise could provide sports, entertainment and lifestyle features. Imagine if every story idea needed to start with the question being asked "will 2,000 people care enough to want to know this?"
We're already seeing some papers in certain regions working together, I figure this could be the next step.

 

A year ago, I'd have said the same exact thing. Alas, the natural follow-up to your last sentence is now, " ... and go where?"

 

Gannett can go to hell. The company that pitched itself as the most innovative has been reduced to a pathetic slash-and-burn, Keystone cops routine.

 

Indeed. And how is that different from any other newspaper chain?

 

Gannett is slimier than most. I got criticized mercilessly for pointing out their horrific way of giving employees poor grades on evaluations. They were leaders in doing that. Somebody in one of these threads explained indeed how his evaluation went from great to unsatisfactory after the sports editor admitted to being brutalized in meetings forcing him to give poor grades.
Gannett simply has no class.
Yes most chains suck. But Gannett takes it to a new low. I personally think Gannett would love for USA Today to be the last newspaper standing and they have some sort of sick "monopoly" on a business it helped kill.