gannett plans to layoff 3,000 by december.

As a Cowboys fan, I would be screwed.

 

Hell, you could start a damn wire service as good as AP, maybe better.

 

By the way, can anyone explain to me how laying off people and making the product more shitty (shittier? never comes up at work) solves anything?

"Hey. Our company's struggling. What should we do?"

"Fire 3,000 people right before Christmas. It's not like these people want to buy their kids Christmas gifts."

This actually reminds me of the time my sister dumped her fiance on Dec. 23. It doesn't make for a very happy holidays. I wonder how law school is looking these days?

 

I'm of the belief (maybe a naive and minority belief) that there is still a market for the service newspapers provide, it's just that large corporates are ill equipped to provide that service.

In my region, there are two family owned papers surrounded by a bunch of corporates (mostly Gannett). The market penetration of the family owned papers BLOWS AWAY the penetration of the corporates in every case. The family papers are selling ads, they are selling classifieds, they have subscribers and news hole. That's not to say they are doing as well as they were doing 10 years ago. It's just that they have reacted in a much more reasonable manner to the downturn in the business. They've set up a chance to steady their business or, (egad) even to bounce back.

The corporates are all on a death spiral.

What will happen, I hope, is somewhere, somebody's corporate paper will shut down, somebody community-minded and rich will buy it to fill a void, hire some non-corporate newspaper people and turn that market around. And that will make more people say "What the fuck were those newspaper corporations doing?"

Don't get me wrong, that doens't mean I don't think papers will continue to evolve and be different from the traditional product. But I think the fundamentals of what people need are the same.

 

Yeah but this way they don't have to give those 3,000 people a few days off for holiday's, vacation days etc. That's all they care about that's why I am willing to bet good money the layoffs will be made by dec. 23.

 

There's a great NYT story by David Carr explaining that the problem isn't the product, given the appetite for media and news. Which is why it is curious companies are gutting the product.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/29/business/media/29carr.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper&oref=slogin

 

. . . and the next thread about The National is right around the bend . . .

 

The suits are doing the easiest thing possible. Instead of developing a long-term plan with solutions for current and future problems, they're slashing expenses and cutting jobs.

It saves them money without having to think much, if even at all.

Excuse me while I go throw up in the trash can. Just talking about the lack of thought used by the higher-ups in this industry makes me sick.

 

At a Gannett paper, that's about 60 jobs. ;D

But, 15-20 at a paper that size? Holy fuck. Good luck coming back from that.

 

Would it help if we started kicking back some of our salaries to the company big shots? Not only would it lower our profiles, if we're making more than minimum wage, but it would line some of their pockets with ill-gotten gain, which might remind them of the good ol' days and get their boots off our throats.

 

I hope that it is 600K in salaries and benefits, rather than 600K in salaries.

600K in salaries and benefits might be eight or nine bodies. Straight salary might be a dozen.

 

Or more than a dozen at our place.

I know what I make, I know what four other people around me make, give or take 1K and it seems like the average at our place is in the low 30s to mid 30s. Unless they get rid of some of the upper management people, you're looking a bunch of people making 35K a year getting cut. That's 16-17 jobs.