I've Had Enough

Frank: I understand what you are saying, but let me tell you about a product we talked about in college (early 80s) which seemed to have a limited growth and probably would declined.

The professor, a good fellow, said this product was primarily consumed by young men and that as they grew older, they wouldn't use it as much. With the trend of the population growing older, this looked like revenue couldn't grow.

The product my professor was talking about?

Beer.

What happened? Well, now there are microbrew pubs and many locally produced beers. There are consumers for different types of beers. The brewers think of new brands and marketing in new ways. What I'm saying is that somebody figured this stuff out. From what I can see, most newspapers have little clue about how to make money from their websites and seem to have be giving up in the face of internet competition.

Let's say a newspaper has a circulation of 100,000. Over the course of five years time, it slips to 90,000, which is about 2 percent a year. Even with a circulation of 90,000, if it keeps readers with higher incomes, it still should be OK. Where else can you reach readers with such a large volume at a reasonable cost? Advertising in newspapers is a lot cheaper than most direct mail. For a while, cell phone companies were big advertisers and that has slowed down with mergers of those phone companies. But cell phone companies were an advertising source that nobody had in 1987.

There are challenges but there are also ways of meeting challenges. If somebody can figure out a way to get people to pay five dollars for coffee in an insulated paper cup, anything is possible.

 

The biggest problem with the Newspaper industry is that they don't shitcan people when the circulation dips. If you are an editor and the circ drops, you are gone. Marketing - gone; Corps have gone all William Ford and allowed circ dips without consequence. This ain't intramurals brother. Do whatever it takes to make circulation rise. Go tabloid. Put curse words in the paper. Make that circ rise NO MATTER WHAT.

 

I believed that to be fact until last week. A two-year rash of really rough exit interviews and an obscene amount of turnover in the newsroom likely led the publisher to demote the dipshit ME and throw money at the people who were foolish enough to stick through the shit (like me). I walked away with a sense that some things would get better with our new editors, and they have. I also walked away with a nine-percent raise, and that ain't bad.

This isn't meant as bragging, but suggesting that maybe there are some thresholds of shittiness that a decent manager just knows he can't cross and know he has to do something about it. When there are no decent managers/publishers, you get a JRC paper.

 

This is perhaps one of the worst recommondations I have ever read anywhere. The problem with newspapers is that the corporations got addicted to high profit margins. When you get that high proft margin that staffs get luxuries. They get an extra guy to just do enterprise and features for example.

Now, that the advertising reveune has declined, Wall Street is demanding that the margin remain. And, with media consolidaton, a poor performance in Michigan kills papers in Pennsylvania. It is just moves on a chess board.

What's going on now is a purging of experienced staff. With the internet and other technological innovation there is no need for a copy editor, a designer and then someone in composing. Those three jobs can be done by one person and automated.

I am sorry about much of this, but there is too much talent in the marketplace with all these layoffs. What happened is older journalists are too specialized. They ahev become luxuries and in today's DUMED down environment are actually dead wood. Talented dead wood, but their skills are no longer neccesary. Look around the country. I bet on every staff there is dead wood hanging out all over the place.

All these people are leaving, and has the public actually complained or noticed a difference?

How sad.

 

That's pretty simplistic.

So you're editor in a town and the factory shuts down and people start moving away, it's your fault when circulation dips.

Or you're editor in a town that becomes increasingly less English-speaking and circulation dips, it's your fault.

Or you're editor in a Sun Belt city that has consistent population growth and circulation goes up, you're a genius!

Aside from all that, selling newspapers is a collaborative effort of departments, but we can't automatically blame all departments equally, we have to analyze the situation to see where the problem is.

Anyway, your solution seems to invite circulation fraud. We'll show a circulation gain somehow if our jobs are at stake, even if we have to cheat.

 

Yes - my argument is simplistic, and bombastic, but I've sat through too many meetings hearing managers rationalize declining circulation and ad revenue comparing it to the rest of the industy etc. and I know what would happen if I tried the same argument to defend my performance. Instead - managers try and fudge the numbers and spin the problem instead of addressing it. They follow the same corporate mandates that haven't proven to increase readership in the past. How many focus groups have encouraged papers to do something that actually increased readership? There are newspapers that have increased circulation/web hits - emulate their models. Newspapers need to remember that their product is information and not profits. Cut the amount of information and you will continue to cut the profits. Simply put, newspapers need to start doing things better and reaching a larger audience, not just reaching their audience in a cheaper manner. There is a reason we no longer drive Model Ts or use walkie-talkie sized cell phones, yet we charge the same (or more) to subscribe or advertise in a newspaper that has shrunk in web-width and page numbers.

 

At my current shop, the town went through a major natural disaster about 10 years ago. Circulation during that time went through the roof. All corporate does now is bitch about how the numbers aren't "up to par" - comparing them to the disaster-related numbers and making the publisher at that time sound like a genius. I wonder how corporate can be that stupid.

 

Another reason why I'm leaving: There is no merit system for raises anymore. I can bust my ass for 12 months, put up work that truly excels, and I get the same review this year that I always do: Brilliant work, outstanding effort, works his ass off.

And then I got a 2 percent raise.

Back in the day, you could get merit-based raises up to 10 percent. I usually got the 10 percent. One year I got three raises that totalled 45 percent.

This year I busted my ass again and came away with 2 percent.

The one next to me, a true fuck-up and a bad person all around, got 2 percent also.

So without a merit system for outstanding performance, why the fuck would I stay around in this industry?

Hell, if rewards and raises aren't based on merit anymore, what the fuck is going on?

What is going on is this: We're stuck with a lot of people who can't get jobs anywhere else, and all the talent is climbing on the outbound train.

We've lost so much incredible talent in the past three years, and the past two years, and now this year too. And here I go also.

It's so sad. 20 percent profit and we're bleeding talent. 10 percent, even 7, is outstanding in retail or wherever else, and we're bleeding talent.

This cycle will catch up in the end, maybe five or 10 years from now, or maybe not. In the meantime, so much good talent is leaving the industry, and maybe never to return.

And this time it's me. Totally sucks, but I guess there's a better world out there. Definitely a better work life. Holidays off and all that, which will be outstanding.

Discuss at will. I always loved this newspaper industry. And now it doesn't even wanna know who I am anymore, and what I stand for.

It's not just me, I hope. Discuss more.

 

I just can't fathom leaving the industry.
What are you going to do? You must be pretty desperate or angry or whatever if you are just going to jump ship with no job.
I can't see myself doing anything else, but I also don't have a problem never working for a major metro someday. I am comfortable doing what I do and I am pretty sure community journalism (read: High School sports coverage) will always be around.
Sure, I'm not going to make a lot of money. But in my mind money isn't everything. Shit, I used to make a ton of money working construction, but then I had to work construction.
I don't know, I guess if you have been around forever and saw the good times in journalism I can understand not being able to deal with what is going on, but where I am at I am enjoying life and my job.
Good luck in the future, Dan.

 

Hey, never be afraid to leave a job for something better.

Plan for it, save for it, like I did. Then take some time off and figure out what works better. That's what I'm gonna do.

You can always find a job, no matter what you're being told about the job market and the economy.

The job market is fine. The economy is fine. Don't believe everything you read.

 

I'm fine with the job market and the economy, I just can't fathom doing anything else. I am not good at much else than writing and covering sports.
Good job saving for the future, it is something I have vaguely been trying to do and everyone should. You can build up a lot of money in a hurry, just putting some away each month.