Jack Curry taking buyout at NY Times?

http://gawker.com/5420766/the-new-york-times-buyout-list-updated

He might not be the only one in sports who's out. From the article:

 

This will give him more time to prank call Jay Horwitz.

 

Does seem like fewer Sports people voluntarily leave during most buyout rounds at most papers. I know that's a generalization, but that how it appears to me the past few years of all the job-shedding.

Must mean we like what we do more than the rest. Or we're more masochistic, in the current times. Or we lack ambition to try something else. Or we know we're generally employable at anythying else. Or... or... or...

 

If you're not going to make room for Jack Curry, why even bother putting out a paper?

 

Jack won't have any trouble getting another job. Great writer.

 

But he's taking a buyout, right? His choice? I know that some "buyouts" are very nearly layoffs of the "...or else!'' variety. But that isn't the case here, is it?

 

Semantics. If you're willing to let a Jack Curry go, regardless of reason, why bother trying?

Derwood is right, and I'm sure Jack would land on his feet at ESPNNewYork, or something similar. Still disappointing from a paper that should be better than the rest.

 

Another instance of buyouts leading to the departure of a newsroom's best and brightest, the worst way possible for a business to cut labor costs. You don't always get only the early early-retirees who leave. You often get those who are most employable elsewhere and those who have confidence enough to go somewhere else or try something different. Guess that's magnanimous of an organization, to pay good people to leave, but it also is self-mutilating.

 

Maybe Jack will start a blog that's not a blog and bitterly rip the Times at every opportunity.

Oh, wait, it's been done.

 

Jack will be fine. He wouldn't take the buyout unless something else is in the works.

 

joe lapointe is also on the list and will leave after the super bowl, according to gawker.

the gawker list might not be complete but i didn't count close to 100 names, and in the original memo, nyt editor bill keller wrote:

 

We're definitely in agreement on this, regardless of the verbiage used to describe Curry's departure.