Problems at Patch.com

Well, there's a good non sequitur. Nobody's saying there is no need for change, only that Patch is an ill-conceived business with a plan for success that is almost impossible.

Also, regarding the "rooting" for Patch to fail, the majority of defenders of Patch and BR and SB Nation -- such as in your post -- are so snotty and self-congratulatory that they just kindle that impulsive response.

 

So everyone has to waste time on conference calls that accomplish nothing? I'd like to think that LEs meeting with their RE once a week would be a better forum.

Newspaper will be around in five years, but will Patch?

 

How many newspapers will be around in five years? And how many will be populated by more empty desks than bodies? Five years ago, did anybody envision the carnage that has since occurred?

 

Of course it's not. I didn't say that or anything resembling that.

 

At least you admit you are rooting for it to fail, as classless as it is to be rooting for other journalists to lose their jobs. Others won't even admit it.

 

oop calls me classless. A badge to be worn proudly. But I digress.

 

So, first the anti-Patch crowd used the fact that there was a recent all-hands call as evidence of a problem. Now the fact that they do them routinely is evidence of a problem. Comic.

Not that I'm disagreeing with you about the idea that weekly meetings with an RE might be better. Just the overall attitude of most on this thread never ceases to crack me up.

 

I said rooting for other journalists to lose their jobs is classless. And since you know I'm right, you attack me instead of trying to defend yourself. Thank you.

 

I am rooting for the venture to fail, yes. If that means rooting for other journalists to lose their jobs, I guess I have to wear that. But if I were sitting in a room with any of those journalists right now, I would tell them to get the hell out of that job anyway, and to go find work in a real industry where $40,000 for 60 hours a week isn't seen as some great thing, and that they are fooling themselves if they think this is going to lead somewhere.

Patch is not good for journalism, therefore it is ultimately not good for journalists.

 

Does anyone think Patch will be around in two years in its current form? With AOL buying HuffPo, paying decent money for content producers isn't part of the long-range plan.

Ask Arianna if that's the plan since she's the boss.

If Patch editors are part of the content-mill scheme where SEO is everything and good content means little, then they aren't journalists anymore.

 

If the industry quits dicking around with the pipe dream that somehow, someway, internet ads will pay for news gathering on a local scale, then there's a chance that more jobs would be saved that will be lost when Patch gives up.

 

There is one all-hands call a week, and it's optional. It typically lasts an hour at most, normally more in the 30 to 45 minute range, and it has a question and answer segment. I don't really see how this is suddenly a big deal - It's a teleconference, so you don't have to drive out to some office to hear it like I had to for the dreaded three hour news room meetings at my past place. They also do a weekly summary e-mail if you did miss the teleconference.