USAT reorg

Perhaps things will be looking up for USAT, then, because this is one of the things that Morgan does best. He's smart and impressive, no doubt. But more than anything, I think, people just wantto work for him.

One meeting is probably all it would take to give anyone a sense of why.

 

So why is there this perception he won't hire women? I've never dealt with him so honestly don't know. But it's definitely out there.

 

Just be aware that I've never worked with a Gannett editor who was worth a damn that stuck around very long. The good ones get better jobs, the principled ones quit and do something else - the drones stick around.
Though I'm pretty sure that isn't exclusive to Gannett. Just fair warning, the place has a history of initiatives that whither and die after a lot of initial excitement.

 

News 2000 doesn't know what you're talking about.

 

"Olympic women's soccer qualifiers and women's figure skating deserve major coverage!" - Christine Brennan

 

Blog away, Auntie. :

 

Not really the case at USAT. For all its warts, it's a destination paper. The sports staff in particular has very low turnover. (Granted, one reason for that might be that ESPN doesn't raid USAT the way it raids every other paper in the country. But aside from ESPN, where would you go after USAT?)

This is true. The big difference here is the new management. For all our focus on Morgan, keep an eye on Beusse. He's practically the antithesis of the typical Gannett bureaucrat.

[quote author=BigRed]"Olympic women's soccer qualifiers and women's figure skating deserve major coverage!" - Christine Brennan[/quote]

In a national newspaper, absolutely. Team USA is the home team. Figure skating has fallen on hard times, but I can tell you skating stories drew big numbers a few years ago. And women's soccer? National team? Abby Wambach? Hope Solo? Anything ringing a bell here? People read this stuff.

Of course, if they continue down the Bleacher Report route, they'll have a Wambach story sitting next to a "Hottest Cheerleaders" photo gallery.

 

It should be a destination paper, but I've never considered it close to that. Way too much casual fan fluff for my taste.
They have the staff size and budget to dominate, yet they fall short almost every day in their story selection and execution. I think it's one of the biggest underachievers in the industry, actually, and that's what interested me. I knew my ideas could help make it better.
I was at one destination paper, some might say two. I knew after 5 minutes I wanted no part of that place.
With Morgan leading it, I'd be a lot more tempted to go now, though. He will turn it into a destination paper.

 

USA Today has a huge lineup of incredible talent that, with some rare exceptions, are a complete waste of their abilities. It's like having Tom Brady, Andre Johnson and Larry Fitzgerald, and then running up the middle 9 out of 10 times.

If the Gannett bean counters realize they can put our the same product with young, cheap writers, rather than talented, expensive writers, you could see the bulk of that staff hit the street.

 

It's not impossible to do quality work there. Difficult at times. I could understand reluctance to go there. But once you're there, not sure where else you'd want to go. Especially if you're among the older $taffer$ there. The people who are leaving are the folks who are getting worked into the ground for low pay but are young enough to start fresh elsewhere, perhaps in another field.

That's my fear. Especially with all the middle managers they've hired taking up a lot of the budget. And especially with the sports front starting to look a little like Bleacher Report. They may just buy a bunch of blogs and figure "Reporters? Pfffft. Who needs 'em?"

 

I'm not sure falling into a rut professionally has any connection with one's obligation to "show up and do your job."