• Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Gannett, Gatehouse talking merger

Is this because the other reporters were out chasing and writing stories or because Gatehouse had cut back to only two reporters?
More the latter than the former - I did my internship at the same shop in 2005ish, and even then, the building was a lot more vibrant. They employed three full-time news reporters at the time of my layoff, plus a part-time correspondent (did 2 to 4 stories a week on one town) and a part-time sports reporter. We did have a digital team - From 9 a.m. through midnight, at least one person was always on, with two people on from noon / 1 p.m. to 7 or 8 p.m. They hadn't downsized the building yet though, so there were desks for 12 reporters.
 
Last edited:
Given the senior debt that Chatham owned, in a straightforward bankruptcy. ... that equity for debt swap they wanted to do was the right outcome.

What Chatham wants to do now certainly is the question. But that was the question months ago when it should have been assumed that Chatham would take ownership (they had already accumulated so much equity already to go with the debt, it was clear they were in for some reason). If they want to be in the newspaper business, there is no way they can attempt this without serious cuts. Relieving the company's debt burden in bankruptcy gives them a fighting chance to get it lean enough where it can be profitable -- at least for a while.

The flip side is that maybe they never actually wanted to be in the newspaper business, in which case they see what they have as an asset that they think they can sell for chunk more than the $300 million. Which is why it wouldn't be a huge shocker if they actually turn around at some point and sell to Alden anyhow, which would love to scale up their newspaper business.
 
I am surprised to discover how many reporters -- pretty much all in News and Features -- still hang out in the newsroom, especially if they live in the coverage area. I've worked from home for years, and I usually drop in if the office is convenient on deadline or to pick up supplies.

I've interacted with my colleagues far more often since they're at home too. We can trade ideas just fine without being in each other's presence. We don't even need to see each other's faces.

Even my neighbors have a group text now!
Agree with this completely. I've been working at home for five years now. I see no need to be in an office.
 
I've been working from home the last four months and taking care of the kids while my wife is back in her office.
Other than swinging by the office late at night to grab boxscores from the few fax machine holdouts for roundups when hs sports resume, I can't think of why I'll go back in when it reopens.
 
Seeing news about Gannett freezing salaries and cutting 401k contributions. It's funny because they've already beaten any expectation of a raise out of me.
I didn't watch the town hall. But, yeah, like we were ever gonna get a bump ... Bascobart's golden parachute ate up that fund weeks ago.
 
I didn't watch the town hall. But, yeah, like we were ever gonna get a bump ... Bascobart's golden parachute ate up that fund weeks ago.
I haven't watched a single one of those shirtshow town halls. Maybe if they make it mandatory and keep some kind of attendance, like the bullshirt ethics classes we have to take online -- as if Gannett/GateHouse has any moral standing to ever lecture anyone on ethics.
 
I tried, once. But when the first comment was "we salute your dedication to local journalism" and we had just laid off 4 people in the newsroom I found something better to do.
 
I tried, once. But when the first comment was "we salute your dedication to local journalism" and we had just laid off 4 people in the newsroom I found something better to do.
We were forced to watch the very first one when they announced the merger. I felt sorry for those poor USA Today staffers who had to stand the entire time while two multi-millionaires sat in comfortable chairs yukking it up.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top