This will be my column for The Gazette (now appearing on Mondays):
Journalists should experience the glare of media attention now and then.
We’ve had the tables turned on us the past couple weeks at the Gazette Co. Journalists who are used to asking the tough questions and deciding what news and facts were most important have fielded inquiries from television and print reporters. We’ve watched and read news reports and blogs with uncomfortable facts, annoying errors and snarky viewpoints.
As the editor who took on an unfamiliar title and delivered some bad news to people who lost their jobs, I spent much of the time in the spotlight.
The media attention began the week before our job reductions, when KGAN got wind of changes taking place at The Gazette and focused on us in a weeklong series on turmoil in the newspaper business. I noted some of the TV report’s errors right away in my blog, though I won’t belabor them here and didn’t blog about all the errors they made. I hope and believe that our staff members identify themselves better in approaching people for interviews and check their facts better. I hope and believe we provide better context and depth in our reporting.
But the fact is, KGAN smoked out the story that something was up at The Gazette and I give them credit for that.
When we started giving employees the unfortunate news Tuesday that some of them were losing their jobs, the glare intensified. I fielded inquiries from the Associated Press, Des Moines Register, three different KGAN staff members and IowaIndependent.com (and I might be leaving out a media outlet or two).
My boss, Gazette Co. President and CEO Chuck Peters, announced late in the day that I would be leading our new operation to develop content independent of specific products. While my organization will include most of the staff of what used to be The Gazette’s newsroom, I will no longer hold the title of Editor. That title goes now to Lyle Muller, a leader on our staff for the past 22 years. We will work closely together, my staff providing news, information, photos, videos and other content and Lyle leading efforts to use some of that content to produce an outstanding newspaper.
Chuck, Lyle and I responded to 37 questions and comments Wednesday in a live chat with the public at GazetteOnline. We received more than two times as many questions as we had time to answer. Many were skeptical or downright hostile.
As I announced Tuesday night in my blog, my new title is Information Content Conductor. I won’t repeat here the explanation I gave in the blog for the title. But here’s the central reason for changing the title: Editor is a role focused on a packaged product, a newspaper (Lyle’s role). My role is going to focus on generating content independently of packaged products. It’s a huge change for this business and a new title, even a title that sounds strange, sends an important message to our staff that we are serious about change. A journalist doesn’t relinquish the title editor lightly, but I felt I had to.
My new title was mocked by Iowa Independent Managing Editor Chase Martyn, who accused us of “gimmickry” (a fair criticism, even if we disagree) and “shortsighted planning” (a conclusion drawn without a single inquiry about our planning). Martyn wondered whether my designation comes with a funny hat (not yet, but I wouldn’t rule it out; we are saying this start-up venture will require us to wear multiple hats).
That blog was mild compared to the diatribe by former staff member Josh Linehan, who left voluntarily before last week’s staff cuts. Linehan proclaimed himself to have more guts than his former bosses, whom he didn’t name but described as charlatans, idiots and liars, though he never had the guts to voice these views face to face to me when he was here. And his self-righteous commitment to the truth didn’t extend so far as to call or email me to check his facts. He also wondered how we sleep at night, without bothering to do the research to see that the question had been answered.
Of course, the media glare isn’t all uncomfortable. Arizona State University journalism professor Tim McGuire cheered me on in his blog, agreeing that our industry has to innovate more seriously than we have so far.
I don’t particularly like the spotlight. I’d rather be the one asking questions and stating opinions. So here’s a question: Would we really be innovative if we didn’t face some skepticism? And here’s an opinion: After we succeed, the skeptics will adopt our approach (if they’re still in the business), but they won’t admit they were wrong.
So…how DO you sleep at night? You say it’s been answered, but I see no proof of that. So tell me…how do you sleep at night?
And way to misconstrue Josh’s blog, BTW. But, then again, that’s what higher-ups at every paper I’ve ever known have done. Twisted things for their self-serving purposes.
LikeLike
Jill, As I noted in this blog and in the live chat, sleep has been difficult. I have lost a job myself. I know how angry and anxious the staff members who lost their jobs this week must feel. I also know that we had to do reduce our workforce to a sustainable level (Josh apparently didn’t attend employee meetings where we shared financial information with staff members or didn’t understand the financial information, because his comments about profit levels at newspapers are years out of date).
Please be more specific about misconstruing Josh’s blog. Did he not call us charlatans, liars and idiots? Did he not proclaim himself to have more guts than us (the guts to admit he is clueless, if you want me to be more specific)? Is it misconstruing to describe a name-calling rant that uses foul language a diatribe?
The only other things I said about Josh were that he lacked the guts to say those things to my face when he was here. That wasn’t in his blog, but it’s a fact. And he lacked the guts to contact me directly to check the facts that he got wrong (that blog post was short but Josh misconstrued a lot about what we’re trying to do at The Gazzette).
I welcome critical comments at this blog, but you’ve got to do better than that. You can agree with everything Josh wrote if you want. But you are wrong to say I misconstrued his blog. Every word I wrote about his blog was true and it reflected accurately what Josh wrote. Unless you think he’s going to admit he was wrong after we’ve succeeded.
LikeLike
Jill: I am a newsroom employee at The Gazette on the same level Josh was when he was here. I like Josh and considered him a friend (still do, just haven’t seen him since he left).
My husband and I as are far from staying-in-line puppets as you can get. When we worked for a newspaper in the late ’90s through 2001 which was owned by the company that eventually evolved (or devolved) into GateHouse media, we were extremely vocal about corporate journalism and the ridiculous expected profit margins (I believe they were 30 percent then). We knew it didn’t serve the community and would eventually fall apart. We, in turn, got fired execution-style – no severance, no nothing. I can’t say I’m at all disappointed that GateHouse is leading the way in corporate journalism failure these days.
In my next job at a paper that was owned by a independent company, I was similarly defiant and wary about the corporate structure. When my boss and mentor was suddenly fired in 2004 because of profit margins, I led the way in the entire newsroom staff walking out within 6 months. I was the executive editor by the way.
I haven’t always agreed with decisions at The Gazette in my near-five years here. It has at times seemed too top-heavy and corporate – not my style. I have tried to leave several times in the past few years, but was unable to secure another job. But now I do feel they are changing for the better. And, no, I’m not just saying that to kiss-up in times of uncertainty. I feel more secure and comfortable about my future at The Gazette than I have in nearly five years.
My biggest problem with Josh’s column was the statements that The Gazette doesn’t not have a restructuring plan and is not working on changing the business model. I am on the business plan restructuring committee and know full well changes will be made. I have also attended enough meetings about the changes going in the content and product to know there is a real effort being made. Is it a little far-fetched? Yes. Will it work? I don’t know. But like Josh said, the current model isn’t working. So we’re going to try something else.
Jill, last year I walked out on the newspaper my husband and I created because we didn’t agree with the business decisions being made. If it turns out it looks like The Gazette is going in the wrong direction, I again will move on. But I’m at least going to give it a chance based on what I know about it.
Angie Holmes
LikeLike
To misconstrue Josh Linehan’s blog as a diatribe is entirely unfair and immature. Grow up. Accept his obeservation that you have no restructuting plan. You have no idea what you are doing. You are making it all up as you go along.
He speaks the truth. It is you who is gutless and self-righteous. You string together a bunch of words that mean nothing, hoping to obfuscate and hide the fact that you are in over your head.
We can only hope that your demotion to “conductor” is not the end of your demotions there.
LikeLike
Bob,
Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the meaning of the word diatribe. Dictionary.com defines it as “a bitter, sharply abusive denunciation, attack, or criticism.” Whether Josh was right in his opinions or not, only time will tell. But regardless of the opinions expressed, there is nothing unfair or immature about calling a blog that resorts to name-calling and vulgarity a diatribe. That’s simply accurate. Diatribes can be right but they’re still diatribes.
Speaking of accurate, Josh can think my restructuring plan is crazy. He will have plenty of company in that. But to say we have no restructuring plan, as you both insist, is inaccurate. We are changing whole departments in ways that no newspaper company anywhere has tried. Say that we are restructuring for failure if you wish and I’ll have to say only time will tell. But say we have no restructuring plan and you’re factually incorrect. That means you either don’t know what you’re talking about or that you don’t care. Either way, you lose credibility with people who do know the facts. In which case, addressing your final point seems like a waste of time, so I won’t.
LikeLike
keep plugging.
our worlds change
as quickly as
yesterday’s tomorrow
disappears
with the snow
LikeLike
My response is the same as yours to my concern over Rick Smith >> I don’t understand a thing you are talking about , we must be on two different planets. M. W. Mcgrew
LikeLike
As a middle-aged long time newspaper junkie who subscribes to the Gazette, Register and Press-Citizen, there’s one thing I don’t get: How
do newspapers think they can afford to continue printing a hard copy when they are givng away their content for free in the their on-line editions? Yes, I read an occasional article ( “A Bright Spot in Newspaper Advertising”, NYTimes , Feb. 28) that says that eventually the on-line newspapers might bring in more ad revenue, but I simply do not believe that there will be enough on-line ads to sustain a paper—even when combined with a post-recession uptick in print ads, and/or a tiny uptick in subscriptions. Can I assume that you believe that the on-line ad revenue is going to work as a business plan? Are you at all open to the idea of charging readers for the on-line version? I am not privy to your
finances, but this seems like the only way to keep newspapers going.
LikeLike
Gary,
Newspapers have already tried charging for content online and it hasn’t worked anywhere, even for organizations with content in high demand, such as the New York Times and Wall Street Journal. In fact, a newspaper that was one of the last holdouts, insisting on charging for online content, cut its staff last week, the same day as we did at the Gazette Co.
The simple truth is that newspapers never charged for their content. The subscription fees you pay for The Gazette, Register and Press-Citizen (thank you, by the way) are barely production and distribution charges, if that. The truth is that newspapers have always made our money by helping businesses reach the audiences who want our content. In a world where abundant content is available free online (not to mention all the free broadcast content), newspapers can’t expect to succeed by charging for online content.
I believe the future for community news organizations lies in expanding our revenue model beyond advertising. We can help businesses sell directly to customers in the digital marketplace. We can provide leads for business customers. We can provide valuable niche audiences for target advertising. We need to build audiences for business customers, not chase the audience away in pursuit of an outdated business model.
Thanks for asking, Gary. On the surface, it seems logical that newspapers are hurting themselves by giving away content online. But when you dig down and analyze the situation, we need the audience, not the revenue for content. Even in print, advertising brings in way more revenue than circulation.
LikeLike
Good luck with the struggles you face. I have subscribed to the Gazette ever since I moved to the Iowa City area nearly 20 years ago and I think it is a superior newspaper. Our local paper, the Press-Citizen, is shriveling up to nothing and blowing away. I still subscribe, but some days when I pick it up off the driveway it feels like I am picking up a pamphlet. When I visit relatives in Davenport and pick up the Quad City Times I shake my head at the incredibily ugly layout of every page.
The Gazette’s content is terrific, and it just LOOKS terrific also. I hate to see anything change but I realize it must. I know that mine is the only driveway on the street that has a newspaper on it every morning. No person I know younger than 45 subscribes to a newspaper. I’m sure some do, but I don’t personally know any. I doubt that anyone under 30 would even read a newsprint edition if it was given to them free on a daily basis. With the economy falling apart, even existing subscribers like myself who enjoy a daily newspaper may think twice when the renewal notice arrives for $280. (I pay annually, but any way you pay for it, it adds up to that.)
I’m also read newspapers such as The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post onlilne regularly, and peek in on many others. I know the day is coming when I no longer subscribe to a physical newsprint edition. I get up early every day, around 5 a.m., and many days I have already read The Gazette online before the newsprint edition is tossed onto my driveway at 6:15. I don’t even have to open the plastic wrap. It seems wasteful and I wonder why I still subscribe, then I realize that by doing so I am supporting your operation. Somebody has to.
I want the newspaper industry to survive. I can’t stand television nwes, especially the clutter, sensationalism, bias and stupidity of cable “news” channels and their bloviators.
Anyway, good luck. I await March 10 and beyond with great interest.
LikeLike
I like John Korkie’s response the best. Things change. It’s terrible to lose a job — but the newspaper industry has to find new blueprints. And some of it will be made up as they go along.
We will always need solid reporting in some format. So let’s give The Gazette a cheer for trying to take on this new world full throttle.
Who knows? They may harness a model of success that will allow laid off people to come back some day or to allow laid off people to come up with their own version and their own business.
LikeLike
When the dust settles, I am sure that the Gazette will still be here.
LikeLike
Thank You,
Patrick Muller.
You got the point of the point. I usually find that my time on this macbook is wasted.
Not because it is: just because it was.
Nice response, and I appreciate it.
I’m In CR because of many, many, life changes.
I still get the paper copy because that’s what I do.
With coffee, especially on the weekends, and I enjoy it in every season.
I read it in the wind, I read it in the garage, sometimes I have to microwave it and get black smudge marks on my keysboard……
Call me an old-timer and I’ll call you a friend.
With all the changes in life
We cannot become a breed of has beens,
Because,
We all know that’s a whole lot better, to be than one who never was.
Let’s move forward.
Localize, Strengthen and Work.
What a challenge.
It’s us for us.
John
Support Steve!
He’s up to his ears.
LikeLike
Whether the restructuring and reorganization plans will work — indeed, only time will tell. It’s an audacious proposal, certainly, and in many ways it seems like a grand experiment, which it most certainly is.
Yet I don’t have to keep checking stock prices for Lee (closed at 35 cents today), McClatchey (42 cents), Gannett ($2.22) and Scripps ($1.03) to know that our industry faces life-and-death decisions.
We’re certainly in a better position than some, being in the Midwest and not being corporately owned. But we’d all be naive to think our careers aren’t in jeopardy without some drastic action.
The Rocky Mountain News was a great paper, until it closed last week. Other titans of our industry — the San Francisco Chronicle, Seattle Post-Intelligencer and Philadelphia Inquirer, to name just a few — are on life support.
I don’t know much for sure, but I do know this, and I’ve said it before: If we fail to act, we’re guaranteed to fail.
LikeLike
When I was a kid, there was THe Philadelphia Inquirer, The Philadelphia Bulletin, The Pottstown Mercury and The Reading Eagle, within a forty mile radius, with morning and afternoon editions from three of the four.
I delivered the Bulletin at the age of ten.
Met some of the coolest characters at the News Agency/ Distribution Center in Stowe, Pa.
Cruddy Buddy
Ba-Ba-Ba Bill the stutterer
Charlie Rienhart
Along with other craggy, unshaven, wrinkled grey men peddling the nooze with the smell of yesterday’s booze.
It was in their blood, 3 AM
Stepside trucks backed to the docks
Bundled with unwrapped bales of stories.
Listening to WFIL, doo-wop,, Philly Soul. along with early hippy stuff and the “Geeter With the Heater,” Jerry Blavett.
Today, there’s not even a rag-man, drawin’ circles, up and down the block.
Our ragman was Billy Blue.
Two packs of Chesterfields and a bag of Red Man in his shirt.
One tooth and a smile.
Today we have this.
Clean, shaven, manicured, wireless.
Seemingly, with reality unchecked,
There’s a life without problems behind the mask.
Packaged
dry
Broke.
We’ll see where it takes us.
Creativity rises when the times are hard.
We’re in the clouds.
LikeLike
[…] painful as this RIF was, we had no choice due to the abrupt decline in advertising revenues in the last […]
LikeLike
Well,
turns out that I lost my job on Friday March 13th…
So, every industry that’s even close to being scared
can take a cue from others to justify what they see in the bottom line..
I’ve been here before, in the seventies, early eighties, 2005 and then again in ’06
Instead of saying, “enough already”
it’s another reinvention
this time with a few more wrinkles…
Time marches on
LikeLike
[…] painful as this RIF was, we had no choice due to the abrupt decline in advertising revenues in the last […]
LikeLike