68 Philadelphia Inquirer newsroom layoffs

Nancy Cooney, metro editor and former sports ed., is now leaving for ESPN. This might save 1 or 2 layoffs.
word is a couple of sports copy editors are first to be called back.
even then, any of those copy editors should have no trouble finding new jobs. All are very good, and I would suggest anyone in need of a desker would contact them. Of course, a couple of them are tied to the area, and prospects for them are more cloudy.
The new editor, in his pep talk to the remaining few, mentioned moving the deadlines back once they get some new presses. that would eliminate some house ads. Of course, i think new presses would mean eliminating some more pressmen before it means later deadlines.

 

I'll win few fans for this, but Bill Marimow, Pulitzer and all, is a fucking hypocrite.

He came to Penn State to speak a few years ago, when he still was at NPR. He derided the chop-chop-chop nature of corporate media, saying that's what was killing the industry. Private ownership would be the only way forward, he said.

Of course, when the chop-chop-chop PMH owners (granted, they're the private-owner saviors in his eyes) called him and offered him the chance to return to the Inquirer, he apparently had no problem with being the one who was there when the Bunyan-like ax fell.

 

Wicked and others, what you fail to realize is that the new ownership isn't iun the journalism business. They are business men. They are loooking at how much money the product is losing. The bottom line is what counts.

 

1. Is the Inquirer losing money, or is it merely not making enough money to service the debt these guys took on to buy it?
2. Here we confront the essential dilemma. When GM lays people off, it's because they're going to make fewer cars. When newspapers lay people off, it's because they're going to make the same amount of a lousier product. People DO get this, and it's why coping with financial stress through layoffs merely creates a death spiral.

 

Mike. the paper makes money but is losing readers and advertisers. It's been that way since the 1980's. It's only a matter of time before the plug is pulled at the Daily News. It's unfortunate becuase some very good people are there but true. The Inky has a much broader base and won't be folding but the ship is taking on a lot of damage.

 

Boots, I do understand that. In fact, I hope they make lots of money. If they don't, they're gonna cut more jobs.

But one of the first adages of marketing is this: when you're losing money, the worst thing you can do is cut advertising. Put less money into your product, and the customer will see that you're not confident in your business. It has a subconscious affect. People hear about these cuts at the Philly papers -- more importantly, they see the quality go down when they plunk down that 75 cents every day -- and they're far less inclined to buy the paper.

Another thing that people should think about is the future of reporting. Fifteen to 20 years ago, radio stations turned to a lot more syndicated programming. Sources of talent development dwindled. Where Joe Schmoe once learned the craft by working the midday shift at that 5,000-watt small AM in Dubuque, he's now been replaced by Dan Patrick. Better quality? Sure. Future ramifications, though. People in the radio business nowadays are worried, since there's nowhere for talent to develop. Even Howard Stern worked at a couple small stations before he hit bigger markets. I have a fear that may be happening in print journalism -- unless you want to count blogs, and 90 percent of bloggers not affiliated with a media outlet wouldn't know what "reporting" was if it hit them square in the schnoz.

 

Some would call it progress but others call it something entirely different.

 

inquirer's deputy sports editor was typing agate last night

 

What a joke.

 

Plug can't be pulled on the Daily News -- it's been stated explicity in the last few union contracts, including this one. It was never an issue in the recent negotiations.

 

They are businessmen who over-paid for the business and now they're in the process of gutting it to realize profits. When that's complete, they'll likely flip it. This is deja vu of the '80s.