1. 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!

Layoffs coming at the OCR...

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by Mizzougrad96, Jun 3, 2014.

  1. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    This is always tough to see...


    Thoughts and prayers for anyone impacted by this...
  2. SnarkShark

    SnarkShark Well-Known Member

    Not clear if layoffs are coming to the newsroom, but they are offering buyouts. Also making all employees (at the OCR, LAR and P-E) take 10 furlough days in June-July.
  3. da man

    da man Well-Known Member

    This is the paper that had that big hiring binge not too long ago and said it was investing in the product, right? I was really hoping that would be a success.

  4. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    Yeah, the only paper I can think of that has invested significantly in new people and done well is USA Today, and that was more a case of getting rid of those who had become complacent, if nothing else and replacing them with good talent.
  5. steveu

    steveu Well-Known Member

    Aw shit. I was hoping, one level, that this would work. If he would have just kept the OCR and not tried expanding with LBR, LA Register and P-E I wonder if he would have succeeded.

    Not ready to say the experiment is a failure, but the patient needs a lot of care.
  6. SnarkShark

    SnarkShark Well-Known Member

    It's worse than originally thought.

    This is what I've heard. They've offered 75 percent of the newsroom staff buyouts. If they don't get enough takers, they will lay off (with buyouts included) around 1/3 of the newsroom staff. Cuts have been called "severe."
  7. Fran Curci

    Fran Curci Active Member

    That "new talent" at USA Today ..? I'm sure there were some people who weren't needed, but a lot of the new writers are simply younger versions of the previous writers. George Schroeder was a good hire.
  8. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    I have a former co-worker who was in the previous regime at USA Today and they would complain all the time about how poorly it was run and how much dead weight there was. They were there for well over a decade and every time I saw them would say, "At some point they're going to realize how much money they're wasting."

    Apparently, it took 14-15 years for significant changes to happen.

    Maybe I'm biased because I have several friends who were hired there, but I think the product is night and day better than it used to be.
  9. Songbird

    Songbird Well-Known Member

    I'm almost wondering if Kushner gave a rat's ass and really just wanted to be stroked as "THE SAVIOR!"

    One year? He gave his big ambitious idea one year?

    Same thing with Paton and his big ambition. He gave Thunderdome one year then scrapped it all. Makes zero sense.
  10. LongTimeListener

    LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

    No, it makes sense.

    If you've given it a year and gotten everything up and running and you simply cannot generate revenue, it would be apparent by then. He probably had a fixed number that he was willing to spend before he saw a sign of progress, and he hit that number and there was no sign of progress.
  11. BB Bobcat

    BB Bobcat Active Member

    Reminds me of FanHouse

    "Hey, we're going to hire a bunch of people and really create a lot of great content and people are just going to flock to us!"

    Two years later....

    "Oh, that didn't work. Never mind."
  12. Screwball

    Screwball Member

    I'm not sure he had a fixed number. The immediate furloughs suggest he couldn't find any more lenders, or at least couldn't get any more financing until he cut costs.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page