More newspaper idiocy, Star-Telegram edition

That's not an apology. I don't see the word "apology" or "sorry" anywhere in that ridiculous piece of management crap. It's an explanation, yes, but I don't think Mr. Witt is the least bit sorry for laying bare his feelings about three of the best writers on that staff.

But I understand that managers are taught not to apologize (see Dallas Morning News layoff story from the Columbia Journalism Review, October 2005) because that's a sign of weakness, and managers must put on a brave face for the good of company morale, even if what they're doing is killing that morale.

 

To be a newspaper manager in this day and age is to either be a tormented decent person or a complete shit. No surprise, the complete shits are becoming thicker on the ground.

 

Sounds like at least two of the publishers I worked for during my time in the business. Frightening that people like that are in charge of newspapers of any decent reputation.

WFW, lono. Worse, why is it we're supposed to know when sources, coaches, players, etc. are being FOS, but supposed to let editors slip with it, even after a blunder of this magnitude?

 

jwitt is a twit. unfuckingbelievable.

 

Sad thing is, if you've worked in Witt's shop, this is not likely to be the dumbest thing he's ever done. And Leb, Revo and Jen deserve much better.

 

This is the fucking height of stupidity. Managers in every business "talk" about people all the time, a fact of life whether people like it or not, but to put it in writing? And then send it out to the newsroom? It's bad enough on its face, but in a climate where people are fearful about their futures, it's even worse.

This is the Zimmerman Telegram of newspaper stupidity.

 

Hell, he was the kind of editor back in the day too dumb to know he shouldn't hand out his username and password to someone in the office. DAMHIK.

 

You know, I don't know that I've seen it put any better than that -- sadly.

 

Of course, it is real idiocy that this internal note became external, but I have to say I have a different take.

As the SE of a Big 12 daily, by no means a metro, with a very small staff that was doing less with more since time began as opposed to since times became tough, I am actually blown away by how little LeBreton and Reeves are contributing to that paper, at least insofar as it was described in that note. In my position, I write 3 to 4 columns a week, and I've always thought that I do it fairly well. And it is so little of all that I have to do in my position. I mean, it's the payoff of all the crap I have to put up with. Sorry for the self-righteousness, but that is the way reading that note makes me feel.

As for Jen Floyd Engel, I have to say, again from the description in the note, this sounds like a young journalist who's been very fortunate, yes, to be a columnist at a place like the Star Telegram, but also like somebody who is doing all she possibly can to make herself as valuable as possible. Meanwhile, Lebreton and Reeves, who I have read and like, nonetheless still come across like a couple of guys trying to do it the way they've always done it, which is so offensive to me, period, and doubly so considering the straits the business finds itself in these days.

I mean, can't they blog three times a week on general topics? Either one could probably do 300 words in 15 minutes at the drop of a hat. Is that asking too much?

I don't know. But that is the part of this business that has always bothered me. The people I see in absolutely treasured positions who don't seem to be working very hard (and more often that not still manage to complain about everything anyway). If those people don't know who they are, rest assured their brethren surely does.

I do know that the proposition of being responsible for 500 to 800 of your own words, on any topic of your choosing, four times a week, seems like a vacation for myself and many in my position. I understand that can become a real albatross around a neck, always having to come up with something. On the other hand, spend four hours looking for a story and an hour writing it and you're still working 20 hours a week. And that's when you've got to get off your butt and find something. When stuff's happening and you've got to to go chase or follow it and just by the nature of the beast, that means putting in an 8-12 hour day for your column? Congratulations, you earned it, just like all the beat writers and copy editors do every single day.

Anyway, that's off my chest.
I feel better.

Bully for Jen Floyd Engel.
Sounds like she's working hard.
Or harder than everybody else.
Even for much less money.

Have to respect that.

 

[size=10pt][size=10pt][size=10pt][/size][/size][/size]

YO, WITT, STFU.

 

I was going to take the high road and ignore the inevitable forums and blogs for a few days, but after reading the unfair posts by slappy and sprtswrtr10, I simply can't sit by idly and let my character be destroyed.

For nearly 29 years, I have covered the Cowboys, Rangers and every area team, pro and college. I've covered 21 Super Bowls, 20 Final Fours, the World Series, soccer's World Cup and 14 Olympic Games. And in all those nearly 29 years, I have never refused an assignment for our online product.

I've contributed to blogs and participated in in-game chats. I sent back more than 60 pictures from the Beijing Olympics for the internet site. I've even operated the camera on road trips for our Cowboys beat writers to do their post-game video wrapups. I've asked *repeatedly* about doing other online things, but was always told, "Don't worry about it." I have my suspicions why I was always told that, but I'd rather not go into them here.

To portray me -- especially to people who don't yet know me personally -- as an aging non-contributor who resists helping with the internet product is not only grossly dishonest, it's also shamefully unjust and prejudicial.

(Thanks to the moderators for allowing me to defend myself).