Slash and burn at the Inquirer, or kill the Daily News?

(Posted here to get more traffic.)

We've all heard by now the potential of 150 editorial layoffs, one-third of the newsroom, at The Philadelphia Inquirer.

Let's assume this number, for our purposes, is correct. And let's assume some major cost cuts are going to be made, even if the papers' owners win a $1 billion Powerball jackpot.

If you were the owner of the Philly papers, would you cut the heart out of the Inquirer, even more than it already has been?

Or, to save some semblance of quality at the Inquirer, would you kill off the Daily News instead?

If you were running the Guild, in the midst of harsh negotiations, and you were given one option or the other, which one would you pick?

I'm not advocating any of these moves. I'm curious to see others' reactions, though.

 

FYI, the original thread: http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/threads/33297/

 

I'm not sure you can say the two choices are of equal impact. Philly has a free daily tabloid; keeping the Daily News in some form might be a way to keep the competition in check. On the other hand, killing the Daily News might also allow some savings in the pressroom and mailroom. Anyway, I think the decision may be more complicated than we can see.

 

I'm sure, Frank. I just tossed the question out there as food for thought.