Strib byline strike: Does anyone care?

If doing the work but not taking credit it for it doesn't work, they just might escalate to doing the work but not cashing their paychecks. That'll really put pressure on management.

 

That's correct. Demonstrate that the readers don't give a hoot and show management that just sticking "Staff writer" on top of stories is a fine way to cover up the fact that you laid off all the veteran reporters making $$ and hide the fact that you've replaced them with less-experienced folks making $.

I've mentioned this before, too. The writers want to show all this "solidarity" with the many inside folks that are about to be dumped by the Strib. Yet it still is seen as so very important to have bylines on stories (hey, hey, look at me, I'm the one who did this work) and no public credit at all on the hard work of copy editors, designers and such. Here, deskers, we'll make ourselves as anonymous as you to show how much we care. But only for a day.

To me, this is like a big boss flying in coach rather than first-class one day in "tribute" to the halving of our department's travel budget.

I'm sure the Minneapolis brass was wringing its hands Tuesday and will seriously reconsider future staff reductions to avoid another grueling byline strike.

 

No.

 

Ever? I believe it used to be somewhat effective raising awareness when the newspaper was the most important outlet in town. People cared about what was happening there, and the local ownership might actually feel a bit of shame if they were giving the workers a raw deal and had to answer questions about it at the Rotary Club.

Now, with corporate Satan-spawned owners, a complete anachronism. But it did have some use once upon a time. Someone should tell the Star Trib that time went away with the Purple People Eaters, though.

 

Wouldn't it be more effective if writers changed every "i" in their story to an "a"

Now there's a strike that would catch someone's attention

 

i was an avid sports reader long before i was a sports writer and i never really paid squat attention to the byline.

 

This is part of the usual contract negotiation process, like an "infomational picket" in which the workers are not on strike but picket to bring the public's attention to the company's cheapness. No, most people won't care--unless they happen to be union members of some sort themselves, in which case they might. The purpose isn't to settle the dispute but to fire an early volley in what's usually a long a process.

In my experience, the contract provision usually said that no reporter's byline could be used over his objections. Mainly this was meant to allow the reporter to have his name taken off if he disagreed with major, substantive editing changes (and in practice, this type of protest is best used sparingly). By extension during a byline strike, all (or most) reporters simultaneously withhold this permission to use their byline. But a byline strike usually is not the major reason for that contract provision--it's to prevent management from forcing a reporter to take ownership of a story that, essentially, was not written by him.

 

There are actually writers I seek to read their work. But readers, I would assume, couldn't care less.

Byline strikes are so irrelevant.

 

Are those writers columnists or big-name beat writers? I doubt most people care about my work.

 

We did it once, along with informational pickets on the busy road outside our building. We got a lot of public support. It embarrassed the company. We quickly settled our contract.
We have the right (union contract) to withhold our bylines at any time.
It doesn't mean shit to the readers, though.

 

I'm tempted to do an art strike every time I don't have cover color.

 

Byline strikes are just a tool to gauge solidarity in your shop and (hopefully) demonstrate to management (not necessarily the public) that union members are aware of the issues and sticking together. Their effectiveness has been severely weakened because good newspaper writers don't stay long enough to establish their bylines, instead getting out of the business after four or five years when they realize "top scale" doesn't pay the bills. The value of a byline has also been diluted in the sea of media not unlike the way the way network "stars" have been devalued by cable television.

There are better ways to get your point across these days and I'd argue that byline strikes can backfire big-time because: a) they cause the membership to question their collective strength in a "Is that the best we can do?" sort of way, and b) it's a job action that comes off as a relatively ineffective cliche after four decades of use in the industry, causing membership to question the creativity and wherewithal of their leadership.