The good ol' days

Just for the fun of it tonight, I went almost all the way to the back of Journalism Topics and came across from this interesting gem---it was posted here in June 2006 and refers to a Q&A with the McClatchy CEO. Guess he has since changed his mind. The cut and paste says it all:

Q: Buyouts and layoffs have are widespread in the newspaper industry. McClatchy has a reputation for not doing them. Can this continue?

A: We don't believe in bulking up in good times and laying off in bad times. We think that's bad for employees, bad for morale, bad for the paper.

I felt so bad for people [laid off] in the industry in 2001-02. I thought the industry's knee-jerk response was mistaken, because their attitude was, ''The recession justifies making the newspaper worse.'' They didn't say that in so many words, but their actions spoke louder than their words.

And they went to Wall Street and bragged about it -- bragged about how much money they were going to save.

Often layoffs say more about management than they do about the economy.

 

To me, that last line says it all.

 

Thanks for that. Someone should send that to Gary Pruitt and ask him for an update.

 

So let me ask this, seriouslike.

How much of this problem with the newspaper industry can be directly attributed to the fall of Knight-Ridder?

I understand the declining circulation and ad sales.

But if KR is intact and doesn't cave to the profiteering money manager Bruce Sherman, who decided that his 15-25 percent return wasn't enough, then there isn't as much of the domino effect with chains buying dying papers and taking on the debt load it can't handle....

Yes, no?

 

If they didn't, someone else would have.

This trend obviously isn't limited to one chain --- or even this industry. We're seeing it all over.

Some day, however near or distant, the storm will pass and the sun will shine again. It will be interesting indeed to see just what the world looks like on that morning.