Big, big changes at USA TODAY

[Mark2010]

Stuff like this is why it's highly unlikely I would ever work full-time for a newspaper again. The companies could care less about you as a person. All one is to them is a bottom line and as soon as that isn't profitable, you're done. No matter how good you are.

Exactly. And all the whining in the world isn't going to change that. The sooner we all understand this, the more equipped we will be to deal with reality. That's why I haven't felt bad about leaving past jobs; I knew they would have dumped me in a heartbeat if it was convenient for them to do so.

 

[Fran Curci]

Ditto, SF Express. I think local papers now live in fear of getting beat by ESPN, Fox Sports (Glazer), CBS Sports, yahoo, you name it.

 

[HejiraHenry]

Stuff like this is why it's highly unlikely I would ever work full-time for a newspaper again. The companies could care less about you as a person. All one is to them is a bottom line and as soon as that isn't profitable, you're done. No matter how good you are.

And this is different from working for ... what? An airline? Hospital? Auto dealer?

 

[Ben_Hecht]

Stuff like this is why it's highly unlikely I would ever work full-time for a newspaper again. The companies could care less about you as a person. All one is to them is a bottom line and as soon as that isn't profitable, you're done. No matter how good you are.

And this is different from working for ... what? An airline? Hospital? Auto dealer?

It hurts more in a business where (a) if you're any good, experience really does matter, and (b) unless you win the lottery, the money tends to be short.

 

[Riptide]

Stuff like this is why it's highly unlikely I would ever work full-time for a newspaper again. The companies could care less about you as a person. All one is to them is a bottom line and as soon as that isn't profitable, you're done. No matter how good you are.

And this is different from working for ... what? An airline? Hospital? Auto dealer?

It hurts more in a business where (a) if you're any good, experience really does matter, and (b) unless you win the lottery, the money tends to be short.

"We're one big family here."

 

[geddymurphy]

I'm stunned to hear about Steve Weiberg. One of the best college writers when it comes to contacts, issues and knowledge. USA Today wants to break more news? It will break less news on the college front without Weiberg.

Also, this whole 24/7 wanting to break news idea seems incredibly stupid. USA Today is a national paper that needs to be more of an overview. How can management expect to break news, particularly in pro sports, when local beat writers are gonna be around teams every day. USA Today can't have the same number of "boots on the ground" as local papers. I understand the idea of a "reorganization" but for USAT to label it as wanting to break more news ... I call bull****.

Steve (like Vicki Michaelis) left voluntarily for a teaching job, though I can't say whether the goings-on at USA TODAY were a factor in his departure or not.

"Breaking news" is really hard to define when you get right down to it. Steve did a lot of original work in college sports. It was more likely to be along the lines of some NCAA reform item than a Texas player declaring for the draft. I'd argue what Steve was doing (the former) is more valuable. People are going to find out the latter anyway, and spending all your resources so you can have it 5 minutes before ESPN is ultimately a wild goose chase in many respects.

 

[crusoes]

Stuff like this is why it's highly unlikely I would ever work full-time for a newspaper again. The companies could care less about you as a person. All one is to them is a bottom line and as soon as that isn't profitable, you're done. No matter how good you are.

And this is different from working for ... what? An airline? Hospital? Auto dealer?

It hurts more in a business where (a) if you're any good, experience really does matter, and (b) unless you win the lottery, the money tends to be short.

"We're one big family here."

I tell people it's not like a family, because I can't fire any of my relatives.

 

[Frank_Ridgeway]

It was more likely to be along the lines of some NCAA reform item than a Texas player declaring for the draft. I'd argue what Steve was doing (the former) is more valuable. People are going to find out the latter anyway, and spending all your resources so you can have it 5 minutes before ESPN is ultimately a wild goose chase in many respects.

I completely agree. I also don't think we should allow competing news organizations or sources to define the rules of play. It is just silly to credit "ESPN first reported" when it's a matter of whose query some sports agent or GM decided to answer five minutes faster. Big scoop, yes, credit them. Rumor or transactional material, no way.

 

[beardpuller]

I'm stunned to hear about Steve Weiberg. One of the best college writers when it comes to contacts, issues and knowledge. USA Today wants to break more news? It will break less news on the college front without Weiberg.

Also, this whole 24/7 wanting to break news idea seems incredibly stupid. USA Today is a national paper that needs to be more of an overview. How can management expect to break news, particularly in pro sports, when local beat writers are gonna be around teams every day. USA Today can't have the same number of "boots on the ground" as local papers. I understand the idea of a "reorganization" but for USAT to label it as wanting to break more news ... I call bull****.

Absolutely. I loved the part in the interview with Pedulla where an editor explained that they want "reporters who break stories every day."
Yeah.
I want a ****ing pet unicorn. And editors/publishers who understand how to grow the product in 2012.
Of course, none of that stuff exists.

 

[beardpuller]

It was more likely to be along the lines of some NCAA reform item than a Texas player declaring for the draft. I'd argue what Steve was doing (the former) is more valuable. People are going to find out the latter anyway, and spending all your resources so you can have it 5 minutes before ESPN is ultimately a wild goose chase in many respects.

I completely agree. I also don't think we should allow competing news organizations or sources to define the rules of play. It is just silly to credit "ESPN first reported" when it's a matter of whose query some sports agent or GM decided to answer five minutes faster. Big scoop, yes, credit them. Rumor or transactional material, no way.

On my beat, I'd like to go with "NFL rightsholder ESPN, which pays many millions of dollars to the league, first reported ..." But that's an aside.

 

[SoCalDude]

Morgan offers an explanation. More specialization, less generalization. Actually adding people. Not a salary dump.
This was picked up by LAObserved today:


http://www.laobserved.com/archive/2012/05/usa_today_sports_jobs_spe.php

 

[wireguy]

I applied for one of the openings, we'll see if I get a response.

 

[Riptide]

I applied for one of the openings, we'll see if I get a response.

I applied for an opening USAT sports had a few months ago but never got a nibble. Maybe because I wasn't real close to the D.C. area, maybe whatever. I did match up well with the job posting. ... But then the guy I applied to was laid off a month later, so I'll never know. And now I wonder about applying there again.

 

[wireguy]

I have my doubts about the place, but figured what the hell when I saw the listing. I've written enough about the sport I applied for, so maybe they'll notice that.

 

[DanOregon]

I almost think the new model for a lot of sports coverage is creating news. Whether a non-existent qb battle with the Jets, a poorly worded Tweet or a simple rant arguing for something that seems far-fetched. The NFL without helmets? Blow up the NCAA? Agents for college players.