Changes at Los Angeles Times

[Editude]

Received a note that Randy Harvey has been bumped up to assistant editor at the LA Times. No word yet on who might be replacing him as sports editor.

 

[MileHigh]

Very, very interesting. Met Randy a couple of times during my time in SoCal and always liked him, and enjoyed him as a writer back in the day as well.

 

[Mr. X]

Here are some details: http://www.laobserved.com/archive/2009/07/pre-holiday_putsch_at_lat.php#more

 

[SF_Express]

Randy's a good guy, and I worked with Arthur. Good, traditional newsman and decent man who had expressed some dislike of the way things are going, so frankly, I'm not that shocked that he's gone, and in fact, might simply be surprised it didn't happen sooner.

 

[MileHigh]

Sounds like Randy stays on as sports editor and is adding the expanded duties/new title.

 

[Frank_Ridgeway]

What gets me about the editor's memo is that the executive editor has to leave because he and the editor disagree about how to do things. I've never understood why agreement is a condition of employment. Willingness to carry out an order, yes. Agreement, why? If the editor is secure about his ability, he should want a deputy who sometimes will disagree with him about the most important issues, especially now when everyone is failing to pin the tail on the donkey. After reading his memo, I would find it incredibly difficult to have any personal or professional respect for the LAT editor. But I suppose it would be wise to hide that, wouldn't it?

 

[SF_Express]

What gets me about the editor's memo is that the executive editor has to leave because he and the editor disagree about how to do things. I've never understood why agreement is a condition of employment. Willingness to carry out an order, yes. Agreement, why? If the editor is secure about his ability, he should want a deputy who sometimes will disagree with him about the most important issues, especially now when everyone is failing to pin the tail on the donkey. After reading his memo, I would find it incredibly difficult to have any personal or professional respect for the LAT editor. But I suppose it would be wise to hide that, wouldn't it?

Frank, there's some history there involving the whole transition from Tribune to Zell Tribune, and Arthur, I think, has played the good soldier for a long time.

I think their differences probably just reached the irreconcilable stage.

 

[Joe Williams]

What gets me about the editor's memo is that the executive editor has to leave because he and the editor disagree about how to do things. I've never understood why agreement is a condition of employment. Willingness to carry out an order, yes. Agreement, why? If the editor is secure about his ability, he should want a deputy who sometimes will disagree with him about the most important issues, especially now when everyone is failing to pin the tail on the donkey. After reading his memo, I would find it incredibly difficult to have any personal or professional respect for the LAT editor. But I suppose it would be wise to hide that, wouldn't it?

We fill our newsrooms with people who are encouraged, even obliged, to question authority, to be highly skeptical of bureaucracy and groupthink, and we make our livings based on freedom of expression. But by God you better not do anything of those things within our walls or our ranks.

Newsrooms used to be fascinating places full of amazing people with all sorts of ideas, opinions and vivid personalities. Now that sort of stuff will get you laid off or run out. Biggest problem, the folks making the decisions aren't secure in their own competency so they cling to their titles and bits of power.

Just my two cents of psychology. We in Sports get good at that stuff.

 

[Michael_ Gee]

It's really even simpler than that, Joe. Everything the Times has tried under Zell has failed, spectacularly. My guess is, the former number two predicted most if not all these innovations would fail. No number one in any organization can afford to have a number two who's righter than he is hanging around.
Easy enough to go to the publisher and say "this guy thinks you and Sam are morons."

 

[Fran Curci]

The thought the explanation for Arthur's move was relatively honest. At least it didn't say he "wanted to explore new opportunities."

 

[Editude]

According to LA Observed, Mike James is the new SE. Note says he's only the seventh Times sports editor since 1928.

 

[SF_Express]

Great news for Mike, one of the nicest and most grounded guys I've worked with, ever.

 

[Simon_Cowbell]

According to LA Observed, Mike James is the new SE. Note says he's only the seventh Times sports editor since 1928.

Alston-Lasorda-Dwyre took up most of those 81 years, right?

 

[Joe Williams]

According to LA Observed, Mike James is the new SE. Note says he's only the seventh Times sports editor since 1928.

Alston-Lasorda-Dwyre took up most of those 81 years, right?

Will it be around long enough to have seven more? Won't even ask about the prospects for 81 years.

 

[DanOregon]

What gets me about the editor's memo is that the executive editor has to leave because he and the editor disagree about how to do things. I've never understood why agreement is a condition of employment. Willingness to carry out an order, yes. Agreement, why? If the editor is secure about his ability, he should want a deputy who sometimes will disagree with him about the most important issues, especially now when everyone is failing to pin the tail on the donkey. After reading his memo, I would find it incredibly difficult to have any personal or professional respect for the LAT editor. But I suppose it would be wise to hide that, wouldn't it?

We fill our newsrooms with people who are encouraged, even obliged, to question authority, to be highly skeptical of bureaucracy and groupthink, and we make our livings based on freedom of expression. But by God you better not do anything of those things within our walls or our ranks.

Newsrooms used to be fascinating places full of amazing people with all sorts of ideas, opinions and vivid personalities. Now that sort of stuff will get you laid off or run out. Biggest problem, the folks making the decisions aren't secure in their own competency so they cling to their titles and bits of power.

Just my two cents of psychology. We in Sports get good at that stuff.

It's kind of a sad thought - managers are now "breeding" a generation of reporters to not question what an authority figure says, and I've got to figure these "company men", operate the same way with their higher ups and the business side.
What was the old bromide? afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted? Now it's don't make waves, go along to get along and all the news that fits the budget.

 

[MileHigh]

Have not met Mike, but have only heard very good things about him. Congrats on the move up.

 

[gutenberg]

What gets me about the editor's memo is that the executive editor has to leave because he and the editor disagree about how to do things. I've never understood why agreement is a condition of employment. Willingness to carry out an order, yes. Agreement, why? If the editor is secure about his ability, he should want a deputy who sometimes will disagree with him about the most important issues, especially now when everyone is failing to pin the tail on the donkey. After reading his memo, I would find it incredibly difficult to have any personal or professional respect for the LAT editor. But I suppose it would be wise to hide that, wouldn't it?

We fill our newsrooms with people who are encouraged, even obliged, to question authority, to be highly skeptical of bureaucracy and groupthink, and we make our livings based on freedom of expression. But by God you better not do anything of those things within our walls or our ranks.

Newsrooms used to be fascinating places full of amazing people with all sorts of ideas, opinions and vivid personalities. Now that sort of stuff will get you laid off or run out. Biggest problem, the folks making the decisions aren't secure in their own competency so they cling to their titles and bits of power.

Just my two cents of psychology. We in Sports get good at that stuff.

It's kind of a sad thought - managers are now "breeding" a generation of reporters to not question what an authority figure says, and I've got to figure these "company men", operate the same way with their higher ups and the business side.
What was the old bromide? afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted? Now it's don't make waves, go along to get along and all the news that fits the budget.

I hope to someday work with people like Joe Williams, Frank_Ridgeway and DanOregon before I graduate to the great journalism wing in heaven.

Though I'll probably end up in the journalism wing in hell since I don't subscribe to the candy-ass editors and publishers that pollute the industry today or the soft beat writers that permeate this decade.

 

[WriteThinking]

Mike James is a consummate professional and the type of manager who will be able to delegate work to subordinates, and then will allow them to do it.

His background with Fox Sports and FoxSports.net was no doubt a factor in his promotion, and hopefully, that experience will be brought to the fore as the Times tries to make its transition from traditional newspaper to multimedia company a successful one going forward.

John Arthur, a traditional news man who gave many hours and years of his life, and probably, his heart and soul, too, to the L.A. Times, can leave the newspaper with his head held high.

I hope he did, even if his resignation was not entirely voluntary.

 

[SixToe]

We fill our newsrooms with people who are encouraged, even obliged, to question authority, to be highly skeptical of bureaucracy and groupthink, and we make our livings based on freedom of expression. But by God you better not do anything of those things within our walls or our ranks.

Newsrooms used to be fascinating places full of amazing people with all sorts of ideas, opinions and vivid personalities. Now that sort of stuff will get you laid off or run out. Biggest problem, the folks making the decisions aren't secure in their own competency so they cling to their titles and bits of power.

That also extends to reporting on the newspaper's business so the public will know, or in some cases, not reporting on it at all.

Newspapers dig into their community's business dealings that can affect the public. Newspapers like to believe they are part of a public trust of sorts, but when it comes to their own layoffs, business dealings, major shifts in workforce or similar issues they often refuse to discuss it. They will issue a publisher's statement for a 6-inch story but not tell the public who is leaving in a buyout or why their physically-smaller newspaper with giant photos and less information will cost more.

Vivid personalities and questioning authority? There's the door, pal.

 

[Birdscribe]

Mike James is a consummate professional and the type of manager who will be able to delegate work to subordinates, and then will allow them to do it.

His background with Fox Sports and FoxSports.net was no doubt a factor in his promotion, and hopefully, that experience will be brought to the fore as the Times tries to make its transition from traditional newspaper to multimedia company a successful one going forward.

Absolutely dead-on nails.

In an era of the Peter Principle running amok on steroids, this is a great hire on every level.

"Consummate professional" describes Mike James to a T and is only one reason why he's the perfect person for this job. Feel free to put his name right now on the thread of what constitutes a "hell'uva sports editor."