Position eliminations: Ballpark figure

[butch]

I know discussions on position eliminations are often posted here, so I apologize if this is repetitive.

But let's say you're trying to explain to a person not in the business just how many positions in "major metropolitan" newsrooms have been eliminated or re-organized. Ballpark figure. It seems like several large dailies have cut hundreds at a time in the last several years. Is there anywhere to identify such a number?
For example: "In the last five years, more than X newsroom positions at newspapers with circulation higher than 100K have been eliminated or re-organized."

 

[Starman]

I know discussions on position eliminations are often posted here, so I apologize if this is repetitive.

But let's say you're trying to explain to a person not in the business just how many positions in "major metropolitan" newsrooms have been eliminated or re-organized. Ballpark figure. It seems like several large dailies have cut hundreds at a time in the last several years. Is there anywhere to identify such a number?
For example: "In the last five years, more than X newsroom positions at newspapers with circulation higher than 100K have been eliminated or re-organized."

I would be very confident in betting that the total number of editorial jobs in print journalism in the U.S. has been cut 20% in the last five years. At a conservative estimate.

 

[FileNotFound]

I know discussions on position eliminations are often posted here, so I apologize if this is repetitive.

But let's say you're trying to explain to a person not in the business just how many positions in "major metropolitan" newsrooms have been eliminated or re-organized. Ballpark figure. It seems like several large dailies have cut hundreds at a time in the last several years. Is there anywhere to identify such a number?
For example: "In the last five years, more than X newsroom positions at newspapers with circulation higher than 100K have been eliminated or re-organized."

I would be very confident in betting that the total number of editorial jobs in print journalism in the U.S. has been cut 20% in the last five years. At a conservative estimate.

That sounds about right.

 

[Write-brained]

I know discussions on position eliminations are often posted here, so I apologize if this is repetitive.

But let's say you're trying to explain to a person not in the business just how many positions in "major metropolitan" newsrooms have been eliminated or re-organized. Ballpark figure. It seems like several large dailies have cut hundreds at a time in the last several years. Is there anywhere to identify such a number?
For example: "In the last five years, more than X newsroom positions at newspapers with circulation higher than 100K have been eliminated or re-organized."

I would be very confident in betting that the total number of editorial jobs in print journalism in the U.S. has been cut 20% in the last five years. At a conservative estimate.

That's a pretty sound guess at a number that's difficult to ascertain. And even jobs that weren't cut have been filled with younger blood.

 

[Joe Williams]

That's a pretty sound guess at a number that's difficult to ascertain. And even jobs that weren't cut have been filled with younger cheaper blood.

Fixed.

And I think 20 percent is a pretty good estimate. Headed toward 33.3 percent by end of '08.

 

[Dave Kindred]

Here's a reporter's work rather than guesswork on this issue.....
******


http://www.pbs.org/mediashift/2007/08/digging_deepertraditional_jour.html

 

[JayFarrar]

I think 20 percent is way too high.
Think about all the niche and free pubs that newspapers have started.Or start up community weeklies or online gigs.
I would guess the total number is about even.
Then you have this from the article Senor Kindred posted...

Scott Bosley, executive director of American Society of Newspaper Editors, says that his organization does a job census each year at daily newspapers in the U.S. If it wasn’t for the growth in online jobs and new free dailies, Bosley thinks job numbers would have shrunk; instead, they’ve remained steady. As for hiring trends in the future, that depends on how well newspaper companies come up with successful business plans online.

 

[Starman]

I think 20 percent is way too high.
Think about all the niche and free pubs that newspapers have started.Or start up community weeklies or online gigs.
I would guess the total number is about even.
Then you have this from the article Senor Kindred posted...

Scott Bosley, executive director of American Society of Newspaper Editors, says that his organization does a job census each year at daily newspapers in the U.S. If it wasn’t for the growth in online jobs and new free dailies, Bosley thinks job numbers would have shrunk; instead, they’ve remained steady. As for hiring trends in the future, that depends on how well newspaper companies come up with successful business plans online.

You are aware, of course, that many newspaper owners are fudging the numbers to conceal the true magnitude of the staff cuts?

Sure, when the Chicago Tribune or New York Times cut 100 positions in the newsroom, it makes news, but when the Podunk Daily Bugle goes from 22 to 17 in the newsroom, it doesn't.

And going from a $40,000 full-time newspaper job to $50 per story stringing for a free-pub, isn't exactly an equivalent trade-off.

 

[buckweaver]

Especially when a lot of those 22-to-17s are not actually laid off, cut back or eliminated.

They're "frozen," never filled, then forgotten.

 

[Starman]

Especially when a lot of those 22-to-17s are not actually laid off, cut back or eliminated.

They're "frozen," never filled, then forgotten.

Exactly. Small-and-medium papers have always had a lot of turnover (in days gone by, due to people moving up to jobs at bigger papers; now it's people simply leaving the business because of ****ty sub-minimum pay and corporate brutalization); formerly those positions were filled (even if sometimes slowly).

So now, the Hooterville County 6-Daily Honk goes from 12 people on staff to 10, then 8, then 6, then 5. Somehow, they get some kind of paper out, and in a few months, somebody leaves, and then they're down to 4.

 

[Mizzougrad96]

I'd agree with around 20 to 25 percent over the last five years... It starts with positions where someone leaves, but the job is never filled, then you get the buyouts and positions being eliminated...

 

[Joe Williams]

You dump 10 people making $50K through layoffs, buyouts and just plain departures. Then you hire nine people at $30K for Web site jobs or the free daily.

Job decline = 10 percent (from 10 to 9)

Salary decline = 46 percent (from $500K to $270K)

That $230K saved buys a lot of "content" at $50 per story. And since Big Daddy Publisher and his peers have thinned the herd, there is a steady supply of "journalists" available for the $50 piece-work.

Leaves a good $150K a year or so to go into Big Daddy Publisher's pocket as reward for a hatchet job well done.

 

[deskslave]

This from the Houston Chronicle editor's post-layoff, all-is-well memo:

"This is the most interesting time I can remember in 30 years of working as a journalist."

Interesting, huh? Yeah, sure is interesting when long-tenured professionals are losing their jobs to pad the bottom line.

 

[wickedwritah]

We know what triggered the buyout trend.

But when did the position whacking begin?

I think back to the recession of the late 1980s and early 1990s, and there didn't seem to be many layoffs then -- then again, I could be wrong, as I was pretty young at the time. Of course, many two-paper towns were becoming one-paper towns around that time, too.

Have staffing levels always been cyclical?

 

[Joe Williams]

This from the Houston Chronicle editor's post-layoff, all-is-well memo:

"This is the most interesting time I can remember in 30 years of working as a journalist."

Interesting, huh? Yeah, sure is interesting when long-tenured professionals are losing their jobs to pad the bottom line.

How about the rest of that paragraph, where he wrings his hands while noting that this is the type of stuff a newspaper has to do "to stay competitive." Competitive?

No, it's what a newspaper chooses to do to keep its profit margins at an exorbitantly high level. Reduce staff, end careers and damage the product, then wonder why cancelled subscriptions and lost ad dollars continue next week and next month. Moron.