USA Today reportedly to give sports staffers bonuses for big pageviews

[gannettblog]

In a new post, I've written the following:

USA Today's just-unveiled plan to pay editorial employees bonuses based on pageviews applies at least to the new Sports Media Group, the entity that now encompasses the paper's print and online sports operations, according to one of my readers.

My reader says the bonuses apply "to everyone in the department -- not just writers. Editors, copy editors, etc., have apparently all received packets outlining their personal goals based on year over year growth from 2010-2011. So if you're in an unpopular sport, you won't be beat out by someone with an NFL beat -- you only need to meet your own goals for traffic."

Here's a link to my post: http://tinyurl.com/3rb8khc

 

[LongTimeListener]

Did I tell you about that time two women who looked like LADY GAGA AND BRITNEY SPEARS were sitting in the front row of the hockey game?

 

[93Devil]

So Cuban was onto something...

Would they be fined by reporting something that is wrong? Like Smart to coach NCST?

 

[Ace]

That's an interesting idea. Could be great; could be hideous, though.

 

[MartinonMTV2]

USA Today's just-unveiled plan to pay editorial employees bonuses based on pageviews applies at least to the new Sports Media Group, the entity that now encompasses the paper's print and online sports operations, according to one of my readers.

No offense, Jim, but I've been to your site frequently enough to be skeptical of some of these claims. "One of your readers"? I need more than that.

This does sound like something Gannett would do. It also sounds like something someone would make up or exaggerate to poke at Gannett.

 

[DanOregon]

The scary thing is that there is incentive for editors to okay click-friendly stuff since they get a piece of the action.
Coming soon: Hottest former college cheerleaders, hottest former college athletes, sports stars at the beach - well, looks like SI.com already is ahead of the game on that.

 

[Steak Snabler]

Not only that, but it's going to lead to some serious whoring out of links on Facebook and sites like this one ...

 

[Ace]

USA Today's just-unveiled plan to pay editorial employees bonuses based on pageviews applies at least to the new Sports Media Group, the entity that now encompasses the paper's print and online sports operations, according to one of my readers.

No offense, Jim, but I've been to your site frequently enough to be skeptical of some of these claims. "One of your readers"? I need more than that.

This does sound like something Gannett would do. It also sounds like something someone would make up or exaggerate to poke at Gannett.

I'm gonna side with Jim, if that's OK with you, Marty.

Jim does a lot of good, hard work. I see no reason to cast aspersions and suggest he might have made it up.

 

[MartinonMTV2]

Jim, USA TODAY has and continues to consider bonuses based on page views but nothing has been decided at this time.
Ed.
Ed. Cassidy
Vice President, Communications & Event Marketing
USA TODAY

Also, looks like The Big Lead got the credit instead of Gannett Blog. So we have a denial and a mention of another source. Color me non-surprised.

 

[MartinonMTV2]

I'm using it as an impetus to get correct information out there. Hope that's OK.

 

[MartinonMTV2]

Of course it's OK. You could do that without insulting anyone.

I think it's good for people to know that some of what passes as "official info" at Jim's site is, in fact, a rumor.

As soon as I questioned how accurate this one would be, someone decided to be cute. And wrong.

But if people are more comfortable with accepting those rumors as fact, then I'll keep that in mind in the future.

 

[gannettblog]

Note: I've included on my original post a USAT memo describing what the paper is calling its "new incentive plan for the Sports Media Group."

 

[Mizzougrad96]

Good to know USA Today is stealing its business model from Examiner.com

 

[SeanKennedy]

Too many issues with this, too little time.

A question: Does this mean writers will start getting paid less regular salary, and will have to rely on a potential "bonus"?

 

[Batman]

Gannett? With an idea that DOESN'T screw the rank and file?
We're about a week late for April Fool's, dude.

 

[MartinonMTV2]

Too many issues with this, too little time.

A question: Does this mean writers will start getting paid less regular salary, and will have to rely on a potential "bonus"?

If it does, then it won't start yet. Not unless Cassidy is lying. Which I guess is possible, but not very smart.

 

[WildBillyCrazyCat]

Bad idea all around. Not surprised Gannett would be the one to float it.

 

[WTFünke]

I'm not an executive, but the belief that financial bonuses like this motivate people to do better work isn't just wrong --- it's an antiquated notion that's downright harmful.

Clearly, Gannett execs have pulled this idea out of their asses. It's not steeped in anything except bull****. So, yeah, sounds like Gannett ...

Fact check:

Cool, short video that explains creating financial bonuses for nonthinking jobs works ... but creating financial bonuses for creative-type jobs reduces performance.
http://www.thatvideosite.com/video/well_drawn_explanation_on_what_motivates_us

TED lecture that explains through scientific evidence that "extrinsic motivators" like bonuses don't work.
https://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/44262

 

[VJ]

I'd just like to say I support potentially bad ideas that result in people potentially getting paid more money rather than bad ideas that result in people getting laid off. Just saying.

 

[Kid Presentable]

If you're at USAT, might as well just post pornography on your blog. PAGE VIEW$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$