Comments on: Layoff Rumors Prove Reality: AJC Cuts 30% of Staff

By: cribbster

cribbster — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 17:56:21 +0000

By the way, a key sentence in that interview is where the analyst claims “newspapers have not been blessed with the best managers.” This is true. And it’s for a number of reasons. Some of them unavoidable. Throughout the ’80s and ’90s, newspapers tossed money around like gangsters. For instance, I’m told the AJC used to fly photographers in helicopters from Athens to Atlanta after UGA football games. Granted, in those days they didn’t have digital photography, which is much quicker, but that does seem a tad ridiculous. Reporters from mid-size to large papers flew to stories. Sooooo many papers had unnecessary foreign bureaus. (Did The Baltimore Sun HONESTLY need a bureau in Johannesburg, South Africa? I don’t see why.)

And that’s because expensive business decisions were being made by editors — people who, generally speaking, are not business-savvy or even greatly concerned about finances. If money was going to improve the editorial process or product, it was spent, no questions asked. And because the editorial department was essentially shielded from the other departments (because a seperation is necessary for ethical reasons), this just went on and on until it couldn’t anymore.

I would love to see a researcher go back and analyze a Top 10 newspaper’s expenditures over the last 20 years and come up with a system to determine which were completely needless — and then figure out how many positions that money would be worth now. (Even if you couldn’t translate it that way, it’d still be interesting.)

By: cribbster

cribbster — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 17:43:21 +0000

I honestly don’t think the average newspaper reader cares a great deal about the quality of writing provided it isn’t horrible. If you look at newspapers with exceptional penetration into their communities, the quality of the writing is rarely a factor. I knew of an editor once — and there are many like him — who claimed the key to keeping readers was to print as many community members’ names as possible. It seemed to work.

Obviously, a large, metro daily cannot and should not do that. I question whether there are solutions to the predicament newspapers have found themselves in. I found this recent interview for a Wall Street Journal blog to be particularly useful (and refreshingly calm):

http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2009/03/19/one-bankers-plan-to-save-the-newspaper-industry/

By: Grant Parker

Grant Parker — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 14:42:28 +0000

Cribbster, thank you. I have spent a few years in newsrooms, and can think of a few truly great writers who worked for dailies. And those writers, mind you, rarely did the metro bump-and-grind of producing stories for the next day’s edition. No, their work was showcased for Sundays, or in big projects.

Our host, DM, brings up good points about the downward spiral of journalism. The dearth of good writing is but one reason. As is often the case with a serious disease, the patient is suffering from a lot of symptoms.

I am curious to know what the revised AJC will be.

By: Steve

Steve — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 13:51:56 +0000

Interesting, since I personally know an excellent writer who recently was laid off from CNN.

By: cribbster

cribbster — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 13:40:03 +0000

I must concur with Grant Parker: you cannot necessarily look toward newspapers — daily ones, particularly — for great writing. Few of the very talented “writers” you mentioned would not be as interesting, eloquent or erudite if they were forced to work under daily deadlines. A writer at Rolling Stone can spend four months on a story. As a reporter who’s worked at a number of dailies large and small, I can tell you the average amount of time spent on a newspaper story is about five hours. That’s the average time spent on your run-of-the-mill metro section story.

At the same time, however, you’re right about one thing: the great writers usually don’t work at newspapers for that very reason. In fact, I can only name a few truly great writers presently working in newspapers (though many of them have taken buyouts). Anne Hull at The Washington Post is one. Dexter Filkins at The New York Times is another. Hank Stuever at The Washington Post. Monica Hesse maybe. Libby Copeland. Both at The Post.

Essentially, great writers tend to populate the top five papers: The Post, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and so forth. You’re simply not going to find people like that at the AJC, especially now that it’s anemic. And I’m afraid you’ll see a flood of the more talented AJCers to CNN, which is launching a very large wire service.

By: Dam G

Dam G — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 04:02:21 +0000

There was an interesting post about how the cost of delivering news via print is so much more expensive than via the web on The Business Insider that I came across today over here. No comment, just an interesting note about changing times.

By: George

George — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 02:21:47 +0000

It’s a business. If the AJC is not delivering value to readers or advertisers, it will fail or be forced to take a new form. I think that newspapers have been way too slow to adapt to the changing needs of the public. Really, who has time to read long, slow developing stories, however well written they may be? I might relish those rare occasions when I’ve got a free hour and a good paper, but they’re so rare that they simply don’t sustain the current model.

Local newspapers are just the latest example of an industry, reluctant to adapt, that has changed forced upon it. Something new will fill the void, something that we may not yet see coming.

By: Former AJC reporter

Former AJC reporter — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 23:35:11 +0000

This death is getting old.

I’m growing radicalized. Journalism is aboriginal. It’s about learning where the tigers have been hiding lately. It’s about who has syphilis and who can’t be trusted on the bison hunt. Everything I’ve written in the last couple of years devolves to one of these 10,000-year-old storylines.

Who got killed. Which overpaid starlet has wider hips and the better rack. Who lied or stole and should be shamed. I can get this crap on Facebook.

I should spend my time looking to blow my mind. I should opine. I should collect really interesting news, at knifepoint. I should make war of journalism, for fun and profit.

I should misbehave.

The Gwinnett cops banned me from their offices a couple years ago for asking questions in an impertinent tone. (Surprise! Some of you know who I am now.) That was fun, and useful.

There is no fucking profit left in conformity anymore, my brothers and sisters. Burn your sources. Take them all with you. Let them know what price is paid.