Wednesday, March 18, 2009
New Layoffs Begin at Commercial Appeal
Posted by Flyer Staff on Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 4:00 AM
"In a meeting late Tuesday, Warren Funk, consulting with human resources, rejected talk of temporary wage cuts to save jobs. Then he informed us that management now plans to increase the number of job cuts in editorial to 19, up from a previously announced 18, and the number in circulation/customer service to seven, up from a previously announced four."
The Flyer has received several tips claiming that some well-known editorial employees have been axed. Out of respect for their privacy, we will not publish the names until we have fully sourced confirmation.
The letter continues: "We are deeply disappointed that management decided to make already destructive cuts even worse and we reserve the right to file a grievances or unfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board.
"Workers will be paid through March 27 regardless of whether they stay on the job or not. We have urged management to let workers continue to have access to the building through this period to wrap up projects and gather materials they need to apply for other jobs, and we hope they will honor this - it's unclear that they will."
In other news, the single-copy price of The Commercial Appeal rose from 50 cents to 75 cents this week.
More as this story develops.
--Bruce VanWyngarden
Comments (31)
Showing 1-31 of 31
like
dislike
Raise the price. Cut the staff. There's a winning combination if ever I've seen one. I wish somebody would pay me big money to make big decisions. Clearly, anyone can do it.
They can always come to work for The Flyer. We absolutely get what we pay for in that fine publication.
For the love of God!! Please go ahead and shut this piece of crap down. I bought the CA today, just to see if anything had improved. It was the worst issue yet---except it didn't have a Marliyn Loeffel column----our only daily is a total embarassment.
Did anyone notice no editors are on the layoff list...no management? I guess someone will be needed to read all the 'news' the paper receives from people who "always wanted to write." I guess the CA'll rely on freelancers to do the work of the pros. Would you want surgery on your brain to be done by a freelancer?
And to think liberal bias pays the bills......LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! And to compare brain surgery to "journalism".......LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL!
Obviously, Cruiser, you've never tried to do it. And if informing people and influencing their thinking isn't like brain surgery then your expectations of journalism is way lower than mine. Good journalists change societies...what brain surgeons do that much?
We are obviously comparing apples to oranges here. "Journalism" and brain surgery are two totally different things. And, journalism is about making people "think" as you said, it's not about making people "think" like you do, sir or ma'am. I would HOPE that a brain surgeon changed someone's life more than a "journalist" would change it. If they needed brain surgery, they obviously need it more than they need a great Flyer article. And, 38138, I have sent 8 letters to editors. And, 8 letters have been printed. I heard it takes some "journalists" 20 yrs to get something printed. It takes me 2 beers and a few hits on the keyboard to get it done. These two things are the reason I think it's funny how "print" is going "out of style". Hey, I never heard a conservative talk about anything out of style......
re 38138: Good journalists...don't "change the world"...good journalists report the facts. Too many journalists today are really agenda pushers with no objectivity at all. It's disgraceful. I don't mind it with little rags like the Flyer but I expect more from the mainstream. The CA is getting what it deserves and I for one am damn glad to see it go under.
Thinker, Good journalists present facts and readers make up their minds. That's brain surgery: it changes whole societies. Often readers confuse facts (journalism) with opinion/columns. They also throw up their hands in anger when they read something that they disagree with and say "Oh, those reporters are such liberal freaks!" or "That's not true -- bad reporting" or "I was there and I didn't hear So-and-So say what's in the paper!" It's a variation of the kill-the-messenger snydrone. I think it may have reached such an extreme that killing the messenger may cost us all our big newspapers. Instead we will all read according to our beliefs and tastes: liberals will read only liberal press, conservatives will read only conservative,etc. We will never be exposed to other ideas. Sad..and scarey.
Cruiser, Surely you know there is a difference between a letter to the editor and a real news story? And the skill level required to produce each is very different. Trained apes, given a typewriter and enough time, can write a letter to the editor. Newspapers print them all (or just about all of them) as a community service, to give their readers different viewpoints, and to warn readers that there are crazy people out there.
I do agree, 38138, that there's a difference between a letter to the editor and someone doing it (or used to do it, the way they're layin' off "journalists" means soon it will be used to) for a living. But, if you are referring to the Flyer or the CA as being "journalism", oh I know I'm better than them. It's sad but true, but I am better than them. And, so is...................................................................................................................................whomever.
B, you must be a "journalist". And, if you think I think I'm a legend, I must be one in your mind. But, get that thought out of your head! Get it gone! I wouldn't write an "article" to be printed in this "magazine" for any amount of money. Not for all the money boyprez will spend on....profits, no........jobs,no......anything else will be suffice, little liberals! He does do that great staredown thing though....He might just be the "savior". Now, what publications are about to be not around.....the fat lady is singing, thoughtthinker, and she loves US!
Does "cruiser" refer to the style of Pampers you wear? Only an immature twit would take joy in someone else's misfortune. Good people have lost their jobs and you are gloating.
B, if someone loses their job, I hate it. Yes, I admit it, I am a "hater". But, when their job is being manipulative, stupid, angry, and becoming a "freeloader", I do not like it. And, when they don't do their job, for example journalism. Journalism is about reporting the facts.....blah, blah, we've been over this.......it's time to do some real work, son. Or, ma'am. I'm not sure what you are, but I know everyone on here knows what I'm sayin. They know that much. Also, how many "jobs" out there in the "journalism" world are actually jobs? How many "positions" are there out in the "journalism" world? I rest my case. "Journalism" is beginning to be like "politics".....I wonder why?
I don't even have a horse in this race, cruiser, but come on now: your use of "boyprez" to describe Obama is a barely disguised racial slur that has nothing to do with Obama's age, no matter how you might mean it. Discontinue its use. You seem like a smart person and can surely articulate your critique of Obama's administration (there's plenty to be critical of) using more grown-up words...? Thank you. Resume meaningful debate, please.
Daily newspapers are in the hands of huge corporations now, and it wasn't always so. I write for a small family-owned monthly magazine, and the huge corporate daily is still trying to monopolize all the ad revenue and run us out of business. The people at the top are not cutting back themselves -- they are putting the squeeze on all the little guys. It's tres mafioso, or some such.
Stork, I do agree with you in a way. I am not meaning the "boyprez" comment as racial (I know it's become common in frivolous lawsuits to pull the race card, and that's sad), but he is a younger president. And, I am actually quoting a person whom comes on this site a bit to voice his opinion (or her opinion for the politically sensitive) that I respect. I mean it in the sense that he is obviously way out of his league (a boy and he is unfortunately the prez), he doesn't know how to be "bipartisan" (whatever that means), and just plain dumb when it comes to politics. All of his "strong points" are actually his weak points, but liberal media has done their "dirt" on it. He sounds like he is still campaigning? It's so sad. Staring down media people because they speak the truth is ridiculous. And, he's so bipartisan that he is picking sports teams? What a joke! And little liberals think Bush was bad......try law enforcement after you liberals lose your "papers". It's not as easy as you think, and it could cause you to become a Republican. If being "bipartisan" and being able to "speak" are his strong points, then he's in for a rude awakening. And, it won't be from me or anyone who thinks like me.....It will be from the hand that feeds him...the media. Anyone, interested in buying a newspaper.....No thanks, I could start my own the way most "papers" are these days. And, Stork, if you are still stuck in the "boy" thing being racial......Which side is stuck in the past? Oh, I know, you didn't say you had a horse in the race, but you still said something along liberal lines. I know you were being "bipartisan"!
"Little liberals." Cruiser writes like The Hulk talks. Cruiser smash! This thread is special.
Cruiser, it doesn't make a person conservative to utter a racial slur, nor does it make a person stuck in "little liberalism" to call the utterer on it. Labels are so very tired. What I'm stuck in is the foolish expectation of discourse between human beings based on a foundation of mutual respect, not contempt. The internet hasn't quite broken my spirit, though it gets a little closer every day. Don't like modern journalism? Dandy, there's plenty not to like about it, but rooting for people to lose their jobs is vulgar. Don't like the president? Me either, but there are ways to be critical without resorting to racial slurs. Don't like it when others call you on these declarations? Do something constructive about it. Your weasel-ly defense and your continued use of your slur smacks of Limbaugh's marching orders, which is just sad. If you truly believe using racial slurs to demean a person or people (whether they're presidents or not) is acceptable discourse, find your own words to demonstrate your belief. Be smart, cruiser, you can do it if you can find your way to the computer each morning. Evolve, for goodness sake. It's the only chance human beings have, for themselves and for each other.
Got a suggestion to run by you, why don't we just sale CA, or better yet Memphis to China?
Stork, this is exactly why I had a problem with your first comment. It's not a racial slur! Why do you insist it's a slur? Isn't it insulting to call anyone a boy? I think it's an insult. Like I said before, I am quoting someone on here. But, I don't like his disrespect of Bush. "Well, I inherited this mess." If he didn't want the job, why did he take it? And, he's saying how tough the job is, but I guess it must have been easier for Bush? If he'll disrespect Bush openly, how would he treat me? And, I agree with the "label" thing being old. I personally believe political parties are there so people can be lazy to the differences of others. All conservatives aren't "rednecks". Just like all liberals aren't "little". But, they are about fundamentals. After being a leftwinger for several years, I realized there's much time wasted and less meaningful conversation at leftwing political events. I am not saying I haven't had good times at them, but I have had many more good times at GOP events. The only reason I lean right side is I agree with the type of gov't they want here. Gov't is there to make laws to establish and keep order. Gov'ts not there to "give" stimulus checks. It's the main reason he was elected. Every "smart" person in America couldn't wait until he became president. Many of them truly believed they wouldn't have to work, pay bills, etc. when he got into office. Well, that's leftwing thing. And, I believe in helping those that are down. But, I don't believe in helping people their whole lives because they are "down". How many people take advantage of welfare? I can't give a percentage, but when a family has 3 generations of welfare babies, that's unhealthy for everyone. Again, a leftwing thing. Gotta go, Stork, later.......
Stork, I also don't like people losing their jobs. Why you are making things up, I don't know. But, it's hard to be impartial and obviously papers can't get it done anymore. I don't know why they can't be impartial, but they try I am sure. When a product doesn't sell, you change the product or improve it. There are many jobs out there right now. There's just no "journalist" jobs available. Maybe, it's better to be impartial........and not try to get your personal agenda across. It seems to be destroying "papers"........and how many people are using the economy as their excuse for being laid off? It might be the reason, but it also may mean they were just in a "position". Operatic anger at it's finest.
Newspapers had their prime in the 60's. People got their sports scores, their political analysis, their front page news, their classified ads, the comic page and the crossword puzzle from the paper.
With the exception of comics and puzzles, people now go elsewhere. Back then, there were three TV stations. Now the are hundreds. Sports, politics, headlines, classifieds...... each now has its own TV station. Liberal or Conservative... you have your own TV, your own blogs. Red Sox fan, Yankee fan..... same thing. Head line fan,..... you now have a headline news TV channel.
Newspapers are dying. Soon they will be dead.
Get over it. Time marches on.
We no longer have horses on Poplar or guys delivering blocks of ice.
We survived.
We'll survive this, as well.
re Hondo1: Well said. The first ammendment guarantees a free press.....not a job. Journalists tend to over estimate their importance and impact on people's lives. The internet democratized the news business.... printed papers and journalists are the first victims. Whining about it is just poor form. Time to get a real job.
re Denise: Please explain how the CA is monopolizing ad revenue. May I also assume that you blame Walmart when the local whatever...goes under. Don't consumers really decide who survives? Your smaller family publication must have attributes that the larger paper envies....use what you have and don't complain about the competition. Go beat them by offering the market a better alternative.
People who saved…
THIS WEEK'S ISSUE
SPECIAL ISSUES
