Saturday, May 10, 2008

The Whistle


Of the Headsman's Ax.

From the Huffington Post

New York Times Layoffs Update: 15 Newsroom Staffers Get The Ax

The New York Post's Keith Kelly reports that the New York Times wielded the ax yesterday, laying off 15 involuntary staffers after not enough people accepted voluntary buyout offers:

The New York Times is laying off 15 journalists after the company acknowledged it fell short of its goal of getting 100 people to take voluntary buyout packages.

The axing is the first-ever mass firing of journalists in the paper's 157-year history.
...

Insiders said the business and national desks were spared, while the metro desk, particularly its suburban bureaus, were hit.

Read the entire New York Post article here or read Executive Editor Bill Keller's memo to staff below, courtesy of the New York Observer Media Mob:

Colleagues:


A little over two months ago, I told you that we would have to reduce staff within the newsroom by roughly 100 jobs given the difficult financial challenges facing our business and the deteriorating national economy.


Our hope, as you know, was that we could trim our payroll by encouraging enough volunteers to accept buyout offers. While the overwhelming majority of our reductions did indeed come from volunteers, we have been forced to resort to a relatively small numbers of layoffs to meet our assigned goal. (We are not going to discuss numbers or the details of the staff reduction, nor will we be releasing a list of names.) All of those who are leaving will do so with a financial cushion that should carry them to other endeavors or to retirement, but that will not eliminate their sense of loss, or ours.



Yadda yadda yadda.

Having been through firings and layoffs and buyouts (oh my!), I can attest to the fact that it is a hear-sickening time; outside of divorce and death, nothing can blow such a massive, ragged hole in a person’s sense of identity and self-worth as getting fired from a hard-won, professional position, especially in hard times and with no place to land.

Suddenly you are in enemy territory, under-armored and far from safety. Suddenly everything you thought was secure is at risk, and everything you thought was enduring starts looking terribly brittle and paper-thin.

So when I read this piece, I could not help but notice that while the NYT cries poor-mouth and gives members of the working press their walking papers for the first time in 157 years, not one of Gotham’s most notorious Neocon stooges and hacks (who, for reasons that passeth all understanding, the Gray Lady keeps ferociously cuddled and coddled in her lavish bosom) --

Not The Piddler



Not The Mad Flatter




Not even The Fucker



-- will be hearing the whistle of the headsman’s axe.

UPDATE: Apparently there is one more, late-breaking NYT layoff:
"Arthur Sulzberger Jr., chairman of The New York Times Company, and his wife, Gail Gregg, have decided to separate, they said in a statement issued Friday. Mr. Sulzberger, 56, who is also publisher of The Times, and Ms. Gregg, also 56 and a painter and writer, said the decision to end their marriage was amicable."


I wonder how many copy-boy's and -girl's salaries that early retirement package is going cost?

As of this writing, however, The Piddler, The Mad Flatter and The Fucker are all still safely ensconced in their lavish sleeper cars aboard Pinch Sulzberger's Neocon gravy-train.
...

11 comments:

res ipsa loquitur said...

Something tells me the wankers who write the NYT's odious "Styles" and real estate sections were spared, too.

But I bet the poor bastard who decided to run this got the boot.

Anonymous said...

And what about MoDo,
aka "Crapwoman"? or maybe "Shatwoman"?
"Scatwoman"?

Anonymous said...

The Chimpromised MSM simply does not get it.

Why on Earth would we take a paper seriously that hires Kristol? This was about the stupidest thing since CNN decided that the Nazi pile of steaming waste Glenn Beck was somehow a relevant commentator.

Oh well-getting rid of that many people probably makes up for some of the revenue they undoubtedly lost when they brought Kristol on board.

Anonymous said...

Huh. I spent five LUCRATIVE (for me at the time) in Spanish Radio, in Sac, CA.

When the last station was sold, and I was finally out of a job, and the local media wouldn't even TALK to me (I was OPS/SALES/Layout N Design) I was devestated.

Haven't really recovered, either. Spent two full years and change since July '03 unemployed. One full year of MY choice.

Retrained for the staffing industry at lower wages, even part time jobs for same . . . I'm a natural at it with my com skills, yadda yadda.

But guess what industry is dead in the water these days? Yep, staffing. VERY down sizing it is, and only folks with an account list and access to instant revenue are getting hired.

Shit happes, to us all. Sad to share in the media's sorrows, myself.

But we endure, adapt, or die. Simple shit.

Luck and my blessings to all.

Distributorcap said...

hence -- i have NOT bought the NYT since the day kristol's first piece of shit column appeared.

and more and more revenue will fly out the door when you make more and more crummy decisions

res ipsa loquitur said...

Cutting those salaries and bennies is a mere temporary fix to the NYT's declining fortunes. Look at this. Their ad revenue is down and their circulation revenue is rising only because they raised the price of the dead tree editions. The problem is not limited to a single quarter's results -- it's a long-term trend. And now the paper has an problem in Murdoch, who is attempting to make the WSJ a national conservative counterpart to the NYT (no laughing, people). He has the deep pockets to do it, to. He's already scaled back business coverage in favor of more political coverage and national news.

Meanwhile, from an editorial perspective, the NYT is plain bone-headed (see e.g., how they blew the McCain lobbyist story, allowing themselves to still be worked by the right, etc.). Then there are the institutional issues. The Sulzburgers and editorial honchos are awfully enamored of their position atop the establishment. When the Washington bureau chief is throwing a lavish dinner party for Condoleezza Rice in the runup to the 2004 election while simultaneously negotiating with Rice's office and the WH over breaking v. holding the NSA spying story you've got a credibility problem.

I'd rather see reporters keep their jobs, of course (their metro section is actually decent), but paying these jackoffs is just one of the NYT's many problems.

Anonymous said...

drifty,

The other issue is that these clowns you mentioned not only suck up payroll, but actively drive away readers. It's not just their politics, but their writing. They're boring and stupid. To the extent, columnists attract and keep readers (as well as 'define' the newspapers), these op-editorialists hurt the Times, particularly when there's more interesting commentary on the internets.

Anonymous said...

You'd think Thomas would voluntarily take one for the team, since he could survive on the royalties from:

"Two more Friedman's, and we'll be winning in Iraq!"

tech98 said...

The Pundit Politburo have jobs for life, regardless of performance or the leaden mediocrity of their writing, so long as they toe their designated ideological line. No competitive market meritocracy for Kristol Meth and his fellow anointed political parasites.

darkblack said...

What a yegg-cellent omelette of some very poor hen fruit that you have concocted, creped crusader.

;>)

Anonymous said...

Gail Gregg is my friend's sister. She has been miserable for a long time but who the hell wouldn't want to be married to he publisher of the NYT, with all that entails? He's not very nice to her. Pinch suits him.