Jackson Free Press

Just days after its home corporation disclosed $2 million in bonuses to its CEO and five other executives, The Clarion-Ledger announced a second round of furloughs Monday, according to a source who asked not to be named. Citing the poor state of the economy, Publisher Larry Whitaker told employees in a letter that he had personally visited with several business owners who told him that Clarion-Ledger advertising "continued to bring their businesses results," but that faced with the failing economy, they still experienced a decrease in profits.

The Gannett Blog is reporting today that the company "mandated a second round of unpaid furloughs for most of its 41,500 worldwide employees, this one during the second quarter. It also froze wages for 29,000 U.S. newspaper workers for the coming year," on Monday. With revenue down 24 percent for the first two months of the year, the corporation did not rule out more layoffs.

The second round of furloughs is expected to begin in the next quarter, and the length will depend on employees' pay level. A salary freeze will also be implemented for the next year.

Beginning Tuesday, the newspaper will also be making changes to their non-daily content, including a downsize of its newspaper's format from 48 to 44 inches. In recent months, the newspapers has eliminated sections and shrunk the "news hole" (space available for reporting news).

The Clarion-Ledger is owned by Gannett Co., which has suffered dramatic stock losses in recent months, and ordered company-wide layoffs and furloughs. The Clarion-Ledger reportedly has cut 25 percent of its positions in the last six months.

As for corporate bonuses, the Gannett Blog reported that "[t]he new reductions came just five days after Corporate disclosed $2 million in bonuses to CEO Craig Dubow and the other five highest-earning executives, driving thousands of infuriated employees yesterday to Gannett Blog."

Employees may be hurting, but investors in Gannett cheered the furloughs, per Gannett Blog: "GCI's stock soared nearly 10%, closing at $2.35."

Previous Comments

ID

145013

Comment

How depressing. The C-L may not be the greatest newspaper in the world, but it's sad to see it struggling so.

Author

tombarnes

Date

2009-03-23T22:47:06-06:00

ID

145014

Comment

The death of the paper news industry is sort of like watching the extinction of a species - sad. It's a time of change in business, those who do not adapt will probably not survive. Yet I think of magazines such as the Sun or Shambala, and I know that there will be room for niche publications, probably for a lot longer than it may take for daily newspapers to go the way of the dinosaurs.

Author

Izzy

Date

2009-03-24T07:59:57-06:00

ID

145016

Comment

I just wonder if the for-profit model is the correct one for a newspaper. Anybody have any thoughts on this, or done any serious research?

Author

Pops

Date

2009-03-24T09:11:38-06:00

ID

145018

Comment

The for-profit model worked fine when newspapers were more locally owned, and not run by corporations that expect 25 percent profit margins to keep stock value high. There are pros and cons to running a newspaper/magazine as a non-profit. The Texas Observer is one example.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2009-03-24T09:22:31-06:00

ID

145022

Comment

Here's an excellent piece in The New York Times about The Austin Chronicle (alt-weekly)—and what makes a newspaper thrive in this climate: They serve their *community.* It just so happens that is also the JFP's primary mission. ;-) Love this graf from the Times piece: Part of the reason may have to do with price (free) but there is something else afoot. The Chronicle is knit into civic and cultural life in Austin to a degree that may make other newspapers nervous. While other regional news outlets do house ads and commercials about their connection to the community, The Chronicle started the South by Southwest conference, its founders have helped finance local filmmakers, and when you step off the airplane and see a huge bookstore branded with The Chronicle's name, it's clear that the weekly plays big for its size.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2009-03-24T09:48:41-06:00

ID

145024

Comment

The fact that Gannett stock went up on the announcement is testimony to how twisted the stock market is. Reducing expenses, usually regardless of the timing or how it's done, is a good thing for profit. Corporate-run newspapers have dug their own grave by making themselves irrelevant to their readers. There's still plenty of room in the industry to do good reporting and write well. Unfortunately, when every decision is made on the basis of "will it return a profit," good reporting and writing are way down the list of priorities. Gannett, and other corporate "news" organizations, would do well to remember that the public is their customer (not a faceless "market" to be sold to) and that they have an important role to fulfill in making this country work.

Author

Ronni_Mott

Date

2009-03-24T10:02:16-06:00

ID

145025

Comment

Right. And you can't have an engaged newspaper reporting amazing community news, which will in turn leads to a successful newspaper that people are loyal to, if everyone is demoralized every day. The market is rather short-sighted on this one. Thus, the problem with the corporate newspaper model. I recommend an excellent book that deals with what is sick in the newspaper world (and warned about it before the current fall): "Good Work: When Excellence and Ethics Meet," by Howard Gardner, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi and William Damon. It's also about the field of genetics. ;-) It's an immensely readable work that is very thought-provoking, as well as motivational for those of us who are in journalism to serve our communities, readers and local businesses—not the stock market.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2009-03-24T10:07:12-06:00

ID

145026

Comment

Meanwhile, USA Today is reporting that Southern Miss Coach Larry Eustachy turned down his $25,000 bonus "because times are tough and wins were hard to come by for his Golden Eagles."

Author

Ronni_Mott

Date

2009-03-24T10:09:16-06:00

ID

145027

Comment

Right, but Craig Dubow couldn't turn down his big ole bonus in order to bolster morale in his corporation. Last year, Larry Whittaker had hardwood floors installed in his office at the Ledger, even as they did away with $50 holiday "bonuses" (gift certificates they could trade for) and free coffee for staffers. Meantime, Todd and I shared a car for two years. To twist F. Scott Fitzgerald, the corporate are different from you and me.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2009-03-24T10:13:24-06:00

ID

145034

Comment

I got one of those mini-papers today. Why they're charging 75 cents for it is a mystery. I'll just think I'm keeping Marshall in a job and it'll be fine.

Author

Ironghost

Date

2009-03-24T11:28:12-06:00

ID

145037

Comment

I haven't seen one, yet. I don't usually see the print edition. However, walking through Fondren this morning, it struck me how many Litter Ledgers from last week (those free Northeast Ledgers) are lying in yards, driveways and rotting in the middle of the city streets. They've only been delivering them to Fondren, or that section of Fondren between State and Old Canton for about two weeks now, and very few people seem to be picking them up. It boggles my mind that print companies think the answer to their woes is "push circulation"—dropping a paper in your yard or mailing you a magazine you didn't ask for. They then use those figures as "circulation" numbers even if no one wants the damn thing. This is a strategy that ain't gonna last long. Meantime, publications that do that are welcome members of the esteemed, ahem, Mississippi Press Association, while papers such as ours (that people gets to choose whether to pick up) are not allowed. It cracks you up to think about it. Also re the TDN World Domination Scheme, Todd and I drove around over the weekend looking at distribution spots. Those green TDN boxes barely have any publications in them, and many are broken so that doors don't open. Have they no pride? Why don't they just pick up the damn things and be done with it? TDN was a dismal failure thanks to a savvy Jackson market that saw through it, and MIPA, which competed head-on with the Ledger's little plan to get us to pay them to be in their boxes. I feel bad for the workers over there, but I sure don't feel bad for that stankin' company. Oh, and while I'm piling on, thanks again, Ledger, for that Melton endorsement. Way to serve the community.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2009-03-24T12:19:33-06:00

ID

145038

Comment

We scooped the Ledger on announcing the furloughs and pay freezes, but here is what they posted about it today.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2009-03-24T12:27:48-06:00

ID

145039

Comment

ladd, to your point about thriving news outlets that serve their community, check out this article about how NPR is outperforming other outlets by changing its model a becoming more relevant to its listeners. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/23/AR2009032302972.html?hpid=topnews

Author

eyerah

Date

2009-03-24T12:30:40-06:00

ID

145040

Comment

However, walking through Fondren this morning, it struck me how many Litter Ledgers from last week (those free Northeast Ledgers) are lying in yards, driveways and rotting in the middle of the city streets. Last week, out of laziness, I put my Litter Ledger on top of my garbage can. Apparently, the trash collector threw it back in my yard.

Author

golden eagle

Date

2009-03-24T12:31:08-06:00

ID

145041

Comment

Tee, hee, Golden. There's luck for you. You can't rid of those nasty things.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2009-03-24T12:34:39-06:00

ID

145042

Comment

Yes, eyerah, a good friend is with Planet Money on NPR. She was in town from NY yesterday (she's from Jackson) and was talking about how NPR is evolving to maintain relevancy.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2009-03-24T12:36:08-06:00

ID

145043

Comment

NPR? Relevant? Since when?

Author

Ironghost

Date

2009-03-24T12:38:14-06:00

ID

145045

Comment

NPR? Relevant? Since when? Boo, hiss.

Author

Todd Stauffer

Date

2009-03-24T12:40:46-06:00

ID

145049

Comment

I re-discovered NPR a few years after being disgusted about celebrity news on WLBT one morning. I wanted to get some real news for a change. I like a lot of the NPR programming, though I'm just not into Prairie Home Companion. I also like the BBC News service MPB runs at night. Speaking of newspapers being trouble, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer posted their last print edition last week.

Author

golden eagle

Date

2009-03-24T13:18:03-06:00

ID

145054

Comment

What is the deal with bonuses lately? I always thought a bonus was something you got for doing a good job or at least as an incentive to perform. How companies on the rocks justify the bonuses they give is just beyond me.

Author

WMartin

Date

2009-03-24T14:25:22-06:00

ID

145057

Comment

Normally I wouldn't give a damn how a private business chooses to reward its executives. But when my tax dollars are paying for the bonuses...

Author

Jeff Lucas

Date

2009-03-24T15:04:50-06:00

ID

145060

Comment

Even if it is private dollars, you may still want to give a damn. When you're buying goods from a business, you're giving them license to keep doing what they're doing as far as their policies, be it positive or negative.

Author

golden eagle

Date

2009-03-24T15:57:14-06:00

ID

145062

Comment

In a boom economy, bonuses become "retention bonuses" meaning they are guaranteed no matter what the person's performance. In a boom market especially one that shifts, employees move at will & so the incentive bonuses developed to keep key people on the team. At least, that's what they said on NPR the other morning! To me these forced furloughs seem brutal - sort of like starving people slowly. What do others think? Is it better to cut costs another way, even if it meant letting staff go?

Author

Izzy

Date

2009-03-24T18:01:54-06:00

ID

145063

Comment

[quote]Even if it is private dollars, you may still want to give a damn. When you're buying goods from a business, you're giving them license to keep doing what they're doing as far as their policies, be it positive or negative. [/quote] A private business isn't required to have public transparency in how it rewards its executives. That's the responsibility of the Board and the stockholders to determine. I don't begrudge a CEO who, after turning a company into a profit monster, gets a nice portion of that. What I don't understand is how a CEO can run a company into the ground but get paid millions for his/her effort - or paid even more to quit. I would think a company with such a twisted compensation policy wouldn't survive long…unless they had the gubmint around to bail them out.

Author

Jeff Lucas

Date

2009-03-24T18:22:55-06:00

ID

145065

Comment

Jeff, I agree with most of the points you made except that consumers shouldn't care how a company is run. I think it's a consumer's responsibility to not spend their dollars with company run in an objectionable manner. It is the best mechanism for policing a free market system. Once consumers abdicate that crucial role through apathy or the belief the lowest possible price is always the best value it only leaves the government to step in to force companies to act responsibly.

Author

WMartin

Date

2009-03-25T06:17:48-06:00

ID

145068

Comment

[quote]I think it's a consumer's responsibility to not spend their dollars with company run in an objectionable manner.[/quote] It's a customers right to spend their money where ever they like. If they want to be Socially aware, that's their business.

Author

Ironghost

Date

2009-03-25T07:49:33-06:00

ID

145069

Comment

Sure, I agree it's anyone's right to be irresponsible if they choose to be. That kind of selfishness isn't helpful to maintaining a healthy free market system though.

Author

WMartin

Date

2009-03-25T08:04:46-06:00

ID

145070

Comment

[quote]Jeff, I agree with most of the points you made except that consumers shouldn't care how a company is run. I think it's a consumer's responsibility to not spend their dollars with company run in an objectionable manner.[/quote] I fail to see how disclosing what executives are paid in salaries and bonuses under normal private funding is akin to consumer empowerment. It's one thing and entirely justifiable to boycott a company that puts out shoddy product or mistreats its rank and file workforce, its another thing to get indignant about the way the company rewards its top talent. While I can understand the anger and envy over fat-cat executive salaries and their perks, I don't see it something to boycott a company over in a free-market economy.

Author

Jeff Lucas

Date

2009-03-25T08:20:09-06:00

ID

145072

Comment

...its another thing to get indignant about the way the company rewards its top talent. I suppose people have the right to boycott companies for whatever reason they see fit. Some of us see executive compensation thousands of times that of their average employee as unjustifiable and irresponsible. But the real problem, as I see it, is that these companies aren't rewarding "top talent," when the people making the bonuses are the some people responsible for bankrupting or destroying the business. You said it yourself in an earlier post. Craig Dubow is the guy in charge of a crappy paper. What actions point to his being "top talent" in either business or journalism (the product his paper supposedly produces)? Many, many Wall Street "masters of the universe" were rewarded for investing money into dubious vehicles that turned liabilities into assets, back into liabilties and back to assets so many times no one knew what those investments represented. That's "top talent?" AIG... well, let's not even go there. The bottom line, Jeff, is that many of these yahoos are getting bonuses through employment contracts aimed at retention, not commensurate with their results. With so much fraud and abuse by big corporations, lobbyist and Wall Street, I'll stick with local businesses where I can look the owner in the eye.

Author

Ronni_Mott

Date

2009-03-25T09:05:14-06:00

ID

145073

Comment

C'est la vie. A business that insanely rewards poor performance by its top execs won't survive in a competitive market because so often those bad decisions trickle down in such that the company should and will collapse under its own weight without me examining its executive compensation policies.

Author

Jeff Lucas

Date

2009-03-25T09:13:26-06:00

ID

145079

Comment

Allow me to derail the discussion for a moment to ask "JFP Actual's" thoughts about the proposed Newspaper Revitalization Act.

Author

Jeff Lucas

Date

2009-03-25T10:13:48-06:00

ID

145082

Comment

[quote]That kind of selfishness isn't helpful to maintaining a healthy free market system though. [/quote] ...what is your definition of Free Market System? I don't think we're on the same page there.

Author

Ironghost

Date

2009-03-25T11:17:33-06:00

ID

145085

Comment

Would you buy a car and rely on a warranty from a company so mismanaged as to put their future viability in doubt? Executive compensation would just be an indicator of how well or how poorly they manage their company. I, like you, believe it's not really my business how an executive is compensated for doing a good job and making his company profitable. But when a company is laying off workers and losing market share quickly giving large bonuses at the same time you are freezing salaries says something to me about management. When you shop and then buy a product or services you are supporting those companies and their policies, whether you do it consciously or not. In a free market society I believe it to be everyone's responsibility to vote with their dollars and support companies that act in responsible ways. I also believe it's up to the individual using their own values to decide what they will support.

Author

WMartin

Date

2009-03-25T12:22:24-06:00

ID

145086

Comment

In the simplest terms a free market is a market that is free of government intervention and regulation. The only problem with a completely free market is that for it to function well and responsibly you have to have an educated citizenry. Therefore you have to have consumers who will trade only with companies who promote the values of their society. If the only thing a society values is money and the lowest possible price you get companies like Wal-Mart being huge. If our society really valued jobs for our people we would pay a little more for American made products.

Author

WMartin

Date

2009-03-25T12:36:17-06:00

ID

145087

Comment

But when a company is laying off workers and losing market share quickly giving large bonuses at the same time you are freezing salaries says something to me about management. - W Martin Good, cogent point! My thoughts exactly. Was reading through GE annual report today and noticed their CEO, Jeffery Immelt, elected not to take his $5,800,000 bonus (what he got in 2007) last year. I think W is exactly right - management should earn what they take, and if the company is drowning they should lead it out by doing whatever they can.

Author

Izzy

Date

2009-03-25T12:37:28-06:00

ID

145088

Comment

Jeff: "JFP Actual" is priceless. You may have just changed our internal memos forever. ;-) I'd like to take some time and respond to this later today; it's talked about a lot in newspaper circles and I find the possibilities fascinating. I think non-profit is certainly an interesting way to go for the "newspaper of record" (whether or not it's a traditional newspaper, a Web/print hybrid or pure Web) in a given market, but it's not without its pitfalls and there's still no guarantee of long-term success. To be honest, I think the newspaper chains' problems have more to do with public ownership and debt service for two decades of acquisitions than whether the paper is non-profit or not. That said, converting to non-profit may be a solution for some of the papers in this country that are faltering, although certainly not a panacea. St Petersburg Times is non-profit (owned by the Poynter Institute), www.voiceofsandiego.com is non-profit (Web only) and Texas Observer is a bi-weekly run as a non-profit. All are examples of newspaper that do good work. More later...great topic. JFP Actual out. ;-)

Author

Todd Stauffer

Date

2009-03-25T12:37:42-06:00

ID

145089

Comment

It seems that most of these major paper industries are top heavy. I can't imagine what an employee would bring to the news paper to have a one year bonus of $5,800,000. What degree do these folks have: From what school did they graduate: What are their experiences? It is apparent that something went wrong when the top money getters can't keep the company afloat.

Author

justjess

Date

2009-03-25T12:56:43-06:00

ID

145093

Comment

The something that went wrong is one thing - stock values. This is the thing, all these publicly traded companies have to show higher stock prices in order to be deemed fit. It isn't enough anymore to make a good product and make a good profit. No! You have to increase earnings for the shareholders, every single quarter, it's a kind of intense and somewhat bizarre pressure - this is why strong companies like Starbucks end up making stupid long term decisions like expanding to more stores than they really should - to temporarily raise stock values.

Author

Izzy

Date

2009-03-25T13:52:52-06:00