October 24, 2011, here on slacktivist: #OccupyTheNewsroom
Peter Lewis on my former employer, Gannett, and it’s quest to destroy the newspaper business:
When Dubow took over as CEO, Gannett employed some 52,000 people in its publishing, broadcast, digital and mobile divisions. When he resigned last week, it employed 32,000 people. Among the 20,000 jobs that were cut were thousands of talented journalists. Mr. Dubow also required many employees to take unpaid leaves of absence, and instituted pay freezes. He referred to this as “increasing workplace efficiencies.”
When Dubow took over as CEO, Gannett’s stock price was $72-something a share. At his departure last week it was $10-something, down 85 percent in his tenure.
Last year, while laying off more journalists, Gannett increased Mr. Dubow’s 2010 pay package to $7.9 million. Including the estimated future value of stock awards and options, his 2010 pay package could increase to $9.4 million. Gannett said the raise was meant to reward Mr. Dubow for boosting the publisher’s earnings — remember, the emphasis is always on the net — for the fourth consecutive year.
Mr. Dubow managed to keep earnings high, according to analysts, by cutting costs (i.e. people) more aggressively than any other company in the media industry. Gannett refers to this as “workplace restructuring.”
… “Craig championed our consumers and their ever-changing needs for news and information,” said Marjorie Magner, non-executive chairman of Gannett’s board of directors.
Gracia Martore, who replaces Dubow as CEO, said: “We will continue our relentless quest to provide trusted news and information and will actively support the people and businesses in the communities we serve.”
These people are lying. The corporate goal is not to serve the consumer; it’s to maximize profits and pay packages for top executives. Can anyone argue that Gannett newspapers and journalism are better today, and that news consumers are better served?
How did Mr. Dubow and Gannett serve the consumer? They laid off journalists. They cut the pay of those who remained, while demanding that they work longer hours. They closed news bureaus. They slashed newsroom budgets. As revenue fell, and stock prices tanked, and product quality deteriorated, they rewarded themselves huge pay raises and bonuses.