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

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - New York Times Layoffs Update: 15 Newsroom Staffers Get The Ax stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

Huffington Post via New York Post, New York Observer
First Posted: 05- 8-08 07:32 AM   |   Updated: 05-16-08 05:12 AM

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Nyt Building Pan

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.


These past few weeks have been difficult for all of us, as we say goodbye to many longtime colleagues who have elected to leave. Others, who raised their hands for buyouts more recently, will be departing in the coming weeks. A few of those who sought buyouts will stay on longer, to help us through the demands of a year when we must cover both the Olympics in China and a national election campaign. We've had farewell toasts, and will have more, for friends and colleagues whose knowledge and dedication we will miss. We know this time has been unsettling and dispiriting.


We hope that the worst is now behind us. As I told you when we met in the Times Center in February, our plan from the outset was to move through this difficult process as quickly as possible so we do not spend a year bleeding from serial cuts.

Story continues below
advertisement


There are, of course, no guarantees, but so far nothing in the company's performance or in the forecasts for the economy at large suggests we will be going through this again anytime soon. Moreover, we remain in a far better position than most competitors, thanks to a large base of extremely loyal paid subscribers, a digital news operation that is outpacing our rivals in readership and revenue, and the backing of a family that sees our work as both a civic trust and a durable business.


Most important, we retain the strongest team of talented journalists in the business, and they -- you -- remain the key to all of our ambitions.


Now it is time to regroup and move forward. In the coming weeks we will be working with department heads to reorganize and reimagine our coverage to ensure the quality journalism that is our standard. When we met in the Times Center in February, I told you that we were facing two seemingly contradictory challenges in the coming year. On the one hand, we must reduce our staffing and costs. On the other hand, we must do whatever we can to strengthen our competitive position. As I said then, that will mean our staff cuts will be offset a little by some investments to ensure, among other things, that we are well equipped to navigate the passage to our digital future.


I want to thank each of you for your patience, your forbearance and your support during this extremely difficult period. Now more than ever the newsroom needs you -- your intelligence and creativity, your energy and dedication.


Bill


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 Tim...
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 Tim...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
15
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
- dax49 I'm a Fan of dax49 18 fans permalink

wonder if they are still happy to have bill kristol on the payroll

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:18 PM on 05/10/2008

So let me get this straight. The "government mouthpiece of record" is fattening William Kristol's wallet at the same time it's laying off actual journalists? Just go out of business, already.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:37 AM on 05/09/2008

(oops! Not sure 1st attempt posted?)

So, what is the cost saving of those 15 people? Can it be that much? Certainly, there are better areas other than the NEWSROOM, to make cuts. Wouldn't even need to be employees from other areas.

How about turning the lights out in offices when not in use? What about re-negotiating vendor contracts?

Gee, what about this? Restore the integrity and timeliness of the paper, thereby getting subscribers back and new ones, which would boost circulation, resulting in a higher price for ad placements?

Now THAT would be using your noggin, Old, Disabled, Gray Lady!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:44 AM on 05/09/2008
- burnt I'm a Fan of burnt 7 fans permalink

The next round should include all those "reporters" who infected their "news stories" with editorial slant and bias towards the editorial board's favorite candidate. That kind of crap should not be rewarded. Then ax the blog fascists who repeatedly nixed my opposing viewposts for the same reason. Then go after all those who do not provide enough meat on the real issues that face this country... push the spinners and fluff out the door... then maybe they'll stand a chance of staving off bankruptcy.

In the meantime... more power to the blogosphere for doing the job that the NYT should be doing every day.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:45 PM on 05/08/2008

Of course, lets sacrifice the careers of 100 people so the New York Times can be the 100th + print news source in this country to report the daily results of the China Olympics. Meanwhile, live and delayed daily video coverage will be available from a wealth of network, cable, and internet news services. The print media in this country can't seem to admit that they have reached the status of buggy whips in the early part of the last century. Irrelevant tradition continues to drag this country down while a few insiders weep the demise of an outdated medium ! Yet, we continue to question why we are ranked further and further down the list of relevant cultures.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:52 PM on 05/08/2008
photo

The truth is that the New York Times has taken a hit and in reality it's the fault of the NYT leadership from the Publisher down. If they had not followed the lead of an un-named editor from The New Yorker Magazine who is the daughter of an un-named attorney from an un-named downtown law firm at this time the NYT would be celebrating the Pulitzers for Local Investigative News reporting, National Desk Pulitzers and who knows where the story, with a full team of investigators, would lead. Clearly, the burbs' would be saved. Maybe it's that fictious New Jersey Editor, Mitchell Blumenthal. The scandal would create headlines, headlines sell newspapers, sold newspapers create revenue, revenue saves jobs. So, there is no one to blame but the NYT itself. (You're taking a hit arthur and it's your own fault. Roll up your sleeves and get back to work, out of your plush office, and figure out why no one on your staff is covering the story.)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:35 PM on 05/08/2008

Is Dowd one of the people fired?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:23 PM on 05/08/2008
photo

No one should take any pleasure from this story. The newspaper industry is failing apart rather rapidly and this will only allow for even more opportunities for disinformation being shoved onto the TV screen than we already have to wade through. The core of information gathering (as news) is under economic attack. The internet has made the process of reading “the paper” an electronic one. Yet, the content we all depend on is coming from newspapers or the wire services. How many internet based reporters are there out there? Bound to be a few, but this content is largely given away for free with ad revenue being their only source of income. That should be cause for concern. We are all at risk if the MSM becomes only an electronic monster with no reality check resultant from traditional reportage. Even now what passes for news on TV is starting to be “infotainment.” Updates on “American Idol” results are not news, yet many TV stations treat them as such. This fragile Democracy’s fate rest largely on an informed electorate, disconnect enough voters from something like the truth and everyone of us lies in harms way.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:02 PM on 05/08/2008
- twofish I'm a Fan of twofish 17 fans permalink

But hasn't the revenue of most newspapers always been ad revenue? It used to be classified and display ads. Even then, they managed to have real reporters and editors reporting real news. Actually, there was plenty of newspaper-based propaganda in the old days, but there were enough different, competing sources of news that you could triangulate and get something like the truth out of them.

But anyway, just the source of income isn't enough to explain the gutting of newsrooms in favor of propaganda. If the source of revenue moves to the internet, why not the reporters? I know it isn't happening, but it could.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:03 AM on 05/10/2008
- Gasparilla I'm a Fan of Gasparilla 28 fans permalink

It's idiotic to cut local "suburban" news. Many people buy a newspaper because they like local news and are unable to get it anywhere else. Why does anyone think just giving national news, found virtually everywhere now among various media, is a winning formula?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:58 AM on 05/08/2008

That rag isn't worth the price it is now, who cares. The Washington Times loses money every year, the Moonie man Grand Leader of all Religion, GOP lobbyist and supporter is willing to subsidizes it to get GOP propaganda out.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:33 AM on 05/08/2008
- Tom95134 I'm a Fan of Tom95134 50 fans permalink
photo

Is it too much to hope that William Kristol is among those that got the axe? Oh, they laid off journalists. Kristol sure as hell is no journalist.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:18 AM on 05/08/2008
- JohnKemp I'm a Fan of JohnKemp 26 fans permalink

WOW!

NYT cuttng back even further while Wal-Mart same store sales exceed "expectations."

Tough day for libs all-around.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:28 AM on 05/08/2008
- vallon I'm a Fan of vallon 2 fans permalink

What a shame. It's another nail in the coffin for that charming anachronism: the newspaper.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:29 AM on 05/08/2008
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect