An independent journal about the Gannett Co. and the news industry's digital transition
I am a news reader who cares about my local community and knows the importance of having a solid, free press operating therein. I root for Gannett to be successful because when it is functioning well, it contributes to the quality of life in my town. I almost can't bear to see what is happening to the product now, however.It is Monday, December 24. Since Friday, December 21, at 5:35 pm, my local Gannett paper has had the following headline prominently displayed on its "Viewpoints" webpage and the same headline linked from its home page: "Court hearing for supper drunk police officer..." This is, of course, a letter about someone charged under Michigan's "super drunk" driving law. My first reaction was to laugh at the unintentional humor and idly wonder how a supper drunk was different from a lunch drunk or how, exactly, mealtimes might have played into the evidence presented at the court hearing. As the days passed, however, my amusement waned as it dawned on me that no one, NO ONE with access to the software used to put out the paper was even reading the content and therefore this error would likely never be corrected. Staff clearly hadn't been reading the home page or viewpoints page for at least three days, or this mistake couldn't have persisted.Hey, I get it, mistakes happen, and we have all gotten too complacent and dependent on spell checkers. But to allow this obvious and prominently placed error to persist for three days? Is there no one home at Gannett? What in the world is going on?Just sign me "a sad reader."
cincinnati.com top 3 stories this morning1. carolyn washburn column 2. story that came out of a city council meeting last week3. pix of girls and their cleavage at a mayan apocalypse party last weekwashburn's column is about apps. a reader put a comment on it that says it all. "It would be better if you had new stories on the weekends and take others off after 24 hours."
In 2013, I hope the people obsessed with all things Cincinnati can start their own site.Now, off to check out the alleged cleavage!
And in 2013 may we be rid of trolls who come on here simply to announce that they, personally, aren't interested in a particular topic or thread. Fat chance.
Au contraire, dipshit. In fact, I was so interested that I went to the site. Not much cleavage -- I counted one low-cut top in the whole portfolio.There were a good number of old fogies, though.
Stay classy, Einstein, you are part of Gannett's target readership.
I wish that women would've dressed like that when I was young enough to enjoy it.
Tonight and tomorrow, thousands of Gannett employees will show up to work the holiday. Some will leave their families, some will drive in snow. All will work without extra pay or even a thank you. And eventually, some will get laid off. That's right, after years of sacrificing what is truly important, Gannett will most likely end your career before you want.Is it really worth it?
Perhaps you are working "without extra pay." I will be paid double time, which is and has been standard procedure at the Gannett paper where I work. So, I am glad to come in, every holiday.
HELL EFFIN' NO!Signed,Former Gannett employeeNOTE: My next bi-weekly paycheck (at my new job) will be well north of what I was making every two weeks at Gannett, after more than a quarter century of award-winning, unappreciated service.
Many newspapers and print sites throughout Gannett land does not get Holiday pay, shift differential or night differential. If you happen to be scheduled to work on a Holiday, that day becomes a floating Holiday to be taken at another time.I can't say, that I know of any other company in my area, who treats their employees this way. This is one case where I wish we were a union site and not just a right to work state.Merry Christmas everyone!
2:48 do you advocate not publishing on holidays? Everywhere I've worked folks received holiday pay. Where do you work and why aren't you getting it?
Did I miss earlier comments on the Journal News publishing the names and addresses of gun owners? It's all over the web. I support stronger gun laws, but I strongly oppose this stunt. It will only encourage lawmakers to weaken public record laws, among other problems.
I work at a Gannett site and they bring us in early on Christmas and New Years to avoid paying holiday pay. Anyone out there going through the same thing?
Readers are leaving coal under the tree at my UCSP rag.Pageviews are running almost 17% lower this December when compared to December, 2011.HO HO HO!
I work for Gannett and I have no issues with my job but this white plains stunt is SICK AND SAD. Seriously, fucked up. I am even for gun control but I honestly hope they get in trouble for this. I can't believe I'm saying that about my own company but you just don't publish private citizen's information without their permission. I don't care if it's public record. It's one thing for someone to look it up, it's another thing to give every crazy person the idea to harass you because they saw it in the paper! UGH.
Hope they "get in trouble" for this? With who?I applaud the move. I can look up voter registrations in most states, house assessments, all kinds of personal documents. Guns are a big deal and they should be part of the public record.And as long as they are public record (apparently), this shows the extent of the ownership, block by block. A gutsy move by TJN and one that should be applauded. The light of day is always the preferred option.
Voter registration lists do not remotely entail the same ramifications directly as do gun registration lists. The "light of day" is great and all, but there is also supposed to be some responsibility involved. To my, it's a matter of context. Sex offenders, the most despicable of life form there is, aren't even subject to having their actual addresses published -- and we're talking about LEGAL gun registration! I'm not a gun nut, but what next? A map of how many neighbors are Jewish? Oh, wait, I think that precedent has already been set with IBM punch cards in the '30s and with about the same prejudice and "public service."
Merry Christmas, bitters! Here's hoping that in 2013, you find lives and stop bitching here.
Merry Christmas, delusionals! Here's to hoping you don't find a reason to be bitter against the big G in 2013 like so many others have. Just remember many laid off were top-notch and some of the best in the industry so it can happen to you, too. So don't let your income or age get too high! HO HO HO
Seems to me that 5:30 a.m., and other similar posters here, have issues with delusion. Big corporations routinely whack people. It sucks. But get a grip, folks. If you work for Gannett, you work for a corporation. It's not a family. Your work colleagues are not your friends. Your work space, which you may have pimped out with photos of your kids and dogs, is still a work space. And it doesn't belong to you. So, don't be bitter. Be realistic. Instead of wasting your time here with repetitive rants about evil Gannett and how those bad corporate people make you feel bad, make an exit plan. Or, get some work done and stay off the Gannett Blog for a few days. The rest of us will thank you.
2:08 is the post of the year! Bravo!
Our smalltown daily always put 2 papers together on the 23rd. One for the 24th and one for Christmas Day, leaving a small newshole available for any breaking news. The Christmas Day papers were delivered late Christmas Eve, giving everyone except 1 reporter Christmas Day off. A few staffers then went in around 8:00 PM Christmas Day to put together the paper on the 26th.Even 10 years ago, the only interest in a Christmas Eve/Day/Day after paper is to see what is on sale at Target.
We're hearing that while Gannett has proclaimed for years that no staff members were getting raises at some site, some people were actually given secret raises in the past two years, but not everyone.
For probably the 50th time in my memory, the Cincinnati Enquirer editorial page on Christmas day dug out the old 'Yes Virginia' this time with the head "Famous 'There is a Santa Claus' revisited once again." In other words, even the headline writer is sick of seeing this hoary old bit of pap "once again." To the poor sap who is actually paying for the paper, the message is: Our one remaining editorial page person is on vacation this week, so here's a big fat serving of stale leftovers.
Jim says: "Proceed with caution; this is a free-for-all comment zone. I try to correct or clarify incorrect information. But I can't catch everything. Please keep your posts focused on Gannett and media-related subjects. Note that I occasionally review comments in advance, to reject inappropriate ones. And I ignore hostile posters, and recommend you do, too."
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.
Subscribe in a reader