Two little words, so fun to write
It’s a longstanding tradition in the newspaper business that when anyone leaves a paper, their colleagues prepare a mock front page to mark their departure. It is further tradition that the faux front be caustic, sarcastic, borderline libelous and R-rated. I’ve had three of them done for me, and I tend to keep them out of sight of decent people. But I treasure them.
It’s a measure of the state of the industry that many departing journalists don’t get such individual send-offs nowadays, simply because there’s no time to prepare them all. When 31 reporters and editors left the News & Observer Tuesday, after having had their jobs eliminated in the latest round of cuts, one fake front page had to suffice for all of them. And rather than focusing its sarcasm on the departed, the front page took square aim at McClatchy Newspapers, owner of the N&O, and its CEO, Gary Pruitt — who are portrayed as the Titanic and its captain, respectively. (You can see the page at this link. Click on the words “mock page one.”)
What you’ll also see there is a comment from former top McClatchy editor, Howard Weaver, who scolds the N&Oers for the “thoughtless and unfounded recrimination” he senses in that fake front page. On his blog, Weaver has more to say on the subject:
” … those who argue that McClatchy took over a thriving N&O and greedily ran it into the ground are misinformed, and perpetuating that myth hurts the cause of reconstruction.”
That’s right: On the occasion of the end of their careers, Weaver is chiding the journalists for letting off some sarcastic steam. Good God, how dense and self-involved can one human be? These people have just lost their freakin’ jobs, and Weaver’s response is to demand they stop “perpetuating the myth” that McClatchy has anything to do with it.
Really, it’s breathtaking. Weaver spins the corporate line with a vigor and shamelessness that would embarrass even the most jaded public relations hack. For all his talk about “facts,” Weaver can’t seem to acknowledge one simple, obvious one: The News & Observer has diminished dramatically under McClatchy’s ownership, and only part of that decline is attributable to a poor economy.
Furthermore, that fact is confirmed by an unimpeachable source — the guy who sold the N&O to McClatchy.
Howard, on behalf of those at the N&O who are too polite or too restrained to speak plainly, let me offer this thought, delivered to you with journalistic concision and no ambiguity: Bugger off.
April 23rd, 2009 at 8:06 am
Mr. Weaver is just ignorant or outright lying about the state of the N&O finances when McClatchy bought the paper. Within the year before McClatchy bought the N&O I had the priviledge of sitting in on an meeting that updated the N&O financials and today still have a copy of the handwritten notes in my file I made during that meeting. So I know of what I speak. I also have experience in working for other chains so Mr. Howard I knew how to interpret what I heard. I prefer not to give exact amounts here, but will say The N&O at that time was making profits that were double digit percentage wise to revenue collected. They had debt as we all know, but the company was not burdened by the debt versus cash flow needed to pay the debt. Furthermore Mr. Daniels was spending most adequately for further needs in capital spending. Yes, he could have been tigher in expense control, but Mr. Daniels obviously saw greater purpose in having a strong company which could write news as it desired and remain financially strong.
April 23rd, 2009 at 8:22 am
Howard the Duck is a pontificating blowhard who sold out a long time ago to the corporation that is driving The N & O and other papers into the ground. One more time, Howie: It’s the debt, you sanctimonious sellout — not the failure of hard-working folks to get on board fast enough with Gary Glitter’s grand vision of restructuring a legacy media company for modern times. Enough pissing on both the folks who got the chop for your mismanagement and hubris and those who are still in the trenches you left a long time ago. And why don’t you take a long gulp of the advice you gave a commentator on your blog when last you lifted your leg — STFU.
April 23rd, 2009 at 9:58 am
Has anyone seen any comments about HOW the N&O can continue putting out a paper with a dwindling staff? We’ve seen the paper shrink and shrink… how long until it just disappears?
I read about the plan to use the Charlotte writer’s content; is this the way it’s going to go–reduce, reuse, recycle?
April 23rd, 2009 at 11:15 am
It appears that Weaver is trying intellectualize a position that is fundamentally flawed. Mr. Fishman, formerly of the N&O, eats Weaver’s lunch in a response in his column (well worth the read). Blow all the smoke aside and it seems that Weaver essentially is a whore for McClatchy’s bad decision-making then and now.
April 23rd, 2009 at 2:55 pm
Fishman is a stand up guy that helped build a great staff before the MNI takeover. In my opinion (which by definition isn’t that important), he was under appreciated in the aftermath. Pretty sure he used to be GD’s boss so he may have a different opinion but I know a few folks who thought highly of him including one Fishman recruit who left partly because he got the bums rush. She won a pulitzer a few months after starting her new gig in Baltimore. From my perspective, Fishman’s and Frank Jr’s accounts are the more accurate ones. It was a somewhat slow transition but MNI eventually sucked the life out of the paper.
April 23rd, 2009 at 3:03 pm
NTI: Yes, Charles Fishman was my boss at the N&O. In fact, he recruited me to join the paper in 1993 (much to Howard Weaver’s later regret, I imagine). Not only is my opinion of Charles not different from yours, it’s even more respectful. Charles is one of the smartest people I know, and I’m proud to call him a friend. We have edited each other’s books and frequently bounce arguments off the other to test them for holes. You’re wise to place faith in his judgment.
April 23rd, 2009 at 4:54 pm
I’ve only met Weaver a few times but, on those occasions, he still carried some respect for his commitment to good journalism. Frankly, I find his recent public comments out of character with the person I met. I’m not sure I would call it the peter principal (although one could probably make a strong argument for that), but I think he became a victim of his own ascension and somewhere along the way lost his bearings. He enjoyed the luxuries of his success way too much — before the Auto CEOs took in the tail from congress, there was Weaver flying the corporate jet to Raleigh and bedding at the 5 star Umsted to break the news that times were hard and layoffs were coming.
Fishman on the other hand, always seemed to function with only the best interests of the organization in mind. Very intelligent indeed, successful in his own right but still grounded in the real world. Although if all your arguments survived his vetting, I may have to reevaluate
April 27th, 2009 at 10:33 am
GD, you were much too kind. Howard Weaver is an asshole of the highest degree.
May 3rd, 2009 at 10:27 pm
I got a page Dan.