Management saw the meetings as informational. The staff had a different view. “People called it the color-coded terrorist alert,” recalls Alan Goldstein, then an assistant business editor. For example, Mong and Rodrigue met with the arts and features staff on July 7. When the meeting ended, many who attended said they felt angry and demoralized. “Management was making it plain how little it valued cultural coverage, and how the depressing rounds of cutbacks would only continue,” says Jerome Weeks, fifty-three, who had been the newspaper’s book critic since 1996. Several interpreted the presentation as a push out the door. “It would just be a matter of time before they got rid of people like me,” says Ed Bark, fifty-nine, who had been the newspaper’s television critic for twenty-six years. “Management would have you believe all the buyouts were voluntary, but in reality that is simply not true.”
On August 10, Moroney and Mong announced details of the buyouts. They described them as voluntary. Mong wrote in a memo to the staff, “This world of continuous change is not for everyone, and for those of you who feel this way, the voluntary buyout may be a very attractive choice.” For some, that memo crossed a line. A number of editors and reporters said they felt insulted that management portrayed the buyout as an option for those who could not adapt.
The buyout offer, in fact, sparked a stampede: 112 reporters, editors, photographers, and artists, almost one-third more than management’s initial estimate, took the offer. They were a far different group from those who had been laid off. They were younger. They included a significantly higher percentage of women, including the second-highest-ranking woman in the newsroom as well as the highest-ranking woman in sports. They included more minority group members, including the paper’s only full-time Asian American columnist. The newspaper’s only three-time Pulitzer Prize winner hit the road. So did the projects editor. Many said the Morning News had lost its commitment to journalism. Among them was Steve Davis, forty-one, a sports reporter who began his journalism career at the paper in 1990. “I no longer truly believed in our product,” Davis says, “and was feeling increasingly dishonest about continuing to take a paycheck given my reservations.”
Gretel Kovach, thirty-one, joined the paper in 2003 and served as an embedded reporter in Iraq. The circulation scandal, the layoffs, and the bureau closings convinced her to take the buyout. “Even in just three years, The Dallas Morning News had changed so drastically that it was almost unrecognizable,” says Kovach, who still freelances for the paper.
We surveyed fifty-one journalists who accepted the buyout offer. Just three of them said they were dissatisfied with their new jobs. Those forced out in 2004 and those who chose to leave in 2006 seem to generally agree on one point: Life after The Dallas Morning News can be very good.
Pete Slover, forty-seven, spent seventeen years with the paper as a beat and investigative reporter. A lawyer, he is now special counsel to the state comptroller. Karen Thomas, forty-seven, was a thirteen-year veteran who specialized in narrative writing. She now freelances and teaches college journalism. Beatriz Terrazas, forty-four, a Nieman fellow who began as a photographer and became a features writer, co-owns a production company with her husband. All enjoy what they are doing.
Then there’s Michael Precker, fifty-two. For years, he wrote features. Before that, he was the paper’s Middle East bureau chief. Now Precker is a day manager at The Lodge, an upscale Dallas gentlemen’s club, making sure no one harasses the pole dancers. “If you’re going to leap out a window,” he says, “you might as well have a mattress.”

Thorough and interesting article. I posted it on my job blog (www.sunoasis.com/jobblog.html
A few points:
1- Down-sizing always happens to real people and not numbers.
2- What is happening in newspapers is a continual erosion of loyalty
between "the company" and the employees. Employees, even journalists have to see themselves as free agents.
3- Writing, editing, reporting talent is very transferrable up and down the labor spectrum.
4- I can see what newspaper management is doing: Cut everything out in the paper that is being done well on the web such as movie, restuarant reviews. Stay local.
5- What is happening today was predicted long ago by Alvin Toffler among others. That is, mass media would be deconstructed across the board once computers were all connected together. At that moment a "communications revolution" is created not simply a technological one.
David Eide
Sunoasis.com
Posted by jobsbard
on Thu 5 Jul 2007 at 12:32 PM
Interesting story. However, I wonder whether it accurately reflects the feelings of all of those who left.
Could it be that only the happy and lucky ex-employees were willing to be interviewed, while those who have flamed out weren't so willing to share?
I also wonder whether researchers asked about finances. Are the happy people also better off financially than they were at the Morning News, or are they happy despite having a lower standard of living and worse benefits?
Posted by ecreager
on Fri 6 Jul 2007 at 09:32 AM
Thanks for explaining how and why my hometown newspaper so quickly became The Dallas Boring News and sadly joined the ranks of the Fort Worth Startlegram and Houston Comical.
Why read the paper or watch its broadcast affiliates if:
• the national and international news goes no deeper than what we’ve already seen in AOL pop-ups.
• they take incidental local news and try to make it tabloid
• they no longer take the time to balance stories or editorials
• they dropped features that made DMN unique or represented the interests of “fly over country”
• you’re not a Cowboy or Stars fan.
To have dropped the opportunity to exploit the Texas connection with Washington makes me think DMN is no longer on the presidents’ reading list either.
If you re-build it, they will come…if it’s not too late.
Posted by DallasBits
on Fri 6 Jul 2007 at 01:03 PM
Tracy,
Your article read like a novel and was well-researched. I feel very happy to have been one of your students! I have a great example to follow in journalism. Cindy (Brown) Mallette
Posted by Jars583
on Sat 21 Jul 2007 at 10:22 AM
All I would have to do is replace the names and this story would be about the paper I work for.
In many respects companies that own newspapers are unwisely placing their money on technology and guessing that the web and videos--warts and all--will be the new frontier for revenue.
"fool's gold" I say to them.
Journalism is a "calling," not just a job. You enter it to serve the public and to help humanity evolve. When those who control newspapers are only in pursuit of profits, the "public service" in journalism is abandoned, and you end up with "infotainment." Why do I remain? The mortgage….
Posted by Worldfoto.org
on Mon 30 Jul 2007 at 06:21 PM
I've lived in Dallas for 25 years, and am not a journalist, but I'm a newspaper reader and am interested from that point of view. One important aspect you failed to mention (and maybe it was not germane to this article) is the extreme political bias of the newspaper. The CEO Robert Decherd is a graduate of the Dallas prep school St. Mark's, and is part of the business elite of the city, which is very much like a country club. His paper consistently sides with business interests (read: Republicans) in this city.
A case in point was the biggest politicial issue this city has seen in the last 50 years, where Dallas voters were to decide on Nov. 6th whether they wanted a toll road inside the Trinity River Park, which is a flood plain. On the pro-toll road side stood the Morning News, the Mayor, 13 of 14 City Council Members, and all the business elite. Although the mayor continued to lie to voters during the campaign, long after the appropriate authorities (like the Army Corps of Engineers) contradicted what he was saying, the Morning News supported him, while failing to show the contradictions. They failed to do simple investigative journalism, like interviewing the Corps of Engineers to verify what the Mayor was saying. On top of that, the Morning News waited until the day after the election (which the pro-toll road side won) to publish articles damaging to the the winning side. In fact, they also sat on damaging information they had a month prior to the election, and waited until post-election to publish it. You can read more about this here: http://www.trinityvote.com/blog/comment.asp?bi=364.
I know several longtime DMN readers who decided to cancel their subscriptions after this political issue, because it was evident that the paper took an elitist attitude, and was not interested in serious journalistic inquiry.
I don't know enough about the newspaper business to know how much this affects readership, but credibility has to be an important factor, right?
Posted by mainbrain
on Thu 6 Dec 2007 at 07:43 PM
Yes it's nice article!
Todd DiRoberto
http://www.newsguide.us/art-entertainment/movies/Todd-DiRoberto-of-American-Satellite-Hosts-Independence-Day-Charity-Event-for-Operation-Bigs/
Posted by amsatpro on Fri 7 Aug 2009 at 05:00 PM
Yes it's nice article!
Todd DiRoberto
http://www.newsguide.us/art-entertainment/movies/Todd-DiRoberto-of-American-Satellite-Hosts-Independence-Day-Charity-Event-for-Operation-Bigs/
Posted by amsatpro on Fri 7 Aug 2009 at 05:01 PM