
In May, as the New Orleans Times-Picayune put to bed an epic, eight-part investigation into Louisiana’s prison system, its editors began to disappear. First, Mark Lorando, the features editor, was nowhere to be found. Then the chairs of the online editor, Lynn Cunningham, and the sports editor, Doug Tatum, were empty. So was that of the city editor, Gordon Russell. Newsroom wags called it The Rapture.
Conspicuously left behind: Peter Kovacs and Dan Shea, managing editors for news, whose subordinates, sworn to secrecy, hadn’t told them what was up. As Kovacs, Shea, and a team of 20 put final touches on the series, “Louisiana Incarcerated,” the chosen editors—including Jim Amoss, the top editor—were two miles away in the Place St. Charles tower, implementing a plan that would make a story like that series far more difficult to pull off in the future.
The secret meetings in May led to a bloodletting in June. Advance Publications laid off nearly half the paper’s newsroom, halted daily publication of the Picayune, and implemented a business and news model that shifts the focus of the operation to its free news website, NOLA.com.
Ten months later, a battle still rages for the soul of the Times-Picayune, and over the meaning of what happened. Much of the media coverage of the changes in New Orleans, while critical of Advance and the paper’s leaders, has focused on the decision to cut publication to three days a week and, to a lesser extent, on the layoffs, which were devastating even by today’s standards. Those are, of course, important storylines.
Less examined: the radical change in how journalism is done at the 176-year-old Times-Picayune and what that means for the future of news coverage. And even less examined are the strange finances of the move, which help explain what to many appears inexplicable, from either a journalistic or a business point of view.
Advance argues that it is taking a difficult but bold step into a digital future, in New Orleans and across the country. But its actions make more sense with a close look at the numbers, which suggest something other than its claim of “securing a vital future for our local journalism.”
American newspapers have lost more than half their advertising dollars in the last five years, an existential threat to an industry that in 2007 depended on ads for three-fourths of its revenue. The Times-Picayune is no exception to the trend. Its advertising has plunged 42 percent since 2009, according to an analysis of figures its publisher gave The Wall Street Journal in September.
There is no sure answer for what to do about this. Still, by now, most major newspapers have begun moving to strategies that play to their strengths: charging core readers online while allowing casual visitors 10 or so free stories a month; increasing the price of the paper, sometimes by charging an upsell fee for bundling digital access with print; shoring up Sunday circulation; and attempting to convert ad departments into marketing-services operations that provide more holistic solutions to local promotion, like website creation, social-media help, app creation, and the like. These and similar strategies are based on the value of the content, and on a hopeful bet that newspapers can keep significant subscription revenue in the coming all-digital future.
Advance is following the industry into marketing services. But mainly it has stuck by what was conventional Web wisdom from before the recession—chasing clicks. In the new NOLA model, editors push reporters to increase “inventory,” more content with fewer journalists. And more of its remaining resources are in sports and entertainment. In this system, a distracted click on a story that says, in its entirety, “Hornets officially announce their nickname will be changing from Hornets to Pelicans,” is worth as much as one on, say, a prison exposé. More, actually, since the former comes with less time and effort.
If you worked for Advance Publications, you might have seen this coming. In 2009, Advance shut down the 174-year-old Ann Arbor News and replaced it with a website, a buzzword-driven news agenda, and a biweekly newspaper called AnnArbor.com. It fired roughly half of the newsroom, partially repopulating it with fresh-faced journalists with job titles like “Sports Reporter—Buzz.” Reporters churn out three or four posts per day.
By most accounts in Ann Arbor, its journalism deteriorated dramatically, but Advance declared AnnArbor.com a success, financially and journalistically. In 2012, it moved all its Michigan papers to a version of the model, centralizing functions like sports and statehouse coverage and slashing newsrooms and pressrooms. Times-Picayune staffers watched with unease, but figured New Orleans, with its devoted print readers, would be last among the Newhouse papers to get the Michigan model, if it got it at all.
And if anything was broken at the Times-Picayune, it wasn’t the newsroom. The paper covered its metro area as well as any in the country, a mix of broad daily coverage and ambitious enterprise reporting that effected change, despite a news staff already down roughly a third from the 270 it employed before Hurricane Katrina. It could be counted on to unearth the foibles and corruption of local politicians, cover the Saints and Uptown social events like a blanket, and capture poignant photographs like one that ran in May of a five-year-old girl, shot in the abdomen at a birthday party, dying in her father’s arms. It produced stellar investigative work, too, like Cindy Chang’s prison series, which exposed the perverse financial incentives behind Louisiana’s bloated penal system. Readers rewarded such coverage: The Times-Picayune had the highest market penetration of any major US daily.
Nonetheless, on May 23, word came that Advance was bringing the Michigan model to New Orleans—ending daily publication of the paper and firing much of the staff. NOLA.com had already introduced a redesign, on May 8, based on the original Michigan template, down to its garish yellow color scheme and what its creators call a “river of news,” a blog-style rollout of stories. It had been hooted out of town. The colors were subsequently toned down and the river of news downplayed, beneath editor-picked stories.
As in Michigan, the newsroom would be partly repopulated by younger digital natives who could be paid much less—as NOLA Media Group reporters, not Times-Picayune reporters. They would be told to write search-engine-
optimized posts for the Web multiple times a day, and not to worry about print deadlines. Editing would be de-emphasized. “Curators” on the newspaper side would pick stories off of NOLA.com and put together a print newspaper on Wednesday, Friday, and Sunday. This in a city that worships its habits and traditions.
Editor Amoss told his staff that the new NOLA.com would be a “website emphasizing sports and entertainment.” The new publisher, Ricky Mathews, handed out talking points for managers that said, “NOLA Media Group will . . . position us to better serve our readers, advertisers, and business partners,” and that “the course we have chosen for New Orleans is tailored to the needs of this market.”
But as many loudly pointed out, New Orleans is one of the poorest and least digitally advanced cities in America. More than a third of its residents have no Internet access at home. Between two-thirds and three-quarters of its population read the daily at least once a week. By 8 a.m. the morning after the news broke, Anne Milling, an Uptown philanthropist and longtime member of the Times-Picayune’s citizens’ advisory board, had bought savethepicayune.org and kicked off a fierce citywide protest. Tom Benson, a local who owns the Saints and the Hornets, would offer to buy the paper, as would another “serious player,” according to Milling. “We could have saved the Picayune, we could have continued it as a daily, we could have done a lot of things, and the community would have rallied,” she says. “But they refused.”
“They” were Advance’s owners, the Newhouse family. “We have no intention of selling,” Steven Newhouse told The New York Times on June 12. “No matter how much noise there is out there.”
Meanwhile, the bloodletting had begun. Earlier that day, a young business reporter, Richard Thompson, went into his early-morning meeting with the city editor, Gordon Russell, carrying a bottle of Crown Royal and a family photo. He offered Russell a drink. When the editor declined, Thompson poured himself a shot and turned the picture to face his boss, saying, “Gordon, what do you want to talk about?”
“I like your style,” Russell said, then laid Thompson off (he would later be essentially unfired after more people quit than higher-ups had counted on). Then he called in the next reporter. But Russell took no pleasure in it, apparently. “By the time I came in, he was pummeled,” Bruce Nolan, a 41-year Times-Picayune veteran, says of Russell. “He was beaten up. He was very sorry; he was remorseful. He said, ‘This is a terrible thing; I’m sorry this is happening to you. You know how much I love you.’ We both understood we were being carried along by forces bigger than both of us.
“And I came out, and I walked through a corridor and into the newsroom, where everyone is standing around. It’s a death march. Every face turns to me, and I draw my finger across my throat. It was stunning.”
On June 19, fearing an evisceration of the paper’s culture, 17 of the paper’s remaining top reporters—all of whom had been offered jobs with the new NOLA Media Group—signed a memo to Amoss and Mark Lorando, who would effectively become the new managing editor, and Lynn Cunningham, the online editor (who has since retired). They had simple questions: “Will there be goals or quotas for tasks such as blog posting, activity on Twitter, and entering comment streams? Will there be opportunities for producing enterprise stories, and if so, how will they be determined?”
They got no reply. Most of them would soon leave, too. Cindy Chang, the force behind the prison series, took a job at the Los Angeles Times. “Even though they continued to pay lip service to great journalism,” she said, “you could also see the direction they were going.”
The New Orleans overhaul is part of a broad initiative by the Newhouse family, which, through its closely held Advance Publications, recently rolled out the Michigan model at its papers in Alabama, Pennsylvania, and New York. Next, presumably, are the Cleveland Plain Dealer, the Portland Oregonian, and the Newark Star-Ledger—all, like the Times-Picayune, imperfect institutions that over the years have nonetheless been the news lifelines of their regions. Union officials in Cleveland have already gotten word that they’ll lose 58 people this year, a third of the news staff.
Neither Steven Newhouse nor Ricky Mathews responded to repeated requests for comment from CJR. Most of the current and former Times-Picayune journalists interviewed for this story declined to comment on the record for fear of retribution. (In the case of the former employees, it was because of non-disparagement agreements that Advance required they sign in exchange for severance packages.)
But in a Poynter blog post in August, Steven Newhouse cast the changes at the Times-Picayune as a part of a “Great Leap Forward” in newspapering: a necessary, if painful, reordering of news organizations meant to take full advantage of digital technologies while bowing to grim economic realities:
The changes we have made in Michigan have strengthened our confidence that we can secure a vital future for our local journalism elsewhere. While we believe that our print revenue will decline further, we are hopeful that our increased focus on digital will allow digital revenue to become an even greater revenue growth engine, and, eventually, turn our local companies into growth businesses once more, allowing them to continue to serve their communities with the quality of journalism that readers expect.
Media analysts have responded mostly with puzzlement. While everyone agrees on the general problem, the Newhouse family is suddenly almost alone among newspaper chains in continuing to insist on the free model for news and an intentional acceleration of print’s demise. “The business case is not all that strong,” mused Poynter’s Rick Edmonds over the summer. Ken Doctor, the news industry analyst and consultant, wrote that “It’s near impossible to see how this is a growth strategy for the T-P’s (and the city’s) future.”
Because Advance is a closely held firm—and a secretive one—it is difficult to get numbers. But a rough estimate based on CJR analysis and reporting puts the combined entities’ annual revenue at about $90 million and operating profit at $9 million, both of which come overwhelmingly from the print side. Data from Kantar Media indicates that the Times-Picayune brought in $64.7 million in print ads in 2011, while NOLA.com brought in $5.7 million, according to Advertising Age. Considering circulation revenue of roughly $25 million to $30 million, based on CJR estimates, the print paper brought in more than 90 percent of the company’s revenue before the changes, and still likely brings in five of every six dollars in revenue. If NOLA Media Group were a standalone business with no newspaper to support it, its costs would exceed its revenue by many times.
In the near term, Newhouse’s idea to shrink the print product makes perfect business sense. It still gets revenue from three fat papers—Sunday, Wednesday, and Friday—even if readers are alienated by the loss of less profitable Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday editions. And by laying off 200 employees—journalists, salespeople, pressmen, and delivery drivers—and sharply reducing what it pays for paper and ink, Advance may have doubled its operating profit in New Orleans. Doctor estimates that the moves gave the Times-Picayune a one-time boost of 11 percentage points in profit margin.
But that’s the near term.
Long-term, everyone agrees that print is in decline. But the digital side is still far from self-sustaining, more than 15 years into its existence, and it faces long odds to ever, on its own, support a newsroom of the sort required to cover New Orleans thoroughly. NOLA.com would have to quadruple or quintuple its 2011 revenue to support its current size.
And digital ad rates continue to fall.
Jim Amoss denies that the newsroom has been gutted, saying that it has been reduced from 181 in May to 155 today. But the current number is inflated by the inclusion of new part-time high-school sports contributors, according to newsroom sources. On an apples-to-apples basis, the newsroom is down into the 130s.
At the same time, the mix of jobs has moved away from news toward sports and entertainment, which have grown significantly since the layoffs. News staffing has declined, according to people familiar with the matter, in large part because of reduced coverage of the suburbs (Amoss disputes this). And several of the new hires have the title of “community-engagement specialist,” a quasi-marketing position that seems mostly to entail asking readers to comment on posts like “Are you a Bieber Believer? Did Justin’s Tuesday night concert rock your world?”
The newsroom is still led by Amoss, who says, “I think fundamentally, newspapers right now are choosing between remaining as they are and hoping that somehow things will turn around, or restructuring radically in order to have a long-term future.
“When I say that I think that our owners have invested, I mean that they chose the second path. All the evidence points to—and this is why I decided to stay, by the way—their wanting to stay in business long-term, and figure out in an intellectually rigorous way how to do so.”
Advance has certainly put money into the operation in the form of new offices. On the top two floors of a 32-story tower, in some of the most prestigious office space in the city, NOLA Media Group has tried to shake off the industrial era and capture a sort of Silicon Valley cachet (observers are watching whether the company goes after lucrative Louisiana digital-startup tax credits). To get to what used to be called the Times-Picayune, go to the French Quarter and head to the Shops at Canal Place. Take an elevator down, walk past J. Crew and Anthropologie, dodge the shoppers, and hop on another elevator that goes up, past the floor with the Panda Garden knock-off, to the offices of NOLA Media Group. “I work at the mall for a website,” says one reporter. The publisher, Ricky Mathews, has spoken of his desire to create a “Google-Nike kind of vibe.” By design, there aren’t enough of the sleek desks for everyone, so reporters are told to not bring in personal effects. They’re encouraged to do “backpack journalism” from coffee shops and their homes.
“When you put all sections of the newsroom and the website together in one room in downtown New Orleans that’s equipped in a way to foster collaboration,” Amoss says, “it’s just amazing that it actually does that in a way that’s both, in our case, unprecedented and was unforeseen—by me, at least. It makes people think about what they’re doing minute by minute, hour by hour, in a way that being in a legacy newsroom, where you have been for decades, and where you’re cheek-by-jowl with the printing press, doesn’t. It’s just a psychological difference that’s interesting to observe.”
Newspapers have been integrating their Web and print staffs for years, though, and NOLA has swapped one form of segregation for another: The staff that cobbles together the printed paper remains at the old Howard Avenue headquarters. The Times-Picayune’s three weekly print editions are thick with news and advertising. The Wednesday paper would be a Sunday paper in most cities. And the Times-Picayune, when it’s there, is still pretty good—if noticeably diminished—compared to similar-sized operations, a testament to the skills of those who remain, and to Amoss. “The reality is that all the people who are still sitting here are committed to putting out a quality product and are committed to make this thing work,” says Mark Schleifstein, one of the few top reporters who stayed on. “They don’t know how that’s going to happen, and they want a voice in making that happen.”
“A lot of younger reporters are getting their chance to play in the big game,” says another current T-P reporter. “It freshens up the ranks. If it wasn’t so depressing, it would be exciting.”
But despite its physical heft, coverage looks thin at times. Incomplete versions of stories have ended up in the paper, including one on BP’s criminal fines in the Deepwater Horizon disaster, as writethroughs posted to NOLA.com went unnoticed by the print “curators.” If you read NOLA.com, you get an unsettling sense of déjà vu, seeing stories you saw online elsewhere days earlier. That happens even if you don’t read NOLA.com. “I saw one recent front page of the Picayune where three of the stories were already in The [Baton Rouge] Advocate,” says Steve Beatty, editor of the nonprofit local news startup, The Lens, and a former Times-Picayune journalist.
As the old structure disintegrates, some staffers say, the quality of the report is deteriorating. The planning required for medium- to long-term projects is mostly gone. With fewer editors available, stories that should be 10 or 15 inches balloon to 30 online.
In fact, reporters say they often file without any editor seeing their copy. They’re told to write two-sentence ledes because someone up the chain at NOLA got the idea that Google’s algorithm favors them. (“It’s a secret that only we’re in on,” says a sarcastic reporter.) After Hurricane Isaac in August, one top editor bemoaned the clicks NOLA.com had lost to outlets that called it a hurricane while it was still a tropical storm, arguing that NOLA.com should have matched the inaccuracy rather than lose search-engine points.
In January, imitating an infamous Huffington Post piece, NOLA.com ran a brief post headlined “When is Super Bowl 2013” to draw cheap search-engine clicks. But showing how the organization doesn’t quite get the game, it tweeted the post, too, effectively spamming its followers with SEO detritus meant only for Google spiders.
The larger question, always difficult to answer, is what’s not being covered. “Stories where people of poverty talk about issues of importance seem almost nonexistent these days,” says Katy Reckdahl, who focused on those issues before she was laid off in September. “There is no regular female news columnist, now that Stephanie Grace is gone.”
The Baton Rouge bureau, under the purview of James O’Byrne, the former NOLA.com editor, is widely viewed internally as an embarrassment. The second sentence of one November story’s lede would be hard to imagine in a high-school paper: “Fortunately for the citizens of the Red Stick, local law enforcement continue to team up with state legislators and federal agencies to ensure stricter drug enforcement laws and regulations make it onto the books.”
As Bobby Jindal kicked off his presumed presidential campaign in the days after Obama won re-election, the Picayune failed to get a story out for weeks. When the bureau posted a piece on that topic on NOLA.com, insiders say that editors thought it was so bad, they yanked it from the site (Amoss denies this). The version up today is still fairly weak, particularly when compared to the sophisticated cover story that the local alternative paper, Gambit, ran on Jindal’s bid two weeks earlier. That piece was written by Stephanie Grace, the ex-Picayune columnist.
Amoss, a native of New Orleans—and once an immensely respected if emotionally distant leader—is now viewed with decidedly mixed feelings by both current and former reporters. The most generous among them say they believe he stayed on to fight to preserve as much of the news culture as he could. “He’s the captain that decided to go down with the ship,” says a reporter still in the newsroom. “He’s a thinker. He’s not a business guy. He’s doing the best with what he’s got.”
The irony of Advance’s big digital push is that the company has been behind the digital curve for so long, and still is. In the late 1990s, in the first few years of the Web’s exponential expansion, Advance formed a separate company to create and control its newspaper websites. Advance Digital, as it is called, imposed a cookie-cutter design on the 32 papers in the chain, in an attempt to find economies of scale. It would be one thing if this template were well done; it is not. Advance’s news websites have long been laughingstocks in the industry, famously difficult to navigate, much less look at, “a cross between a dusty phonebook and The Internets circa 1999,” as The Atlantic Wire wrote in July, about NOLA.com.
In a town rich in history and its own peculiarities, NOLA.com seems like an out-of-town visitor. The site made cosmetic and structural changes in May and June after a wave of complaints, but is still an ugly mess—challenging to navigate, with corrections that aren’t flagged when fixes are made. Few of the pleasures of the print Times-Picayune come across on NOLA.com. But the problems aren’t just cosmetic.
The Newhouses, along with their editors and publishers, framed their move as investments in the future. But it’s a clear disinvestment in New Orleans. And compared with decisions by other owners, it looks like an unnecessary and premature surrender of the qualities that make newsrooms worth having—and saving.
And there are contrasting visions of a digital future. Consider the Orange County Register, a similar-sized paper that was purchased by the Aaron Kushner-controlled Freedom Communications in June. Kushner boosted print pages by 40 percent and added a new business section. He’s installing a metered paywall, raising print prices, and even improving the paper stock. Most important, he has gone on a hiring spree, expanding the newsroom by 50 percent, from 180 to 270. “Aaron Kushner is the anti-Advance,” writes Ken Doctor. “It’s been widely reported as a print-first strategy. I think that mischaracterizes it, though print is getting well funded. It’s a reader-first strategy, and a wily one that aims at doing the right things in the right order, with capital to match.”
Kushner’s idea is that newspapers can’t cut their way to survival, let alone prosperity, particularly when almost all metro newspapers are already thin imitations of their former selves. Diminishing your journalism means chasing away readers and advertisers who have paid you good money.
Kushner ended the futile pageview chase the Register had been on for years, just as the Picayune joined it in earnest. Most of the Register’s 40-some blogs have been shuttered with a note that reads, “You may have already noticed a few changes to our website as we shift our focus to more quality, informative content. With these changes, we are saying goodbye to a few of our blogs, including this one.” The old regime gave reporters Web quotas. That, too, is gone.
Other publishers have different strategies, not as radical as Kushner’s but nonetheless drawing on the strengths of newspaper journalism. The New York Times has preserved the size of its dominant newsroom at the expense of its profit margins, and devised a digital-subscription model that others in the industry are emulating. As a result, last year the Times’s revenue was up for the first time in six years, despite continued print-advertising declines.
The Naples Daily News, an EW Scripps paper in Florida, has increased revenue each of the last two years by reinventing its ad-sales department and increasing its print circulation. Even Gannett has gotten results from its new strategy to raise circulation revenue (a metered paywall and a print price increase). Its publishing division saw revenue increase 4 percent in the fourth quarter, though it was helped by an extra week in the period.
In New Orleans, the internal and external backlash against the new model has delayed or moderated some of Advance’s plans. In December, editors disappeared again for another meeting, in which the dreaded Web-production quotas were discussed. Virtually all of the news desk—including most of the new hires—signed a letter to the top editors—Amoss, Lorando, and Lynn Cunningham—protesting the idea of quotas and seeking a meeting.
The editors were taken aback, and quickly told reporters that the quotas were mere “goals,” not something set in stone. Few believed it, particularly now that the newsroom employs a Staff Performance Measurement and Development Specialist and incentive pay might be introduced next year. Lorando has told staffers that accomplishing the goals could mean roughly three to five posts a day. Of the emphasis on quantity, one reporter says, “We were given certain assurances that it wouldn’t get to this point. I just don’t like going in there anymore.”
Meanwhile, the Picayune has opened its print moneymaker up to competition. The Advocate in Baton Rouge launched a barebones startup in New Orleans, a much bigger market 80 miles to its southeast, and scooped up 23,500 paying readers in its first three months.
It’s hard to imagine a lucrative future for NOLA.com once the print edition inevitably slides into the red. But consider this: If they sold the paper right now, the Newhouses probably would get less than $40 million for it, based on the earnings multiples of recent newspaper sales. By radically slashing costs, as they have done—perhaps by as much as $25 million—the company can earn that amount in a couple of years thanks to higher profit margins. Anything beyond that is gravy.
This looks like an orderly liquidation. By cutting costs well ahead of perpetually declining revenues from the “Inkosaurus,” as James O’Byrne calls the print edition, the Newhouses can ride the Times-Picayune down profitably while minimizing the loss of money. Once the paper reaches terminal velocity, they can shut down Advance Central Services, the print wing, tie up any potential liabilities from the paper, and pitch them into the Mississippi.
If NOLA Media Group is able to turn a profit on its own by then, probably with a dramatically lower headcount than its newsroom has even now, so be it. But it will never amount to much as a business. Not to a family worth at least $14 billion. And not to serious readers, either, who likely will have long ago floated off the river of content. By then, a system that so clearly emphasizes quantity over quality will have taken its toll. And not just in New Orleans.

Gaddamn this is a fine piece of writing.
Hardly anyone I know reads that dead man walking on any regular basis and no one I know has a subscription. I hope they die sooner than later. Good riddance to Yankee rubbish.
On Twitter the hashtags are #BoycottTP BoycottNOLAcom #NoHitsNoDollars
Whad'ya say, let's bury these A-Holes.
The Advocate has stepped into the newsprint void in New Orleans. They managed to snag critical personnel, from they who shall remain nameless, as well as nailing daily delivery.
#1 Posted by Editilla~New Orleans Ladder, CJR on Fri 1 Mar 2013 at 09:56 AM
It's a shame that Ryan Chittum refused our invitation earlier this year to visit our newsroom before writing a piece filled with bad assumptions, inaccuracies and preconceived notions. If he had, he would have seen firsthand an extraordinarily talented team of journalists working to produce an excellent newspaper and digital report. He would have heard the unmistakable hum of a news operation in top form -- reporting, editing, collaborating on a range of work from brief dispatches to ambitious enterprise pieces. He might have caught the excitement that comes from engaging with your readers and allowing your work to be shaped by their reactions and suggestions. He would have been hard-pressed to ignore the storytelling energy in the room and our use of the many tools to express it. For example, he might have noted the recent stellar performance of our team reporting on the blackout during the Super Bowl, as described by the New Yorker or our recent projects about teacher evaluations, inadequate New Orleans restaurant inspections and the rebirth of a Katrina-flooded neighborhood.
As reporters we choose our subjects, our quotations, the lenses to frame our work. The best put aside conventional wisdoms and derivative points of view. They allow their writing to be shaped by deep reporting and their own fresh responses to what they find. Mr. Chittum's backward-looking and narrow take falls short of doing that. American newspaper journalism has been beset by bloodletting and decline for a decade. Those who find a path forward will do so by being innovative and entrepreneurial in their thinking. We don’t claim to have all the answers to finding a viable future for our industry. But we believe that we’re advancing the essential conversation about what kinds of bold changes will save us. We invite others interested in the fate of our business to come and see us in New Orleans and to explore but one of many possible futures for viable, vigorous journalism in the digital age.
Jim Amoss
#2 Posted by Jim Amoss, CJR on Fri 1 Mar 2013 at 10:26 AM
Get over it Amoss. You are the captain of a dying ship even though there are those out there who say you are a consumate newspaper man and editor. I disagree. And this group of Newhouses are nothing like the founding members of the Newhouse newspaper family who were not only shrewd business people but had a heart as well. Heart is sadly missing at the sometimes-picayune. And I applaud the CJR for an excellent piece of investigative journalism.
Priscilla Fleming Vayda
#3 Posted by Priscilla Fleming Vayda, CJR on Fri 1 Mar 2013 at 10:49 AM
"But as many loudly pointed out, New Orleans is one of the poorest and least digitally advanced cities in America. More than a third of its residents have no Internet access at home." - cite your source for this claim? I see pre-Katrina numbers.
#4 Posted by A numbers guy, CJR on Fri 1 Mar 2013 at 11:27 AM
Newhouse is NOT too big to fail. We can replace them with better online journalism anyway. To hell with them: http://blog.locustfork.net
#5 Posted by GW, CJR on Fri 1 Mar 2013 at 11:42 AM
As Jim well knows, I was in New Orleans in early December and asked for interviews then and in the weeks afterward. I didn't hear back from anyone for about seven weeks, at which point my deadline was nigh. My editors declined to fly me down to New Orleans again just to see the new newsroom.
#6 Posted by Ryan Chittum, CJR on Fri 1 Mar 2013 at 11:56 AM
I am so pleased to read this article. The City of New Orleans has been missing the in depth journalism which was the hallmark of the former Times-Picayune. We have a current issue with the City's infrastructure and the revising of the Sewerage and Water Board. This would have been a prime topic in the old T-P.
Instead the citizens of New Orleans have been treated like we have no brain and only want to read about sports and entertainment.
I found it is interesting that we received a Times-Picayune on Thanksgiving Thursday, only to realize that Advanced deemed that we needed a newspaper to provide the ads for Black Friday sales.
I now feel that New Orleans is being treated as we were after Katrina with inconsistent or no mail delivery(remember no magazines for six months). We are receiving our news on an ad hoc basis.
As someone who subscribes to the T-P, the Advocate, the New York Times (all in print) and have a digital Wall Street Journal subscription as well as New Orleans City Business subscription, if I feel out of the news cycle imagine someone who does not have access to the Internet.
And finally the numbers for lack of Internet access were published in the Louisiana State Legislature when the Yellow pages wanted to eliminate the phone books and go to strictly digital directory.
#7 Posted by Ann de Montluzin Farmer, CJR on Fri 1 Mar 2013 at 12:38 PM
Mr. Amoss:
If you have examples of "inaccuracies," please let us know what they are. If you can't do that, it means you're impugning Chittum's reputation based on nothing. Which is pretty shitty.
Also, you seem to imply that if Chittum had visited your newsroom, somehow ... what, he would have decided that the major shortcomings in the paper that he cited here weren't so bad after all, because of the "humming" and whatnot?
I'll say again: If Newhouse had announced some real investments in newsgathering along with the decision to cut back on paper publication, that would have been convincing. As it is, it's clear that the company simply disinvesting and squeezing as much cash as it can out of the paper before selling it off. It might take years, but that's what they're doing. I'm not sure why any T-P journalist would want to carry water for them in this way, but that's between Mr. Amoss and his conscience.
#8 Posted by Dan Mitchell, CJR on Fri 1 Mar 2013 at 01:30 PM
It's a shame that Jim Amoss ignored former and current employees requests last year to explain his actions before and after taking part in these drastic, unnecessary changes to their lives and careers. Rather, he relied on bad assumptions, inaccuracies and one-sided work evaluations. If he had listened to them rather than others' opinions of them, he would have seen firsthand an extraordinarily talented team of journalists working to produce an excellent newspaper. He would have heard the unmistakable hum of a news operation in top form -- reporting, editing, collaborating on a range of work from brief dispatches to ambitious enterprise pieces. He might have caught the excitement that comes from engaging with his employees and allowing his decisions to be shaped by their reactions and suggestions. He would have been hard-pressed to ignore their energy and their enthusiasm to continue to be part of real journalism, regardless of the tools used to express it. For example, he might have noted the stellar performance of HIS team before during and after Hurricane Katrina.
You, Mr. Amoss, is the one with a backward-looking and narrow take. Your innovation and entrepreneurial thinking has fallen far short of what you and your colleagues' enormous egos think you have accomplished. You DON'T have all the answers to finding a viable future for your industry, and you don't know the first thing about essential conversation about what kinds of bold changes could have saved more.
#9 Posted by itsashame, CJR on Fri 1 Mar 2013 at 01:39 PM
This is fantastic writing.
#10 Posted by Sarah Brown, CJR on Fri 1 Mar 2013 at 01:39 PM
I have no idea to which publication Amoss is referring, but it sure the hell isn't the nonsense that is being passed off for a digital newspaper at nola.com, or the regurgitated stories that appear in the print edition. The level of "journalism" being displayed on both would not pass muster with the better high school publications in our city. Stories are filled with misspellings, improper syntax, and are focused on entertainment and "soft" news. The blatant attempts by the so-called reporters to troll the commenters is a sad indictment of what Amoss is foolishly attempting to label news. True journalism is being practiced at The Advocate, The Lens, Gambit and other web sites. At nola.com?!? Laughable for anyone to pretend so, and insulting to the intellect of the citizenry. Shame on you Amoss, even more so than the Newhouses. You are nothing more than a lackey who not only drank the Kool Aid, but now is actively trying to dispense it.
#11 Posted by Even the blind, CJR on Fri 1 Mar 2013 at 02:42 PM
As a former employee under Mr. Amoss, I can say that engaging with his employees was not something he was particularly good at. Hiding in his office and posing for photos were his true strengths.
#12 Posted by Commenter1, CJR on Fri 1 Mar 2013 at 02:49 PM
This article is fairly accurate. But there was much more planning to submarine the print, than the public realized. For several years before May 2012, the TP had stopped promoting itself. There were no ads or promotions outside of the paper. They used to be at all of the festivals, parties and community events. Then suddenly, if you didn't see the Picayune from the Interstate, there was no visible sign they were around. Also, years ago, they would print millions of pieces to be delivered all over the Gulf South. Especially for the grocery stores. They stopped working to get that money all together. And the part of this story about what happened with Mr. Kovak and Mr. Shea seems true. Selected Managers would disappear for days at time. People were told that they were just in meetings. But the whole time they were deciding the fate of over 200 employes future. Many of them were in the newsroom, many were not. People that were there for over 30 years were cut from the ranks. From the Package Center to the Newsroom and every department in between.
#13 Posted by yatearp, CJR on Fri 1 Mar 2013 at 06:14 PM
I wouldn't even say the sports coverage has been stellar by any means. There is very little original reporting or investigative sports journalism. An important opportunity was missed on one of the most pivotal sports stories--The Bounty Scandal--to come of New Orleans. The stories are meant to encourage clicks and not responsible journalism or thoughtful assessments of The Saints. Many new blogs and websites are rushing in to fill the void in sports reporting.
#14 Posted by KeepTheDomeLoud, CJR on Fri 1 Mar 2013 at 08:24 PM
No need to feel story for Jim Amoss. I'm sure he was paid handsomely for his self-respect, as these numbers attest: http://blog.al.com/live/2011/04/former_press-register_publishe_1.html
#15 Posted by nolacontendre, CJR on Fri 1 Mar 2013 at 10:24 PM
A well written story is always a delight to read -- even if the content, at least to this Orleanian, is unutterably sad. Reading the TP's erstwhile editor's musings about the paper's journalistic excellence is like hearing those courtiers comment on the emperor's fine new clothes.....REPORTERS DON'T EVEN HAVE THEIR OWN DESKS AT THE TP THESE DAYS!
#16 Posted by nonathabove, CJR on Fri 1 Mar 2013 at 10:31 PM
Let me see if I get this right: The commenters to this story never get their information first from the internet, their smartphone, or their tablet? You always wait until you read a printed version to find out what's going on--and you think that's the wave of the future? So I guess you all sent your "Letters to the Editor" of the magazine as well, right? Of course not. DIgital is how people interact with news--and your comments are the proof. Why pretend any differently? What a clueless, "oh the old days were better--why should we change?" piece of nonsense this story is.
#17 Posted by WakeUp, CJR on Sat 2 Mar 2013 at 03:07 AM
GREAT STORY.
Piling on, from the home of the newhouse school, Syracuse, NY
http://www.syracusenewtimes.com/newyork/article-6446-post-mortem.html
Add this little nugget. How to bury the lede , the title and the subsidy-
http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2013/02/national_grid_contributes_300k.html
"The developer previously received an $837,500 grant from Empire State Development Corp. and a $612,500 state grant directed to the project by the Syracuse Industrial Development Agency."
"The ground-floor tenant will be Syracuse Media Group, which produces The Post-Standard and syracuse.com."
#18 Posted by bob, CJR on Sat 2 Mar 2013 at 04:51 AM
I cancelled my subscription to the Times Picayune the day it ceased to be a daily, since that time I have received almost six months of the Times Picayune at no charge to me, and this is how Advance is improving profits?
#19 Posted by Northshore, CJR on Sat 2 Mar 2013 at 10:08 AM
WakeUp, I'm a blogger. I work online all day. I get it. The point, which I think we made clear, is that this is a nonsensical and dated digital strategy and a big disinvestment in hard news.
#20 Posted by Ryan Chittum, CJR on Sat 2 Mar 2013 at 11:59 AM
Great article Mr. Chittum!
New Orleanians will remember the late Buddy Dilliberto, the veteran print, television and radio journalist and commentator who often sparred with head coaches of the long-time losing New Orleans Saints. One losing head coach castigated Buddy for never attending a practice and witnessing how hard Saints players were working during the week. As Buddy so accurately pointed out, watching practice is not important to determining the success of the team. Fans are paying for results on Sundays.
Mr. Chittum, neither you nor I need to visit the newsroom to see "firsthand an extraordinarily talented team of journalists working to produce an excellent newspaper and digital report." The print edition and nola.com are Advance Media's "gameday." That's the won-loss record where Jim Amoss and the Newhouse crowd should be judged. Unfortunately for fans of "viable and vigorous journalism" in New Orleans, Mr. Amoss' results are much closer to Dick Nolan's 1980, 1-15 Saints team than Sean Payton's 2009 Super Bowl Champions.
#21 Posted by Kilowatts, CJR on Sat 2 Mar 2013 at 02:59 PM
Jim Amoss is dying the death of a thousand razors and he doesn't even know it.
#22 Posted by Mick Haller, CJR on Sat 2 Mar 2013 at 07:27 PM
The difference in attitude between the Free Paper Publisher's Roundtable in Feb and the wake that was the paid newspaper gathering in New Orleans the previous week was astounding. While we in the free paper industry partner with digital, niche pubs, blogs and other sources, the arrogant dailies continue to spend foolishly on trappings and status while the creators of American journalism are shunted off to become media stars in other areas. Nice job in New Orleans, Amoss and Mathews.....or should we say Amos 'n Andy?
#23 Posted by TonyO, CJR on Sat 2 Mar 2013 at 10:55 PM
TONYO apparently is unaware of the arrogant and greedy manner in which Amoss and Matthews (and their boss, Steve Newhouse) handled their readers and employees when their secretly conceived changes were leaked to and made public by The New York Times. For example, their decision to lease the top two floors of one of the most expensive properties in the city, "OCP," and calling reader protests and purchase offers "noise." Arrogance and spending are NOT limited to dailies.
#24 Posted by Mark Haller, CJR on Sun 3 Mar 2013 at 12:57 AM
Mr. Amoss seems to think he is doing important and pioneering work on behalf of his industry. He is, in his own words, trying to "find a path forward" and "advancing the essential conversation about what kinds of bold changes will save us." My, what self-important work he is doing. In fact, what Amoss has done is despicable. He radically downsized and downgraded his news product with little regard for the community he once served. He unceremoniously fired a good portion of his staff. Mr. Amoss is welcome to cloak himself in noble causes...perhaps it helps him sleep at night. But the real truth is that his actions, and the print and online news products he is now responsible for, are a joke. I'm all for embracing the digital future, but God help us if nola.com represents the future of news in this country. I've long been a supporter of the TP and nola.com, but I'm fed up with the pompous attitude of the paper's leadership. Frankly, I don't care if the Times-Picayune finds solutions for the industry or not. I just want a quality news product.
#25 Posted by BMiller, CJR on Sun 3 Mar 2013 at 01:11 AM
Hard to argue with anything in this article.
My favorite write-up of this tragedy came from an anarchist blog... it's long but very thorough. Highlights include Dan Shea scabbing during an Ohio newspaper strike and saying he considered himself to be on the bosses' side... and then being left out in the cold when the Times-Pic bloodbath occurred.
http://nolaanarcha.blogspot.com/2012/07/murder-of-times-picayune-part-one.html
None of us thought the Times-Pic was perfect but it really was a damn good newspaper, and the whole region mourns its death. This CJR piece is the elegy it deserved.
oh and NOLA.com was always a bad website. Find me one New Orleanian who likes or is happy about these changes. They're universally hated, like Ricky Mathews & Roger Goodell!
#26 Posted by Big Dawg, CJR on Sun 3 Mar 2013 at 01:43 AM
Ryan,
You replied to my comment that the point of your article was "this is a nonsensical and dated digital strategy and a big disinvestment in hard news." So I guess interviewing disgruntled ex-employees and random former subscribers (but no New Orleanians who might counter your premise) counts in your eyes as covering why this is bad for hard news coverage. As to the other half of your argument, where in your article did you interview New Orleans business leaders or those currently paying for ads on Nola.com to get their take on what you call a "dated digital strategy"? Any local input from those actually spending their money on the product, or happy with the change? Umm, nope. And since it hasn't even been a year, and you can't compare year-over-year numbers, how exactly can you say it's not working financially? You can't because you didn't talk to the people you needed to talk to in order to make your case. That's lazy journalism.
#27 Posted by WakeUp, CJR on Sun 3 Mar 2013 at 10:01 AM
The comments of WakeUp and Amoss here are prefect examples of the Newhouse Waterboy syndrome - just complete cognitive dissonance. It's really mystifying how they can point to the steaming pile of crap that is nola.com and tell us what a fine example of next generation journalism it is. Do they think we can't read, or what?
#28 Posted by WIll K, CJR on Sun 3 Mar 2013 at 11:01 AM
WakeUp,
It's hard to talk to people when they won't return your calls and emails. And I walked around New Orleans buttonholing people at random about nola.com and the Picayune. None--young, old, black, white--had a single positive thing to say about the changes. None had even a neutral thing to say.
#29 Posted by Ryan Chittum, CJR on Sun 3 Mar 2013 at 12:05 PM
MARK - Did you read my comments? I'm a mainstream free paper publisher in this market. I referred to the dailies as inclusive of the T/P, which of course today is the 41.9% daily paper. I predicted in print in June the Advocate would be in this market Oct 1 and I was right. Of all the anal, clueless and uptight daily and paid paper publishers in America, the Newhouse clan (klan?) gets the Oscar. Of course the Wick group gets an honorable mention for firing 24 staffers on Valentine's Day, thirty minutes after the fait accompi was avaiiable on the internet. Al Capone would have been proud.
#30 Posted by TONYO, CJR on Sun 3 Mar 2013 at 02:57 PM
Newhouse Is A Setting Sun (to the tune of "House of the Rising Sun")
There is a newspaper in New Orleans
It's called the Times Picayune
And it's been ruined by the Newhouse clan
It's death may come too soon
In 1837
It started its great growth
But an idiot named Steven N
Has put it on the ropes
Now the only thing Steve Newhouse needs
Is another big 'ol yacht
Readers and clients are just 'noise' to him
The guy must be on pot
The T/P was a daily
Sports and news, op/ed
Now the damn thing's down to three days a week
It's spirit crushed and bled
So mothers, tell your children
The Times is now kaput
Send your bucks to Baton Rouge
And read the Advocate
#31 Posted by TONYO, CJR on Sun 3 Mar 2013 at 04:36 PM
I left Gannett to take a job at a Newhouse paper in a state near Louisiana. It was exciting to work for a paper that cared for its employees as much as or more than profit.
Ten years later, it was hard to believe I was being laid off from the same paper. I feel really bad for the dozens of co-workers also laid off, but I feel worse for the residents we used to serve. Instead of investigative pieces by seasoned reporters, the readers now get one-source, unedited blog posts written by buzz reporters and public intercourse experts (or something like that).
To the long-time employees still left in the Newhouse chain, keep your resumés fresh. I think you'll need them sooner rather than later.
#32 Posted by Amos Anon, CJR on Mon 4 Mar 2013 at 12:09 AM
The utter bad faith--duplicity, really--of the decision-makers at the Times-Picayune was made clear when they announced the end of daily publication as soon as they had concluded 175 days of articles celebrating the newspaper's 175 years in print. It was rather like a husband throwing an elaborate silver anniversary party and at the conclusion telling the wife that he wanted a divorce. We now subscribe only to The Advocate and get our online news from radio and television websites.
#33 Posted by J. Gonzales, CJR on Mon 4 Mar 2013 at 06:05 PM
Reading the Picayune had been a daily ritual. But I have adapted to the changes. The Times-Picayune and nola.com have now become irrelevant and dispensable for me.
#34 Posted by K. Bleichner, CJR on Thu 7 Mar 2013 at 11:04 AM
By reading this article and the comments, one could conclude that Jim Amoss is no longer professionally respected in New Orleans. That is simply untrue: Ricky Matthews thinks Jim is wonderful.
#35 Posted by PhilBlake, CJR on Thu 7 Mar 2013 at 02:59 PM
Having now read both the article and Jim Amoss' response to it, I have to say, I think I'd hire him--Mr. Amoss--to be my head of marketing no matter what the industry.
No one puts lipstick on a pig any better.
Mo Rage
the blog
#36 Posted by Mo Rage, CJR on Thu 7 Mar 2013 at 10:58 PM
And what's really horrible--unconscionable, really--is that the paper had offers to be bought out, from the outside, too.
The owners had no hearts, only wallets and bank accounts, clearly.
#37 Posted by Mo Rage, CJR on Thu 7 Mar 2013 at 11:04 PM
Seriously, I fear for our nation.
Mo Rage
the blog
#38 Posted by Mo Rage, CJR on Thu 7 Mar 2013 at 11:43 PM
If you currently work for Advance, you are in for a life altering nightmare. They will lie to you and deceive you to get every last bit of integrity you have for their benefit. You will walk away feeling dirty and used. The community in Ann Arbor was forever changed by the closing of the paper. Of course this directly affected the employees, it also has had a huge impact on the residents. I cannot hear the words, dot com without it leaving a dirty taste in my mouth. It's funny to see the kiosk in the local stores, attempting to get people to sign up with the lure of gift cards. Most people roll their eyes and say, "No thanks."
The only ones that think the dot com is a success is Advance. It has not been well received in this community and it's been almost 4 years. Bitter? Yeh, just a little.
#39 Posted by Dawn Tobias, CJR on Sun 10 Mar 2013 at 11:25 AM
Sorry, kids, but this is the way capitalism works in present day America.
The Times-Picayune was nothing to write home about prior to these devastating changes, but everything looks better in retrospect. Sure, there were meaningful investigative stories, but in a state like Louisiana, investigative reporting is like shooting fish in a barrel.
I split my time between New Orleans and western Massachusetts, where the Newhouses own the Springfield Republican, the dominant daily. This writer nailed it when referring to the websites as cookie-cutters, famously difficult to navigate. I've been struck for years by the insipid design of both newspapers' websites.
I'd wager that a Newhouse family member played a big part.
Anyone who feels that a family worth 17 billion would allow a sense of community to temper corporate decision-making needs to get out more.
Moan all you want.
It's their business.
#40 Posted by Herblore, CJR on Wed 13 Mar 2013 at 05:00 AM
The sad part is that the amateurish Advocate - which seems to have a digital department firmly rooted in about 1999, and where stories are written (but not edited) in a newsroom and delivered daily in printed form - is now the top paper in the state.
I weep for Louisiana. First Katrina, then Jindal, now this mess - the T-P dying and the Advocate ascendant. Truly, the state rewards mediocrity.
#41 Posted by Doug Broussard, CJR on Wed 20 Mar 2013 at 12:50 AM
As the only New Orleanian of the four original nola.com employees, I can testify that getting a T1 line in 1999 was quite a feat. We also were to turn content for epicurious.com and other Advance properties. I can say absolutely nothing good about that operation... and its lack of a) design, b) journalistic, and c) professional standards.
#42 Posted by Robin Kemp, CJR on Sun 31 Mar 2013 at 03:41 AM
What Mr. Steven Newhouse doesn't really seem to understand - or whomever his advisors are - it the NEWSPAPER has served America as the "voice" of
a community. I live in Birmingham AL and have watched the demise of
The Birmingham News with deep personal sadness. When the paper changed to a Sunday - Wednesday - Friday frequency, we began to see in the paper,
"marketing" columns, pitching the "new digital age of journalism" like the new
loaf of sliced bread. The new planners of the paper's format re-constructed
what had traditionally been the editorial page to what appears to be a "duke's
mixture" of opinion columns, and occasional letters to the editor with diminished eight or ten point type headlines that underplay the potential
power or value of the writer's point of view. Because the local death rate
of citizens hasn't lessened to respect the reduced appearance of the paper's
three times a week editions, each issue is now dominated with pages and pages of obituaries and comics, crossword and other puzzles. It will be interesting to see how long the News retains its present dysfunctional
presentation....or do its owners really care as long as the bottom line
seems secure? Time will tell.
#43 Posted by John Wright, Jr., CJR on Fri 24 May 2013 at 11:53 PM