But you need to know more than that to set the strategy. Amid the handwringing and keening about the decline of media, an array of interests is measuring the field and toying with “products” that are all basically news based. These range from simple community websites to vast social networking products like Facebook. Yahoo, AOL, Google, countless independents and experimenters are looking for what will become the new model for news media.
It’s time to revisit that old story about Colonel McCormick. He was not born with newspaper instincts. He honed his knowledge of Chicago while he was reforming the Metropolitan Sanitary District. In his head, he had a central piece of knowledge that was important to the fortunes of media in his day; he knew where development was going to be in Chicago because he knew where water was going to go.
If you want to win the war this time around, you need to know where technology is going to go, where demographics are going to go, where people are going to go for news, and you need to put everything you can muster in front of them.
You want a plan for the future? Go get the news business.
As CEO, you will be picking the people who run the institutions that fall under Tribune’s umbrella. Like a missionary, you must create converts to the news cause. You must explain to them that technology and change are not enemies, but opportunities.
You must develop a much deeper awareness of customers. It was a mistake to think of a customer as a shareholder. It was a mistake to think of success as increasing quarterly performance. It was a huge mistake to think of print as a near-dead medium (embracing the rhetoric of people whose own fortunes were connected to its failure) just as it was a huge mistake to think of the Internet and technology as enemies. The “either/or” model was just flat wrong. It’s time to transform thought about this.
You must start on two levels. One level is about customers and the second is about repairing damages of the recent past. The latter, which will be hard, costly, and painful, should come first.
Get Smaller Fast
There is no plausible reason anymore for Tribune to be running publications in Los Angeles, Baltimore, Florida, Pennsylvania, or anywhere but Chicago. The arguments about synergies and efficiency and gigantic advertising footprints have all collapsed. They were strategies that made sense in an era that ended a decade ago.
People in those places despise you. They cannot wait for you to fail. They wish you only ill. No one can be a worker focused on customers in that atmosphere. Their days will be consumed by rumors of cuts to come and resentments of cuts already accomplished.
Recall that when Tribune owned the New York Daily News (and there were historic reasons for that relationship that transcended shareholder value) the buzz in New York was that all of the Daily News profits were shipped to Chicago and dumped into Lake Michigan.
The atmosphere has changed so radically that an argument can be made that only local markets in advertising and news can help news companies return to stability for the long term.
What is certain is that Chicago can never care as much about Los Angeles, Baltimore, or anywhere else as it cares about itself. And caring about one’s self is a crucial component of success. All great news companies deserve local ownership.
In this process, avoid the creative debt nightmares that wrecked the company the last time around.
All of those decisions are “inside the Tower” decisions for Tribune. What comes next is not.
A New News Universe
Nothing changes all at once.
Readers will tell you when they no longer want a print product. Don’t rush them.

One small not:. In my understanding, Sam Zell did not "cobble together$12 billion" to leverage his purchase of Tribune; he borrowed $12 billion from employees' retirement funds in an ESOP arrangement. If I am wrong on this, please correct me.
#1 Posted by abg, CJR on Tue 11 Jan 2011 at 03:19 PM
I believe in the late 80s and early 90s the Tribune stock hovered at $100/share. Not bad for legit work. The call letters of WGN stood for something. All assets and entities that developed derived from the broadsheet. That's amazing! The news is the people and the people make the news.
If there is a ozone-burning spotlight or multiple ones, i.e. one for the Middle East and one for Lady Gaga, no one has addressed that issue separately or correctly.
It would be a great thing to select a "natural fit" for the next Tribune CEO/Chairman: someone who is focused on operations and finance but would want to continue to advance media while keeping it a clean and honest business.
Unfortunately the recent past reveals a slow torture on the emotions.
The Tribune is on the verge of a transformation. It is capable of improving the city of Chicago greatly or just reporting on Chicago's man-made financial disintegration.
#2 Posted by Anonymous, CJR on Wed 12 Jan 2011 at 11:09 AM
The only worse than current management is former management. I used to buy and use equipment for a Tribune-owned TV station in California. I could find some pretty nice, user-friendly, lower-cost gear, but was overridden on major purchases by corporate's Chief Engineer in a tower in Chicago.
We spent thousands on terrible equipment, and the training and overtime to try to work with it. That Chief Engineer hadn't edited videotape in years, but was somehow more qualified to make major decisions than I, an actual manager/user was.
#3 Posted by Former Employee 1, CJR on Wed 12 Jan 2011 at 11:26 AM
Mr. Madigan is right on. Local newspapers need to be owned locally and their mission should be to earn the role as the dominant source of news for that region. It breaks my heart when I read a sports story in the LA Times written by someone in Chicago. Bring it back home.
#4 Posted by Shelly Schraff - former LA Times ad sales exec, CJR on Wed 12 Jan 2011 at 05:40 PM
In light of recent events, it appears as if Charles Madigan has either been used or is making sarcastic commentary.
#5 Posted by Anonymous, CJR on Fri 21 Jan 2011 at 04:25 PM