End of the week Chicago media news round-up
As the weekend approaches, there are several bits of Chicago media news I wanted to mention. None of them really cry out for a full-fledged post, so I decided to do more a news digest.
The State of the Chicago Sun-Times
Crain's Chicago Business interviewed Bruce Sagan, one of Wrapports investors and owner of Hyde Park Herald. As you may recall, he wound up being a chair of the newly formed Sun-Times Holdings company after Wrapports head Michael Ferro became Tribune Publishing's largest shareholder. He said that he his focus was keeping Chicago Sun-Times viable, which is encouraging, but which is easier said than done. He acknowledged that the paper wasn't profitable, but he said that it was in a better financial shape than it was five years ago. Which, sadly, makes sense, considering all of the people who were either fired, took buyouts or quit (to say nothing of the fact that, with severely reduced art coverage and most of the Sun-Times Media newspapers sold, the company has way freelancers to pay for).
Sagan also pointed out that, unlike Tribune, Sun-Times has no debt. As you may recall, when Tribune Company was split into Tribune Media and Tribune Publishing, the later got all of the company's debt, because the company was owned by its creditors, and they could get away with that sort of thing. But that doesn't necessarily mean Sun-Times is in the better shape. After all, Tribune is making profit - though it's maintaining that profit through cuts - while Sun-Times, well, doesn't.
And finally, while Sagan mentioned that the Chicago Sun-Times website is getting a badly needed revamp, Sun-Times Network isn't going away. He doesn't have a say in that, because the Network is apparently a separate corporate entity. Which does raise a rather distressing possibility. As I've written before, accounts strongly suggest that the Network is a money drain, and that Wrapports may have been using revenues from other parts of the company to prop it up. Does the new corporate structure effect how the money is distributed? Because, if those claims are true, Chicago Sun-Times may be stuck with a Sun-Times Network albatross around its neck, undercutting anything Sagan might do to put the paper on better footing.
Having said all that, I should mention that Ferro's departure from Chicago Sun-Times in one way. Back on Wednesday, it published a strongly worded editorial criticizing Gov. Bruce Rauner. Rauner, as you may recall, was a Wrapports investor before he ran for governor. During the election, the normally liberal paper endorsed him, and longtime state governemnt reporter Dave McKinney was suspended for a week after writing an unflattering article about him. And even if you ignore all that... While the Sun-Times Editorial Board hasn't been quite as nice to Rauner as its Tribune counterpart, it hasn't criticized him like that, either.
The message here is unmistakable.
Tribune Publishing Offers Buyouts to Pioneer Press Staffers
Back around Tuesday, I got strong indications that Tribune Publishing are preparing to fire some Pioneer Press staffers. The company previously offered buyouts to staff members from its daily newspapers, but this was the first time they would do anything with Pioneer Press.
As it turned out, the company offered buyouts rather than outright firing people. And the offer extended to all of the union employees represented by the Chicago News Guild, which, in addition to Pioneer Press editorial staff, includes staff members of Lake County News-Sun and Northwest Indiana Post-Tribune. When Trib bought the ex-STM newspapers, it agreed to honor existing union contracts (though, apparently, they are not terribly happy with the situation. Chicago Tribune is notorious for disliking unions, and according to one Pioneer Press staffer, the company is very keen to keep all that union stuff "contained.")
I suppose buyouts are better than firings, because this means that jobs of staff writers and editors I know aren't necessarily in danger. On the other hand, if not enough employees take the buyouts, Trib may start firing people anyway, so...
Now, you may wonder - why on Earth is it trying to reduce staff when it's about to relaunch a newspaper? Or, for that matter, why does this come less than a week after it got $44 million from Ferro? Well, remember the bit about how it was planning to use the money for acquisition? Politico Media reports that the company really, really wants to buy two major California newspapers - the money-losing but widely circulating Orange County Register and its profitable sister paper, the Riverside Press-Enterprise - as part of CEO's Jack Griffin's strategy to consolidate control over major newspapers in the regions where the company has presence. That seems to be what all of the money is for. There's no guarantee that it would work - Tribune Publishing is just one of the several bidders. Bringing Ferro on board and ending dividend payments caused the stock prices to plummet. So it could well be that the company wants to free up a bit more money, just in case.
On one hand, I think it would be interesting to see what happens if the bid fails. On the other hand, even if does fail, I don't think Tribune would withdraw buyout offers. After all, cutting staff would reduce its expenses either way.
Chicago Reader Responds to Newcity Publisher's Ideas for Saving Chicago Sun-Times
In my last post, I wrote about Newcity publisher Brian Hieggelke's ideas for saving the Bright One. And one of those ideas is merging it with the Reader.
Michael Miner, the paper's media reporter and one of its most senior contributors, was not amused.
The problem with this is that the Reader no more considers the Sun-Times the "mothership" than Latvia did the Soviet Union. We'd be about as digestible as the Letts were. The editorial staff's response to life in Ferro's corporate sphere of influence was to organize as a unit of the Chicago Newspaper Guild and parent Communication Workers of America. This step was taken on behalf of the staff's jobs, values, and dignity-unionization had never been seriously considered during the 40 years of the Reader's independent existence.
Hieggelke has been around the block too many times to assume there's any particular comity between the Reader and the investment group that now owns us. But when he proposes a merger he sounds naïve. It would happen under duress, and it would install at the Sun-Times a hive of seething irredentists.
And if that didn't get across his point clear enough, the image he chose to use to illustrate the article certainly did.
Which, I have to say, is the kind of classic Reader touch we don't see all that often these days.
To be fair, it should be noted that Miner really, really doesn't like Sun-Times. He was very vocally unhappy about the news that Wrapports was buying the paper. When the staff moved to the Sun-Times building, Miner decided to work from home. And, during the first two years, he was openly critical of many of Wrapports' actions.
But not long after the photographers were fired, he became a lot less critical, justifying some of the company's controversial moves. He wasn't enthusiastic about it, but he didn't sound like he was writing it through gritted teeth, either. More like with quiet resignation. This is actually the first time in a while Miner used such strong words to describe the parent company. I wouldn't be surprised if Ferro ordered to him to tone it down, and now that he isn't here...
Having said all that, I actually think Miner has a point. Sun-Times and the Reader do have distinct cultures, distinct language and worldview. I'm still not sure if they would really work together all that well.
In the comments, Hieggelke said that he wasn't trying to have the Sun-Times absorb the Reader. That, rather, he was suggesting a paper that was the sum of the best parts of both. But that's easier said that done. And, more importantly, I'm not sure that would really benefit either paper. Because Miner is right about one thing. The papers should have never been brought under the same corporate umbrella to begin with. The Reader was always the outsider, a place for voices that no one else would give a platform to, a place where long investigative articles and reviews sit side-by-side with more unusual and innovative pieces. Sun-Times is the of the Big Two - the smaller, scrappier of the two, but part of the Big Two nonetheless. It keeps doing what it does best in spite of everything fate throws at it, in spite of bad corporate decisions and cutbacks. It has grit, the tenacity.
To put it another way... If Chicago Sun-Times was a person, it would be a bus driver. It does the same thing over and over again, but it does it well. It knows the passengers, it knows the every little nook and cranny on the road. And rain or shine, it will keep doing its job, because there are people who need it.
Reader would be one of those bicyclists I see riding along Broadway Street. It knows the streets, and it has the routine, but it doesn't have to follow the same path. It may not always even bike - sometimes, it may walk, sometimes, it may take the bike on the train. It sees the parts of the city the bus driver doesn't see, but it also misses some things the bus driver notices in the daily life. It rides because it wants to, because it believes in what it's doing, and because it hopes that, in its own way, it can make a bit of a difference.
There are overlaps, sure, but fundamentally, they are different creatures. And I think that, just as Chicago would be lose something if it loses the Bright One, it would also lose something if it loses the Reader. And I'm not convinced that any fusion of it would replace it.
Finally, because no follow-up post would be complete without a little boasting, I should mention that Hieggelke put up my post on his Facebook page. Where it got some likes. And, if nothing else, it's always nice to get some praise from people you write about.
A thoughtful response to my article.
Posted by Brian Hieggelke on Friday, February 12, 2016
The State of the Chicago Sun-Times
Crain's Chicago Business interviewed Bruce Sagan, one of Wrapports investors and owner of Hyde Park Herald. As you may recall, he wound up being a chair of the newly formed Sun-Times Holdings company after Wrapports head Michael Ferro became Tribune Publishing's largest shareholder. He said that he his focus was keeping Chicago Sun-Times viable, which is encouraging, but which is easier said than done. He acknowledged that the paper wasn't profitable, but he said that it was in a better financial shape than it was five years ago. Which, sadly, makes sense, considering all of the people who were either fired, took buyouts or quit (to say nothing of the fact that, with severely reduced art coverage and most of the Sun-Times Media newspapers sold, the company has way freelancers to pay for).
Sagan also pointed out that, unlike Tribune, Sun-Times has no debt. As you may recall, when Tribune Company was split into Tribune Media and Tribune Publishing, the later got all of the company's debt, because the company was owned by its creditors, and they could get away with that sort of thing. But that doesn't necessarily mean Sun-Times is in the better shape. After all, Tribune is making profit - though it's maintaining that profit through cuts - while Sun-Times, well, doesn't.
And finally, while Sagan mentioned that the Chicago Sun-Times website is getting a badly needed revamp, Sun-Times Network isn't going away. He doesn't have a say in that, because the Network is apparently a separate corporate entity. Which does raise a rather distressing possibility. As I've written before, accounts strongly suggest that the Network is a money drain, and that Wrapports may have been using revenues from other parts of the company to prop it up. Does the new corporate structure effect how the money is distributed? Because, if those claims are true, Chicago Sun-Times may be stuck with a Sun-Times Network albatross around its neck, undercutting anything Sagan might do to put the paper on better footing.
Having said all that, I should mention that Ferro's departure from Chicago Sun-Times in one way. Back on Wednesday, it published a strongly worded editorial criticizing Gov. Bruce Rauner. Rauner, as you may recall, was a Wrapports investor before he ran for governor. During the election, the normally liberal paper endorsed him, and longtime state governemnt reporter Dave McKinney was suspended for a week after writing an unflattering article about him. And even if you ignore all that... While the Sun-Times Editorial Board hasn't been quite as nice to Rauner as its Tribune counterpart, it hasn't criticized him like that, either.
The message here is unmistakable.
Tribune Publishing Offers Buyouts to Pioneer Press Staffers
Back around Tuesday, I got strong indications that Tribune Publishing are preparing to fire some Pioneer Press staffers. The company previously offered buyouts to staff members from its daily newspapers, but this was the first time they would do anything with Pioneer Press.
As it turned out, the company offered buyouts rather than outright firing people. And the offer extended to all of the union employees represented by the Chicago News Guild, which, in addition to Pioneer Press editorial staff, includes staff members of Lake County News-Sun and Northwest Indiana Post-Tribune. When Trib bought the ex-STM newspapers, it agreed to honor existing union contracts (though, apparently, they are not terribly happy with the situation. Chicago Tribune is notorious for disliking unions, and according to one Pioneer Press staffer, the company is very keen to keep all that union stuff "contained.")
I suppose buyouts are better than firings, because this means that jobs of staff writers and editors I know aren't necessarily in danger. On the other hand, if not enough employees take the buyouts, Trib may start firing people anyway, so...
Now, you may wonder - why on Earth is it trying to reduce staff when it's about to relaunch a newspaper? Or, for that matter, why does this come less than a week after it got $44 million from Ferro? Well, remember the bit about how it was planning to use the money for acquisition? Politico Media reports that the company really, really wants to buy two major California newspapers - the money-losing but widely circulating Orange County Register and its profitable sister paper, the Riverside Press-Enterprise - as part of CEO's Jack Griffin's strategy to consolidate control over major newspapers in the regions where the company has presence. That seems to be what all of the money is for. There's no guarantee that it would work - Tribune Publishing is just one of the several bidders. Bringing Ferro on board and ending dividend payments caused the stock prices to plummet. So it could well be that the company wants to free up a bit more money, just in case.
On one hand, I think it would be interesting to see what happens if the bid fails. On the other hand, even if does fail, I don't think Tribune would withdraw buyout offers. After all, cutting staff would reduce its expenses either way.
Chicago Reader Responds to Newcity Publisher's Ideas for Saving Chicago Sun-Times
In my last post, I wrote about Newcity publisher Brian Hieggelke's ideas for saving the Bright One. And one of those ideas is merging it with the Reader.
Michael Miner, the paper's media reporter and one of its most senior contributors, was not amused.
The problem with this is that the Reader no more considers the Sun-Times the "mothership" than Latvia did the Soviet Union. We'd be about as digestible as the Letts were. The editorial staff's response to life in Ferro's corporate sphere of influence was to organize as a unit of the Chicago Newspaper Guild and parent Communication Workers of America. This step was taken on behalf of the staff's jobs, values, and dignity-unionization had never been seriously considered during the 40 years of the Reader's independent existence.
Hieggelke has been around the block too many times to assume there's any particular comity between the Reader and the investment group that now owns us. But when he proposes a merger he sounds naïve. It would happen under duress, and it would install at the Sun-Times a hive of seething irredentists.
And if that didn't get across his point clear enough, the image he chose to use to illustrate the article certainly did.
Which, I have to say, is the kind of classic Reader touch we don't see all that often these days.
To be fair, it should be noted that Miner really, really doesn't like Sun-Times. He was very vocally unhappy about the news that Wrapports was buying the paper. When the staff moved to the Sun-Times building, Miner decided to work from home. And, during the first two years, he was openly critical of many of Wrapports' actions.
But not long after the photographers were fired, he became a lot less critical, justifying some of the company's controversial moves. He wasn't enthusiastic about it, but he didn't sound like he was writing it through gritted teeth, either. More like with quiet resignation. This is actually the first time in a while Miner used such strong words to describe the parent company. I wouldn't be surprised if Ferro ordered to him to tone it down, and now that he isn't here...
Having said all that, I actually think Miner has a point. Sun-Times and the Reader do have distinct cultures, distinct language and worldview. I'm still not sure if they would really work together all that well.
In the comments, Hieggelke said that he wasn't trying to have the Sun-Times absorb the Reader. That, rather, he was suggesting a paper that was the sum of the best parts of both. But that's easier said that done. And, more importantly, I'm not sure that would really benefit either paper. Because Miner is right about one thing. The papers should have never been brought under the same corporate umbrella to begin with. The Reader was always the outsider, a place for voices that no one else would give a platform to, a place where long investigative articles and reviews sit side-by-side with more unusual and innovative pieces. Sun-Times is the of the Big Two - the smaller, scrappier of the two, but part of the Big Two nonetheless. It keeps doing what it does best in spite of everything fate throws at it, in spite of bad corporate decisions and cutbacks. It has grit, the tenacity.
To put it another way... If Chicago Sun-Times was a person, it would be a bus driver. It does the same thing over and over again, but it does it well. It knows the passengers, it knows the every little nook and cranny on the road. And rain or shine, it will keep doing its job, because there are people who need it.
Reader would be one of those bicyclists I see riding along Broadway Street. It knows the streets, and it has the routine, but it doesn't have to follow the same path. It may not always even bike - sometimes, it may walk, sometimes, it may take the bike on the train. It sees the parts of the city the bus driver doesn't see, but it also misses some things the bus driver notices in the daily life. It rides because it wants to, because it believes in what it's doing, and because it hopes that, in its own way, it can make a bit of a difference.
There are overlaps, sure, but fundamentally, they are different creatures. And I think that, just as Chicago would be lose something if it loses the Bright One, it would also lose something if it loses the Reader. And I'm not convinced that any fusion of it would replace it.
Finally, because no follow-up post would be complete without a little boasting, I should mention that Hieggelke put up my post on his Facebook page. Where it got some likes. And, if nothing else, it's always nice to get some praise from people you write about.
A thoughtful response to my article.
Posted by Brian Hieggelke on Friday, February 12, 2016