FishbowlDC TVNewser TVSpy LostRemote AgencySpy PRNewser GalleyCat SocialTimes

Posts Tagged ‘Arthur Sulzberger Jr’

NY Times’ Sulzberger: Cuts are ‘Painful’

During a talk at NYU, Arthur Sulzberger Jr. — the New York Times’ publisher — told the audience that the layoffs and buyouts currently making their way through the paper are “painful.”

Early last month, the Times announced it would be reducing its newsroom by 100, via either buyouts or layoffs. In a note explaining the plan, Sulzberger and CEO Mark Thompson stated, “We know that they will be painful both for the individuals affected and for their colleagues.”

As Capital New York reports, Sulzberger went back to that “painful” description again during his NYU talk. ”We have more journalists today than we’ve ever had in our history,” said Sulzberger. “The skills necessary to succeed in this world are truly changing, and that’s not necessarily age-related. This is not to suggest going through these cycles is not painful. It is.”

We imagine 100 Times staffers agree.

Mediabistro Course

Middle Grade Novel Writing

Middle Grade Novel WritingStarting January 15, work with a literary agent to write your middle-grade novel! In this course, you'll learn how to develop strong characters, write compelling dialogue, master the art of revision, and market your work to publishing houses and agents. Register now!

Morning Media Newsfeed: NYT Cuts Staff, NYT Opinion | Jeter Launches ‘Players’ Tribune’

Click here to receive Mediabistro’s Morning Media Newsfeed via email.

NYT to Cut 100 Newsroom Jobs, Shutter NYT Opinion (FishbowlNY)
Wednesday was not a good day for many New York Times staffers. The paper cut a whopping 100 people from its newsroom. The last time the Times let go of this many people was in 2009. NYT Arthur Sulzberger Jr., the newspaper’s publisher, and Mark Thompson, its chief executive, said that in addition to the job cuts, NYT Opinion, a new mobile app dedicated to opinion content, was shutting down because it was not attracting enough subscribers. HuffPost The Times said it would seek to eliminate roughly 100 jobs in the newsroom through either buyouts or layoffs. Additional reductions are expected in the editorial and business departments. The cuts have been widely expected for weeks. The paper’s own report on the changes noted that the newsroom will lose around 7.5 percent of its employees. That still leaves it with one of the biggest in the industry. Politico / Dylan Byers on Media The Times has already eliminated at least 230 newsroom positions since 2008, even as it continues to staff up on the digital and development side. The new cutbacks should leave the Times with roughly 1,200 newsroom staff. New York Post The cuts appear aimed at getting more senior staffers to exit. Employees covered by the Newspaper Guild will receive three weeks of salary for each year worked, capped at a maximum of two times annual salary, according to Baquet’s memo. In addition, the Times is offering a cash payout of 35 percent of total severance to staffers who have been at the company 20 years or more.

Read more

NY Times Names Arthur Gregg Sulzberger Editor for Strategy

The New York Times has named Arthur Gregg Sulzberger — son of publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. — its senior editor for strategy. Sulzberger, widely believed to be an eventual successor to his father, has been with the paper since 2009.

Per a memo from Dean Baquet — the Times’ executive editor —  in his new role, Sulzberger will “aggressively search for the trends and developments in the industry — from the way people read us as they bounce from mobile to print, to the most Timesian way of finding and grooming a new and bigger audience.”

You can read the full note from Baquet below.

Read more

Dean Baquet: ‘I Never Said to Anyone It’s Me or Jill’

We hope you’re not tired of the Jill Abramson/New York Times drama, because it appears that Dean Baquet — the new executive editor of the paper — isn’t. He gave a long interview with NPR, and touched on several storylines that have been floating around.

Baquet denied the rumor that he had told Arthur Sulzberger Jr. he needed to fire Abramson or he would walk. ”I never said to anyone it’s me or Jill,” he told NPR. “I think that’s a simplistic calculation. I don’t think there’s any question that I made it known that I was a little unhappy.”

As for that unhappiness, Baquet confirmed that he was upset Abramson wanted to hire The Guardian’s Janine Gibson as a co-managing editor. He also poured more fuel on the narrative that Abramson wasn’t well liked in the newsroom:

Read more

David Carr Gives His Take on Jill Abramson Drama

DavidCarrHeadshotAlmost everyone has weighed in on the drama behind the New York Times’ unceremonious firing of its executive editor, Jill Abramson. The latest? David Carr, the Times’ media columnist.

In his latest piece, Carr wrote that Abramson’s firing was handled horribly (“The lack of decorum was stunning”), but that Arthur Sulzberger Jr. — the Times’ publisher — had valid reasons for letting her go. “I like Jill and the version of the Times she made,” wrote Carr. “But my reporting, including interviews with senior people in the newsroom, some of them women, backs up his conclusion.” Carr also gets some female Times staffers to say that they’re worried about their path at the paper after Abramson was cut so brutally.

Of course, all the sources in Carr’s piece are anonymous, so that doesn’t help much. Also, Carr states that Abramson was going to “fight her way out” and “inflict some damage on its [the Times] publisher,” but then doesn’t provide a single example of that happening.

No doubt there will be many more takes on this mess, but here’s ours: Everyone loses. Abramson loses because she produced a fantastic verison of the Times and was unceremoniously fired. Sulzberger loses because he acted like a child by publicly bashing Abramson. And the Times loses because this is a drama better fitted for a high school paper, not the paper of record.

New York Times Publisher Takes Media to Task for Abramson Coverage

new-york-times-logoThe spiraling debate and speculative coverage of Jill Abramson‘s departure from the New York Times as a pay-inequality issue finally became too much for her boss to bear. This afternoon, New York Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. categorically denied the notion that Abramson was paid less than her male predecessors.

He then went on, very candidly, to outline why Abramson was let go. Here’s the full statement, sent to FishbowlNY:

Perhaps the saddest outcome of my decision to replace Jill Abramson as executive editor of the New York Times is that it has been cast by many as an example of the unequal treatment of women in the workplace. Rather than accepting that this was a situation involving a specific individual who, as we all do, has strengths and weaknesses, a shallow and factually incorrect storyline has emerged.

Fueling this have been persistent but incorrect reports that Jill’s compensation package was not comparable with her predecessor’s. This is untrue. Jill’s pay package was comparable with Bill Keller’s; in fact, by her last full year as executive editor, it was more than 10% higher than his.

Read more

Guardian U.S. EIC at Center of Jill Abramson Dismissal

Talk about being an innocent and yet momentous bystander.

JanineGibsonTwitterProfilePicPer an article by David Carr and Ravi Somaiya, the final straw with regards to alleged tensions in the New York Times newsroom triangulated new executive editor Dean Baquet, predecessor Jill Abramson and Guardian U.S. editor-in-chief Janine Gibson (pictured). From their piece:

In recent weeks, these people said, Mr. Baquet had become angered over a decision by Ms. Abramson to make a job offer to a senior editor from The Guardian, Janine Gibson, and install her alongside him in a co-managing editor position without consulting him. It escalated the conflict between them and rose to the attention of Mr. Sulzberger.

Read more

Deconstructing Jill Abramson’s Sudden Departure

new-york-times-logoHere’s the first of what will be many bits of anecdotal evidence submitted in an effort to decipher the abrupt exit of New York Times executive editor Jill Abramson. It comes from a New Yorker item by Ken Auletta:

Several weeks ago, I’m told, Abramson discovered that her pay and her pension benefits as both executive editor and, before that, as managing editor were considerably less than the pay and pension benefits of Bill Keller, the male editor whom she replaced in both jobs.

“She confronted the top brass,” one close associate said, and this may have fed into the management’s narrative that she was “pushy,” a characterization that, for many, has an inescapably gendered aspect.

Another source however told Auletta that the salary gap had been closed,* leaving only a pension disparity tied to the pair’s differing lengths of NYT service.

Read more

Arthur Sulzberger Jr. and Mark Thompson Talk Advertising and Family Legacy at the Times

arthur sulzberger

Arthur Sulzberger Jr., chairman of the The New York Times, surveyed a restaurant full of media elites yesterday and declared that his family would never sell the Times. The Ochs-Sulzberger clan has owned the newspaper since 1896 and has a trust mechanism in place to ensure that the publication can’t be sold unless every single family member agrees, according to Sulzberger.

“The family is united around its ownership and its responsibility to maintaining The New York Times and its journalism and its journalistic integrity,” he told interviewer and former Times media reporter Alex S. Jones at the Bryant Park Grill.

Read more

Thomas Middelhoff to Leave NY Times Board

Thomas Middelhoff GThomas Middelhoff, the former head of German media giant Bertelsmann, is stepping down from his spot on The New York Times Company’s board. Middelhoff has been on the Times’ board since 2003.

“Thomas has served with great distinction as an outstanding director of The New York Times Company for over a decade,” said Arthur Sulzberger Jr., chairman of the Times company and publisher of the Times, in a statement. “While I regret that he will not seek re-election, I am immensely grateful for his years of service, his advice and counsel, and his dedication in helping to steer the Times through a transformative period. We will all miss him.”

The Times said that all of its other directors — 13 in all — intend to seek re-election.

NEXT PAGE >>