Blog Post

Gannett To Slash More Than 3,000 Jobs Across Local Papers

imageA day after Tribune’s Los Angeles Times swung the job axe, Gannett (NYSE: GCI) has announced plans to lay off more than 3,000 employees at its local papers, Reuters reports. This is Gannett’s second big round of job cuts; in August, it said it was eliminating 1,000 positions, with 600 staffers being let go. The layoffs will hit 80 local Gannett dailies.

In a memo to staff, Gannett newspaper division president Robert Dickey attributed the cuts to the economic downturn and continued difficulty attracting ad sales at the local papers. The company just released another in a string of dismal newspaper earnings reports, as Q3 total operating revenues slid 8.9 percent to $1.64 billion and net income dropped 32 percent to $158 million. At Gannett’s board meeting Thursday, it may decide to cut its dividend to free up more capital.

Marketwatch: The newspaper industry has shed a staggering 12,000 jobs this year. And while newspaper ranks have thinned considerably over the years, this current bloodletting shows no signs of hitting bottom.

2 Responses to “Gannett To Slash More Than 3,000 Jobs Across Local Papers”

  1. Manuel L. Ponte

    Years ago, I wrote to Gannett and pointed out that the time had come for the company to realize that the U. S. is becoming a nation of minorities to whom the communications industry should cater instead of relying on the costly products directed solely to the large English-language printed-word markets. I even used the Portuguese proverb "Dos poucos se fazem os muitos" to illustate my point. The company should, therefore, take that factor into consideration as it added to – or eliminated – certain of its products. It should even consider the possibilities of teaming up – or buying – small radio stations that could cater to those minorities in certain population centers (St. Louis, for example, has a large Bosnian and Spanish-speking populations that could stand some advertising, news, entertainment, etc.). Many of those groups have considerable unpaid talent available in order to sustain minority-oriented channels at a profit to the channels' owners.

    My suggestion, in spite of being backed by factual information, probably ended up in somebody's waste basket. Well, the time has come to retrieve it.


    Manuel L. Ponte, St. Louis, Missouri