Sunday night I was leafing through my Sunday Journal and on one of the inside front section pages an ad jumps out at me with a picture of a former colleague who I know just left the paper.
The 1/4-page ad quotes the reporter and encourages readers to check out her writing in the paper.
Here's the quote: "It's become more important than ever for professional journalists to provide the public with accurate and objective news."
That's true, but for her own preservation she has taken another job, out of newspapers, as of last Monday. So if readers want to check out her writing they will have to go to the archives.
Someone needs to send a memo to the centralized copy desk and keep them up to date on the personnel changes.
I wish her nothing but the best, she was one of the best writers at the paper and also one of the hardest workers. A huge loss for the paper.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Not surprising. I still see ads for sections and features long gone. I suspect that the elimination of a marketing department means even more stuff like this.
Nothing surprises me. Call a phone number of any newsroom employee who is long-gone. Most voice mail messages give no indication that the employee no longer works there. I don't know how readers contact anyone there these days.
I've been gone nearly a year. You can dial my extension and still get my lovely voice. I really don't want to be associated with the paper any longer, so I wish they'd fix the problem.
They call the Circulation Department. What's left of it now.
Gone nearly a year and still calling your old extension? You might want to take up a hobby or two. But seriously, I understand. I've commented here before that I am flabbergasted by the FJ's badly outdated online contact area for reporters and other staff. Last time I glanced at it, the names and numbers of many folks who left long ago were still listed. How can a paper that supposedly values accuracy explain and justify such a mess? And what's so strange is that it would take someone only an hour or so to update. Almost as if FJ management wants it to look like the news staff is much larger than it is. That or the paper is trying to sow confusion for some other ignoble reason. Hmmmmm. Anyone have conspiracy hound Jessie Ventura's number? It would be poetic justice if the person using the contact page to phone in what would be that first FJ Pulitzer Prize-winning tip instead gave up in frustration after not being able to reach a current reporter. Oh well, a Kwame Sutra Pulitzer hasn't seemed to help the Freep's fortunes much.
I'd bet the designer who stuck that house ad in there very well knew the reporter had quit. That's exactly the kind of thing I would take great pleasure in. =)
Wow! I just called a whole bunch of numbers of reporters who were let go from The Journal, some as many as two years ago and the messages are still there: "I'm away from my desk, please leave a message and I will get back to you as soon as possible." Seriously? How in the world can you trust a news organization to get anything right when they can't even get the phone system right? How many stories are missed? How many messages go unreturned? Does anybody care? Course why would you care when you get paid little more than a Burger King manager. Time to shut it down folks. Move to the internet, give up the ghost...that's what it is, a ghost of a paper.
I've been critical of the FJ's way outdated online staff contacts page. For months on end, the page contained the names and contact information of reporters and editors who left during the LBJ administration (exaggeration for effect). Well, I glanced at the page over the weekend and it appears that someone finally took the hour or so required to update the page (read, delete all of the laid-off and fired reporters and editors). Now, I don't know about the phone extensions. My bet is they're still incorrect and out of date. Anyone care to post a status here on that issue?
Post a Comment