Deep cuts at CBS-owned stations
Cory Bergman April 1st, 2008
Dozens of employees have been cut at CBS owned-and-operated stations across the country: 30 at WBZ, 17 at WBBM (”the most dramatic single-day newsroom purge in Chicago TV history”) and 14 at KPIX. The staffing reductions swept across all departments, even the web in Boston. “We have to rethink how we do business,” said WBBM President and GM Joe Ahern. “We’re not unique in the economic environments we’re all involved in.”
I’m afraid this is just the beginning, folks. While local TV is a very profitable business and certainly not threatened like the newspaper industry, declining audiences and a softening economy will bring tough times in the months and years ahead. More than ever, it’s critical for stations to do their best to protect and grow their online initiatives — a tall order when fighting tooth and nail for every rating and share point with fewer resources.
12 Comments Add your own
1. SMB | April 1st, 2008 at 11:52 am
Cory - do you think those of us in digital media are largely immune from cuts like these?
They seem to be affecting the core of the “old” media (meaning high-paid anchors, and producers dedicated to only one thing) and I haven’t seen any web producers or sales people on any of the lists of positions eliminated.
Just curious on your opinion…
2. Z | April 1st, 2008 at 12:55 pm
WBZ let go at least one Web person, so I certainly doubt we’re. immune. Plus, since there’s usually few in any newsroom, a single person laid off is a sizeable proportion of the department.
3. JT | April 1st, 2008 at 1:05 pm
SMB - I know you asked Cory, but I’ll chime in with my take.
It all depends on the strength of your online business plan.
You have to figure out the balance between what should be done with your site - which we all talk about all the time on Lost Remote - and the resources & revenue to make it happen.
A site that gets a lot of page views or impressions may not be as successful when it comes to profit margin and revenue generation.
There are site platforms out there designed to generate a profit with a very small web staff. Granted, it may not be a high quality site, but if it makes more money it has a more successful business plan.
While we’re all pushing the envelope on content and site development and interactivity, we have to be aware of profitability.
Obviously the web is becoming more and more important in the newsroom - as it should - but just because your TV news is in the top 50 markets, that does not mean your web site produces top-50 market revenue.
Your extra web producer may cost the station between $50-70K or more after salary, health insurance, social security, etc. Maybe that money can be better utilized on a more automated web platform - or even another news reporter or equipment.
I think its a question that requires a very individual answer from every news station out there.
What about the efforts of Google and Yahoo! to post AP content and pull your stories from your site through rss feeds, etc?
Its not just the “old” media getting cut. That doesn’t mean online staffs are on the chopping block, but it does mean web producers need to be more aware of the contraints that the newsroom is under.
Of course, that’s just my take. I’d be interested to hear what anyone else thinks.
4. tdc | April 1st, 2008 at 1:39 pm
the one anchor they dumped was being paid like a CEO-
$2,000,000 per year on a five-year contract.
i’d like to see ANY affiliate make that sort of committment to the web.
5. tdc | April 1st, 2008 at 2:16 pm
btw- one blogger from each state will be seated at the democratic convention in denver.
found the story on thedenverchannel.
might be worth a look.
6. MinneyNews | April 1st, 2008 at 3:36 pm
No one is immune - WBZ lost 2 web people - KCBS lost one (sales). While we all know that online is the future - our stations all live in the present and they need to get through 2008.
7. anonymous | April 1st, 2008 at 6:47 pm
I am in a small market and we are actually ADDING 2 full time positions to our newsroom as we speak. 1 will be a management/web only position and the other a new anchor.
8. Anonymous | April 1st, 2008 at 8:34 pm
Anyone know of what kinds of cuts they may have done at KOVR?
9. Anonymous | April 2nd, 2008 at 9:25 am
O & Os are the biggest losers in this. Next come station groups.
Want relative stability folks…. jump about the little guys that are locally owned and operated. There are only about 5 in the country. You’ll never get rich, but you’ll have a job.
Good luck
10. Jeremiah | April 3rd, 2008 at 9:39 am
One thing local news outfits could try is producing some actual NEWS once in a while, versus running VNR’s, reciting PR scripts, live coverage of someone buying a home (Hello, KCRA?!?), and goo-goo-gaa-gaa deference toward authority figures.
Another gimmick they can deep-six is uber-super local sports coverage, where they run teams/stats as if it were NFL week. While fun for coaches and parents of athletes, that time could be better used to discuss, I dunno, the presence of pharmaceuticals in our drinking water.
11. Anonymous | April 5th, 2008 at 11:23 pm
It’s all pretty stupid in the long run. Check back in December.
12. Anonymous | April 5th, 2008 at 11:24 pm
PS is this the stunt de jour?
Leave a Comment
(Please keep URLs out of the comment body or the spam filter will block you.)Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed