A lot of Guild members are asking questions, which, of course is what media folks do best,about The News Project – the innovative Bay Area newsgathering collaboration funded by Warren Hellman.
They’re wondering whether the new news organization will lead to, or hasten, the demise of the San Francisco Chronicle. They’re asking whether the Bay Area needs another newsgathering outfit when the ones that are here are struggling. And some are asking why the Guild would be involved in such an effort.
Many, it should be noted, are also sending their resumes.
But first, a little background. The News Project, and the Guild's involvement, started with a threat. On Feb.24, Chronicle publisher Frank Vega stood in front of employees and announced that unless the unions bargained significant concessions, the paper would be sold – or closed. And even if they did their part (again) to help save the Chronicle, it still might be sold.
That threat sent the Guild to the bargaining table. But it angered a lot of
people. When some of our members asked how they could help, we assigned a couple of them to contact community leaders and ask for support if the paper were shuttered. We also asked if any of those leaders might be interested in buying the Chronicle if it were put on the block.
Those contacts led to meetings, which led to studies, which led to plans, many of which were abandoned or modified, and eventually led to Thursday’s announcement of the new non-profit news organization, which will produce news for multiple platforms, possibly including a regional edition of the New York Times.
The Guild got involved for a lot of reasons. We didn’t want San Francisco to be left without a journalistically strong newsgathering operation. We didn’t want even more of our members to have to give up their professional careers. And we wanted somebody to try something bold, truly new, and journalistically strong.
The News Project promises that, though many, many details are still forthcoming.
Now for those other questions. Will the new organization accelerate The Chronicle’s demise? Well, that’s up to the Chronicle, and the Hearst Corp. My hope -- as both a Chronicle staffer and a Guild official –- is that it will actually do the opposite, that it will prompt the Chronicle to improve its journalism just as it recently improved its printing – or at least stop gutting its news staff.
I’d like to think that Hearst has some fight in it, and will step up to the challenge.
Will competition renew public interest in journalism? It’s possible. More competition will lead to better news coverage, and better products, be they online, on the air, or in print, that could lure more advertising and the kinds of demographics that attract advertisers. As less gets covered, there’s less reason to read,subscribe to, or advertise in, newspapers.
The News Project will also create more journalism jobs, allowing some of the incredibly talented folks who have been pushed out of Bay Area newsrooms to get back in the business. It may not be a lot of jobs, but it will be a significant number, and it's likely to grow.
Finally, some folks have asked why the Guild would support the creation of a competitor. Well, we’ve always represented (and supported) competitors to the Chronicle: the (Hearst) Examiner, the Oakland Tribune, the San Jose Mercury News, the former ANG papers.
As new models for journalism are developed, we want to make sure they involve quality journalism – and decent wages and benefits. Many of the new journalism experiments count on people giving away their work for free or for very little compensation. We think journalists and other mediaworkers, not to mention our readers, deserve better.
We want the news industry to thrive – not surrender -- and we want it to be union.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Friday, June 19, 2009
Tough times in Guild land
The mood here at the 74th annual convention of The Newspaper Guild in Washington, D.C., is, as you might imagine, rather stressed and somewhat somber. I'm here with local rep Carl T. Hall and local vice president Silvia Barden, and 107 other union activists from 38 Guild locals across the country.
Everyone seems tired and frustrated -- of bargaining pay cuts, furloughs and saying goodbye to the endless stream of talented newspaper workers our employers are shoving out the door. We're sharing our experiences in hopes of helping each other survive this firestorm. And were all hoping, of course, to find some glimmer of hope amid the gloom.
I spent about four hours Friday afternoon on two panels recounting and, unfortunately, reliving, the events that started with Frank Vega's Feb. 24 threat to close the newspaper, and will end, well, sometime at the end of the summer, when the last of the people laid off in this most recent brutal round of job cuts walk out the doors of 901 Mission Street.
As painful as it was to recount those agonizing days at the bargaining table, and waiting for the layoff axe to fall, it made me realize that it was time to blog again. Frankly, I'd been avoiding it since February because I was burnt out, bummed out and couldn't think of much worth writing.
The panel was called "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly of Concessionary Bargaining," and I realized that there were indeed good things that came out of our lousy agreement to amend the contract.
-- We saved the San Francisco Chronicle from being shut down or sold.
-- We reduced the number of job losses.
-- We ensured that everyone who left the paper, voluntarily or involuntarily, got some severance pay and health coverage.
-- We preserved hundreds of newspaper jobs with decent pay and benefits.
Those accomplishments, of course, came at a steep price, including the loss of seniority protections, something that cost many talented Chronicle staffers their jobs. And the concessions will make it tougher for those of us who remain.
But we did what union members do best. We made a difficult decision in the best interest of the majority of our Guild colleagues. I'm proud of that decision, and proud of our members at the Chronicle, as well as those at the Sacramento and Modesto Bees, who made similar sacrifices.
The Guild convention continues Saturday, and much of the focus will be on discussing ways we can move forward. The emphasis is on preserving -- or creating -- decent jobs for journalists, regardless of whether the stories appear in print, online or on cell phones or other gadgets.
As Guild President Bernie Lunzer said during his opening speech: "The future of news is in the frontline worker."
Everyone seems tired and frustrated -- of bargaining pay cuts, furloughs and saying goodbye to the endless stream of talented newspaper workers our employers are shoving out the door. We're sharing our experiences in hopes of helping each other survive this firestorm. And were all hoping, of course, to find some glimmer of hope amid the gloom.
I spent about four hours Friday afternoon on two panels recounting and, unfortunately, reliving, the events that started with Frank Vega's Feb. 24 threat to close the newspaper, and will end, well, sometime at the end of the summer, when the last of the people laid off in this most recent brutal round of job cuts walk out the doors of 901 Mission Street.
As painful as it was to recount those agonizing days at the bargaining table, and waiting for the layoff axe to fall, it made me realize that it was time to blog again. Frankly, I'd been avoiding it since February because I was burnt out, bummed out and couldn't think of much worth writing.
The panel was called "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly of Concessionary Bargaining," and I realized that there were indeed good things that came out of our lousy agreement to amend the contract.
-- We saved the San Francisco Chronicle from being shut down or sold.
-- We reduced the number of job losses.
-- We ensured that everyone who left the paper, voluntarily or involuntarily, got some severance pay and health coverage.
-- We preserved hundreds of newspaper jobs with decent pay and benefits.
Those accomplishments, of course, came at a steep price, including the loss of seniority protections, something that cost many talented Chronicle staffers their jobs. And the concessions will make it tougher for those of us who remain.
But we did what union members do best. We made a difficult decision in the best interest of the majority of our Guild colleagues. I'm proud of that decision, and proud of our members at the Chronicle, as well as those at the Sacramento and Modesto Bees, who made similar sacrifices.
The Guild convention continues Saturday, and much of the focus will be on discussing ways we can move forward. The emphasis is on preserving -- or creating -- decent jobs for journalists, regardless of whether the stories appear in print, online or on cell phones or other gadgets.
As Guild President Bernie Lunzer said during his opening speech: "The future of news is in the frontline worker."
Monday, January 12, 2009
Fighting for the future
Twenty-eight hours is a long time to spend sitting on your butt in a cool hotel meeting room with bad acoustics.
But it was worth it. Leaders from The Newspaper Guild and the broadcasting and printing sectors of the Communications Workers of America met in wintry Baltimore for three long days of meetings to come up with ways to protect jobs and help save the news industry.
"It's really tough right now, and there's a lot of despair," said Guild President Bernie Lunzer. But we think if we work together, we can kill the despair with hope."
No, we didn't come up with a magical solution -- I wish we did-- but we did take several forward-looking steps. They include:
-- Establishing a task force to develop skills training programs for members.
-- Exploring non-traditional ownership arrangements -- including non-profit arrangements, employee stock option plans, public financial support, startups and hybrid models that combine traditional ownership and alternative approaches.
-- Launching community campaigns promoting the importance of journalism and newspapers.
-- Bargaining contract language that protects jobs.
-- Establishing cooperative relationships with management to find mutually beneficial solutions to make newspapers work.
Our new, merged California Media Workers Guild was well-represented with Media News mobilizers Carl Hall and Sara Steffens joining me, along with soon-departing Luther Jackson, former administrative officer of the San Jose Newspaper Guild, and Gloria LaRiva, head of our typographical sector. We were among 150 leaders from media unions in the U.S., Puerto Rico and Canada.
I can only speak for myself, of course, but I left feeling tired and a bit hopeful. There's a lot of work ahead if we're going to try to save newspapers from themselves (And we'll need your help). But it feels good to be doing something other than whining, moping and cursing our owners -- and something more innovative than laying people off.
Now, it's time for me to get some sleep.
But it was worth it. Leaders from The Newspaper Guild and the broadcasting and printing sectors of the Communications Workers of America met in wintry Baltimore for three long days of meetings to come up with ways to protect jobs and help save the news industry.
"It's really tough right now, and there's a lot of despair," said Guild President Bernie Lunzer. But we think if we work together, we can kill the despair with hope."
No, we didn't come up with a magical solution -- I wish we did-- but we did take several forward-looking steps. They include:
-- Establishing a task force to develop skills training programs for members.
-- Exploring non-traditional ownership arrangements -- including non-profit arrangements, employee stock option plans, public financial support, startups and hybrid models that combine traditional ownership and alternative approaches.
-- Launching community campaigns promoting the importance of journalism and newspapers.
-- Bargaining contract language that protects jobs.
-- Establishing cooperative relationships with management to find mutually beneficial solutions to make newspapers work.
Our new, merged California Media Workers Guild was well-represented with Media News mobilizers Carl Hall and Sara Steffens joining me, along with soon-departing Luther Jackson, former administrative officer of the San Jose Newspaper Guild, and Gloria LaRiva, head of our typographical sector. We were among 150 leaders from media unions in the U.S., Puerto Rico and Canada.
I can only speak for myself, of course, but I left feeling tired and a bit hopeful. There's a lot of work ahead if we're going to try to save newspapers from themselves (And we'll need your help). But it feels good to be doing something other than whining, moping and cursing our owners -- and something more innovative than laying people off.
Now, it's time for me to get some sleep.
Thursday, November 27, 2008
Full of thanks
Thanksgiving and the holiday season it kicks off are a time to give thanks and appreciate friends and family. I'm in sunny Goleta, spending time with my family, and I'm thankful for that. But I wanted to take a couple of moments to say thanks to my union family.
And I really do consider it a family of sorts, though sometimes a dysfunctional one, like most families. We care about each other, we help each other, we fight for what's best for us. And we support each other, especially when times are tough, which they've certainly been lately.
There are endless numbers of examples, so I won't single anyone out. But thanks to all the Guild staff, officers and activists. Enjoy the turkey and, especially, the pie.
And I really do consider it a family of sorts, though sometimes a dysfunctional one, like most families. We care about each other, we help each other, we fight for what's best for us. And we support each other, especially when times are tough, which they've certainly been lately.
There are endless numbers of examples, so I won't single anyone out. But thanks to all the Guild staff, officers and activists. Enjoy the turkey and, especially, the pie.
Monday, November 24, 2008
Twisted logic from Forbes
Even journalists, well-known for our mathematical inabilities, can figure out this word problem. Let's say you have $1,000 you're saving for a new laptop. It gets stolen, leaving you with nothing. So you work a lot of overtime -- putting it down on your timecard (hint-hint). Your long hours and hard work pays off, and you earn $2,000. So, the question is: How much did you earn? The answer, of course, is $2,000.
But a writer from Forbes would disagree. In a recent article about The Newspaper Guild (check it out via the Media Workers website), James Erik Abels downplays the magnitude of the Bay Area News Group -- East Bay organizing campaign. In an interview, I laid out the history of the BANG campaign, starting with the Singleton purchase of the Contra Costa Newspapers and the subsequent decision to form BANG East Bay and withdraw its recognition of the Guild contract.
To Abels, that somehow means that the accomplishment of organizing BANG's 208 members wasn't as significant as it seems. To me, that doesn't make sense mathematically: We gained 208 members where we had zero.
But it also ignores that the Contra Costa Times was a long-time non-union (and anti-union) paper that unions had eyed for years. And that the organizing campaign was driven in large part by a desire to maintain journalistic quality. And that nobody in the newspaper industry (and especially at Media News) ever expected it to succeed.
Abels does quote me as saying that we're receiving a lot of organizing inquiries, though he doesn't mention my statement that it's because journalists are getting fed up with the steady decline in staffing and quality, and the failures of newspaper management to try any strategy other than slashing jobs. (Now there's a story for a good business magazine).
The gist of the article is that the Guild is struggling to survive. Being in a union has always meant struggling, and that's never been more true than in the past decade of a hostile National Labor Relations Board and Department of Labor. (Fortunately, that should change soon).
But we're not struggling to survive as a union (Cue the Gloria Gaynor music here). Sure, times are tough, and yes, we're losing members to layoffs. But we're organizing, we're adapting to changing times and techologies, we're exploring (and getting involved in) alternative ownership models, we're planning for our future.
Don't write The Newspaper Guild off just yet.
But a writer from Forbes would disagree. In a recent article about The Newspaper Guild (check it out via the Media Workers website), James Erik Abels downplays the magnitude of the Bay Area News Group -- East Bay organizing campaign. In an interview, I laid out the history of the BANG campaign, starting with the Singleton purchase of the Contra Costa Newspapers and the subsequent decision to form BANG East Bay and withdraw its recognition of the Guild contract.
To Abels, that somehow means that the accomplishment of organizing BANG's 208 members wasn't as significant as it seems. To me, that doesn't make sense mathematically: We gained 208 members where we had zero.
But it also ignores that the Contra Costa Times was a long-time non-union (and anti-union) paper that unions had eyed for years. And that the organizing campaign was driven in large part by a desire to maintain journalistic quality. And that nobody in the newspaper industry (and especially at Media News) ever expected it to succeed.
Abels does quote me as saying that we're receiving a lot of organizing inquiries, though he doesn't mention my statement that it's because journalists are getting fed up with the steady decline in staffing and quality, and the failures of newspaper management to try any strategy other than slashing jobs. (Now there's a story for a good business magazine).
The gist of the article is that the Guild is struggling to survive. Being in a union has always meant struggling, and that's never been more true than in the past decade of a hostile National Labor Relations Board and Department of Labor. (Fortunately, that should change soon).
But we're not struggling to survive as a union (Cue the Gloria Gaynor music here). Sure, times are tough, and yes, we're losing members to layoffs. But we're organizing, we're adapting to changing times and techologies, we're exploring (and getting involved in) alternative ownership models, we're planning for our future.
Don't write The Newspaper Guild off just yet.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
It's time to vote...
...but I'm not talking about the Presidential race.
By now, most of you have probably received ballots in the mail for the proposed merger of the Northern California Media Workers Guild (that's us) and the San Jose Newspaper Guild.
A lot of people have asked me today how they should vote on the proposal. I'm recommending a "yes" vote, and so has our Representative Assembly, the local's leadership. The San Jose local approved the merger on Friday. So, it's up to us.
Why vote "yes?" Put simply, there's strength in numbers and strength in unity. This merger will give us both. If it passes, all of the Bay Area's best newspapers will become part of the California Media Guild (our proposed new name) along with California's court interpreters (already part of our local). It will also make it easier for the Bay Area News Group--East Bay and the Mercury News to work together to get fair deals from Dean Singleton's MediaNews.
Please join me in voting YES on the Guild merger proposal.
(Questions? A merger agreement was included with the ballot, but more information is available on the local Web site. More questions? Shoot me an e-mail at CTUAN@aol.com or call me at 510-612-1027.)
In solidarity,
Michael Cabanatuan
President
Northern California Media Workers Guild
By now, most of you have probably received ballots in the mail for the proposed merger of the Northern California Media Workers Guild (that's us) and the San Jose Newspaper Guild.
A lot of people have asked me today how they should vote on the proposal. I'm recommending a "yes" vote, and so has our Representative Assembly, the local's leadership. The San Jose local approved the merger on Friday. So, it's up to us.
Why vote "yes?" Put simply, there's strength in numbers and strength in unity. This merger will give us both. If it passes, all of the Bay Area's best newspapers will become part of the California Media Guild (our proposed new name) along with California's court interpreters (already part of our local). It will also make it easier for the Bay Area News Group--East Bay and the Mercury News to work together to get fair deals from Dean Singleton's MediaNews.
Please join me in voting YES on the Guild merger proposal.
(Questions? A merger agreement was included with the ballot, but more information is available on the local Web site. More questions? Shoot me an e-mail at CTUAN@aol.com or call me at 510-612-1027.)
In solidarity,
Michael Cabanatuan
President
Northern California Media Workers Guild
Thursday, October 16, 2008
We're ba-ack...and so is Kathleen: with an important message
After a longer than planned summer break (Well, hey, it still feels like summer), it's time to knuckle down and get back to posting.
Our first post is a guest post (Yeah, we're easing our way back into this blogging thing) from esteemed Chronicle ex-unit chair and researcher extraordinaire Kathleen Rhodes. We miss you, Kathleen.
A Short Note from Kathleen Rhodes
Please vote NO on Proposition 8. Sometimes the political is personal. Proposition 8is an assault on my civil rights; it will eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry. The California Supreme Court this year pointed out that separate is not equal. Prop 8 is about fear, not about fact.
I have always believed in fairness and even if I were straight I would still be against Prop 8 – it is an attempt to write discriminatory language into the state constitution.
In my opinion, the people pushing Prop 8 are doing so out of both hate and fear. They are asking the voters of California to change the constitution to take away the right to marry from one group.
This proposition is not about the church-sanctioned marriage; it is about changing the state constitution to discriminate against gays and lesbian in committed relationships who want to marry. The proponents are trying to convince the people of California that they know what is best for everyone. These are the folks who want all of us to look, feel, and think like they do or else.
They are spending lots of money to impose their particular views on the rest of society.
Voting no on Proposition 8 continues California’s tradition of inclusion. We celebrate our diversity, proposition 8 is trying to destroy that.
This is supposed to be a short note, so I will stop now. Please feel free to get in touch with me if you have any questions on Prop 8. This hurtful and hateful initiative needs to be defeated. I am voting no on proposition 8. Please join me.
Thank you,
Kathleen Rhodes
rhodeskat@sbcglobal.net
Our first post is a guest post (Yeah, we're easing our way back into this blogging thing) from esteemed Chronicle ex-unit chair and researcher extraordinaire Kathleen Rhodes. We miss you, Kathleen.
A Short Note from Kathleen Rhodes
Please vote NO on Proposition 8. Sometimes the political is personal. Proposition 8is an assault on my civil rights; it will eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry. The California Supreme Court this year pointed out that separate is not equal. Prop 8 is about fear, not about fact.
I have always believed in fairness and even if I were straight I would still be against Prop 8 – it is an attempt to write discriminatory language into the state constitution.
In my opinion, the people pushing Prop 8 are doing so out of both hate and fear. They are asking the voters of California to change the constitution to take away the right to marry from one group.
This proposition is not about the church-sanctioned marriage; it is about changing the state constitution to discriminate against gays and lesbian in committed relationships who want to marry. The proponents are trying to convince the people of California that they know what is best for everyone. These are the folks who want all of us to look, feel, and think like they do or else.
They are spending lots of money to impose their particular views on the rest of society.
Voting no on Proposition 8 continues California’s tradition of inclusion. We celebrate our diversity, proposition 8 is trying to destroy that.
This is supposed to be a short note, so I will stop now. Please feel free to get in touch with me if you have any questions on Prop 8. This hurtful and hateful initiative needs to be defeated. I am voting no on proposition 8. Please join me.
Thank you,
Kathleen Rhodes
rhodeskat@sbcglobal.net
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)