chicago sun times lays off entire photo staff

P

porktaco

Well-known
Local time
3:17 AM
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
1,460
By Robert Channick
Tribune staff reporter
10:30 a.m. CDT, May 30, 2013

The Chicago Sun-Times has laid off its entire photography staff, and plans to use freelance photographers going forward, the newspaper said.
About 20 full-times staffers received the news Thursday morning, according to sources familiar with the situation.

The newspaper released a statement suggesting the move reflected the increasing importance of video in news reporting:

"The Sun-Times business is changing rapidly and our audiences are consistently seeking more video content with their news. We have made great progress in meeting this demand and are focused on bolstering our reporting capabilities with video and other multimedia elements. The Chicago Sun-Times continues to evolve with our digitally savvy customers, and as a result, we have had to restructure the way we manage multimedia, including photography, across the network."

rchannick@tribune.com | Twitter @RobertChannick
 
tough times, how many people ? and by freelance do they mean user submitted or professional photographers ?
 
The world no longer cares about photography it seems. It's worth has diminished in the mainstream.
 
Lauffray said:
tough times, how many people ? and by freelance do they mean user submitted or professional photographers ?
Click to expand...

The original post, also cited by the Chicago Tribune, reported "about 20 full-time staffers" were laid-off/released/downsized/euphamism/fired. There is no indication if this includes only photojournalists, or also photo editors.
(edit: looks like segedi beat me by a minute)

Re: "freelance," my guess is that they'll hire photographers/journalists for one-off assignments. I don't know though...perhaps it will devolve into a racket like CNN's iReport.

This tweet says that reporters will photograph assignments with their iPhones. The original report also says "to evolve with our digitally savvy customers...we have had to restructure the way we manage multimedia, including photography" and I take that to mean they're going to emphasize video over still images.
 
Not too surprising. Think about it - everybody runs around with a smart phone these days and takes pictures - those by-standers will be happy to give away their photos just to see their name credited in the paper. It seems nobody cares about quality anymore.

It's just the beginning!
 
Lauffray said:
tough times, how many people ? and by freelance do they mean user submitted or professional photographers ?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be surprised if someone on staff combs social media for real-time photos and videos they can license from "freelancers".
 
That's surprising, considering that sports photography isn't something that can be handled from the bleachers.

Maybe they'll just rely on AP or other services.

Getting a freelancer into a pro event (sports, concerts, events) is going to take more time, because you need to get credentials for that person.

My guess is that they will rehire the photographers as freelancers. That way, they don't have to pay benefits or wages. The news industry sucks right now.

Amateurs can't handle the volume of work that a newspaper expects.

They will also need some photo techs to handle prepress work. There's a certain skill involved in prepping a photo for newspaper reproduction. It's not the same as Web display.
 
This is the cost of our collective purchasing habits.
I buy a newspaper now once or twice a week as what time I do have to catch up on the news I can do online, it's not as in-depth, but for the time I have it's enough.
Newspapers are dying because people like me are not supporting them.
I was actually discussing this with my wife this morning and we've decided to take on an online newspaper subscription. As they say, use it or lose it.
 
In the 70s I was hired as the photographer on a small town newspaper that was the laughing stock of the business--several journalism schools even had subscriptions to show the students how really bad things could be.

The editor had died several years before, and been "replaced" by his secretary. All of the (bad) photography was done by the writers, and the guys in the printing department did the layout, using small ads to fill empty spaces on the front page--a concept that was so outrageous that the newly hired editor who hired me didn't know where to start to make things right.

Now the Sun-Times has adopted my old paper's photography habit, and I notice that for some time the Trib has been running ads on their front page. I guess awful is the new norm in journalism.

Bobbyrab, I can proudly say that I don't subscribe to a paper now. I used to--sometimes three at a time--but since they have become right-wing trumpets rather than bringers of truth (I can't believe that Judith Miller still has a job in journalism, for instance), I can't in good conscience spend my money helping them exist. Perhaps if they're in trouble, they should look at what they've been doing to themselves.
 
I work at Boston University, and last week they just laid off their photo department and abolished the department altogether. Not the academic photography department, but the one in charge of all official university photography. I realize that BU is not the Chicago Sun Times, but it more evidence of a growing trend. From what I understand, the thinking is that they can get students with high-end DSLRs to do the same thing at little to no cost. The head of the department is 65 and had been here 44 years.
 
Newspapers have always been mouthpieces for right or left wing groups or individuals. As far as I know there have never been newspapers who were "bringers of the truth." I don't know everything so I could certainly be mistaken, but I kind of doubt it in this case.

As for amateurs trying to do what once took a pro, that is going on everywhere, not just news publishing. A lot of businesses are struggling and doing anything they can to stay afloat. That does not make it any easier for those who are let go, nor does it improve quality in the resulting product.
 
wow that sucks. feel bad for those laid off.

ah well, have to thank the prosumer camera market for this. with the advent of amateur photographers pouring in, this kind of thing was bound to happen.
 
anjoca76 said:
I work at Boston University, and last week they just laid off their photo department and abolished the department altogether. Not the academic photography department, but the one in charge of all official university photography. I realize that BU is not the Chicago Sun Times, but it more evidence of a growing trend. From what I understand, the thinking is that they can get students with high-end DSLRs to do the same thing at little to no cost. The head of the department is 65 and had been here 44 years.
Click to expand...

man, what a joke.

I met Kal as a student there about 2 years ago. Interesting guy, very different interests as a photographer than me but nice, helpful, and with good skill.

it's a hard life for photographers right now. I think the middle group of decently talented people who made up a lot of photography staffs are simply not going to have a job. we'll have a bunch of free **** and then the super good people will probably continue to be able to convince people of their value.

1 photo just doesnt have as much value these days unless it somehow manages to really stand out. there is no more good enough, now its either spectacular or lost in the sea.
 
Pioneer said:
Newspapers have always been mouthpieces for right or left wing groups or individuals. As far as I know there have never been newspapers who were "bringers of the truth." I don't know everything so I could certainly be mistaken, but I kind of doubt it in this case.
Click to expand...

My knee-jerk reaction is to say that you're wrong. But the reality is more complicated.
 
Adapt or die.

Photography used to require specialized knowledge/skill. It doesn't anymore, if your aim is simply to "faithfully record what happened." This leaves aesthetics as the sole remaining reason for photographer/journalists. The idea that the news needs to be reported photographically by someone with an aesthetic sense flies in the face of the news' claim to objectivity."Professional" photographer journalists have always put the lie to the claimed 'objectivity' of the news.
 
L Collins said:
Photography used to require specialized knowledge/skill. It doesn't anymore, if your aim is simply to "faithfully record what happened." This leaves aesthetics as the sole remaining reason for photographer/journalists.
Click to expand...

And newpapers use to be more profitable - or at least in the black. I'm not sure how many have found sustainable business models at all now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom