chicago sun times lays off entire photo staff

[zauhar]

Exactly. This is a big deal. It reflects and amplifies a series of major transitions in our economic and cultural climate. Some of these changes will be for the better; many more will not.

What exactly is for the better ?

And please don't say that we can all get a IPhone .

Don't get me wrong - they are true marvels. I enjoy iOS development.

But when I was a kid there was a public phone on every corner, and you could talk all day for a dime. And there was a morning and an evening newspaper, which supported many talented people who believed in what they did.

Randy

 

[redisburning]

it's not all bad, and it's not all good. progress causes pain for some, you just have to hope that the net benefit outweighs the net loss.

 

[Exdsc]

This news is a big deal by the way those people were fired in one day, Godfather style. Maybe the newspaper in question was trying to make a point and perhaps impress its shareholders and so on, to show that the management is serious about trimming down what's not needed.

But this is the beginning, by the end of this year there will be many more fired PJs.

 

[Eric T]

The Sun Times clearly doesn't understand how good photos can save money for print journalism since "a picture is worth a thousand words".

 

[semilog]

What exactly is for the better ?

1. Access to news sources (for readers) is democratized.

2. Information about breaking news (disasters, protests, meetings etc.) can be disseminated by almost everyone. This has clear weaknesses but it also has immense strengths.

A simple example is the infamous pepper spray incident at UC Davis. The key photos were taken by students with their phones. Even in the heyday of photojournalism, most newsworthy events were not photographed because to get the picture there has to be a person with a camera.

Another example. The practice of embedding and other media control techniques has made war zones like Iraq enormously difficult for professionals to photograph except as governments want them photographed. NYT photographer Micahel Kamber on the Iraq war: “A lot of what we saw wasn’t making it into the press,” Mr. Kamber said. “Some images were blocked by the military or the embed process itself, others by the photographer’s conscience or by a lack of interest by some media organizations.”

But arguably the most important images to make it out of Iraq were not taken by professionals. They were taken by soldiers at Abu Ghraib Prison.

Much is being lost, but the loss is not unalloyed.

 

[gb hill]

I've just about quit watching videos because of the aggravating commercials.

 

[redisburning]

I've just about quit watching videos because of the aggravating commercials.

adblock, my friend!

 

[nikonosguy]

simple - just like wedding and portrait photography, the pros who have put a lifetime of training, gear, and money have been replaced with the mwc's as they can cheaply acquire a dslr and produce adequate results --- at least adequate to the end consumer -

 

[dmr]

This just hit the TV news! 🙁

I'm surprised that Warren B's Berkshire-Hathaway just bought our main surviving local daily. I have not subscribed in years. He must have some kind of insight and plans.

Oh well ...

 

[Al Patterson]

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.

So, what do people expect will happen when we all want free news from the internet? If you want to keep folks employed, you need to buy the dead tree edition of your local paper.

This has nothing to do with left or right spin, just profit and loss. Nobody is going to expand payrolls when losing money by the truckload...

 

[nikonosguy]

So, what do people expect will happen when we all want free news from the internet? If you want to keep folks employed, you need to buy the dead tree edition of your local paper.

This has nothing to do with left or right spin, just profit and loss. Nobody is going to expand payrolls when losing money by the truckload...

same thing that happened to porn on the internet -- a lot of people made lots of money and then there was a glut of free porn and most of the porn sites went small or shut down

there's sill money to be made.... but it's much harder.....

 

[hugivza]

A compulsive newspaper reader, I have 3 daily electronic subscriptions and one paper edition. Given the additional costs of production of paper, notwithstanding the concerns of the wood pulp environmental chain, the electronic media is here to stay. It's harder to do the crossword electronically, but I can live with it. As distressing as it must be for those who have been retrenched, it is becoming more and more common, particularly in those areas like the arts which mark our civilised status perhaps? The entire music faculty at an Australian university was recently retrenched mid semester ofr "economic reasons".

 

[rluka]

Don't those photojournalists also write reportages too ?

 

[hlockwood]

So, what do people expect will happen when we all want free news from the internet? If you want to keep folks employed, you need to buy the dead tree edition of your local paper.

This has nothing to do with left or right spin, just profit and loss. Nobody is going to expand payrolls when losing money by the truckload...

My NY Times will have to be pried from my cold, dead hands.

HFL

 

[MartinP]

A newspaper exists to make a profit. Profit is made by selling advertising and 'advertorials'. News (the stuff that costs money but which may unfortunately be necessary to sell the advertising) comes from agencies and press-releases. Pictures come from agencies or press-releases, with the occasional reader-submission for parties and road-accidents. That's it.

 

[Paul Jenkin]

Easy to say when it's not your job.
Cheers,

R.

Couldn't agree more, Roger.


I still prefer reading a broadsheet to having to bugger about downloading the same thing on a "tablet" or laptop. Crappy video footage taken by Joe Public on their iPhones (etc) is a fashionable / sensationalist option right now but most of the footage is poor quality.

Let's hope National Geographic (and the like) don't dumb down to anything like the same degree. That said, even they are starting to publish readers' photographs.

Still, we get what we pay for. If we aren't prepared to pay a few pennies extra for a professional job, we have to put up with what can be bought with the funds available. Proof, I suppose, that quality pays, it doesn't "cost".

 

[Steve Bellayr]

It is about independent contracting and outsourcing. It is far less expensive for a large organization to pay a higher hourly wage that does not include health insurance, retirement, vacation and sick leave. In this case the photographers will get a high value for each photograph purchased but there will be more competition. It is called privatization. Many states in America are already doing this with Police, Fire, and Education. Nothing new here just another expansion.

 

[bwcolor]

Remember, many newspapers are folding. The reasons pretty much mirror this story. People get their news from a wider mix of sources, just as images can be pulled from real time smartphone coverage. It is more cost effective in a time where newspaper revenues are down.

 

[jwicaksana]

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!

Agreed. Not only bystanders, some part time photographers are also willing to do jobs based on photo credit only.:bang:

 

[Photog9000]

There are numerous valid points made in most of the replies to the layoff. This is not new but it drives the final nail home for me. After working as for military/government contractors as an engineer for 30 years (I'm including my own time in the US Navy), I left it all for the dream of working for a newspaper. Started freelancing, went contract and, in 2005, got hired full time for a small weekly. That was a great year. My wife, who was a education/business reporter for the same weekly, and I garnered bonuses amounting to roughly $25 grand for that year (the only year it happened) 😱! But when the 2007 bust hit, I instantly saw the handwriting on the wall. I probably had a few weeks, if not days, before I would have gotten my notice. I was fortunate to return to military contracts until another layoff hit them in 2012. Now, approaching 66 years old, I know it is time to hang up the DSLRs, go totally to rangefinders or the Fuji X-System (just got the new X100S) and go to finding images that make a difference. For me, I am looking to work with non-profit organizations that can use the help. The pay, if any, will be small but I am at retirement age and can survive on what I have put away over the years.

What really gets me about this particular layoff is that, according to the union for these staffers, they were in negotiations for a contract and had been told no layoffs were planned. Then they get called to a mandatory meeting on yesterday (30 May 2013) and are told they are all gone effective immediately. Sounds like little severance, if any, and no place to go. BUT the moneychangers keep their jobs. I remember one editor giving a presentation about the [at the time] new camera phones. He was gushing how he had taken an image from a "citizen journalist" and blown it up on the front page. His words, and they are still true today for the management staff, "It is good enough!" No matter that it was so fuzzy you could not really tell what was going on.