Fairfax Media to axe 125 editorial jobs as part of $30m restructure

Queue comments offering uninformed advice…

The MEAA has a point: based on Sean Aylmer’s note to staff, the $30m in cuts is coming entirely from editorial. Surely there are other parts of the business that could also be “streamlined” to help address Fairfax’s hemorrhaging revenues? Instead, the consultants and management masterminds behind this “plan” opt to cut more than a quarter of an already-severely depleted newsroom. And still, Fairfax continues to parrot the absurdity that they are all about quality, independent journalism. Now, that is the definition of Fake News….

Coming on the back of its attempt to pose to the right (“pro investor, pro consumer”) management and board decide to kill the very purpose that consumers and investors have valued. Let’s see how the grand Domain float goes!

Fairfax – and indeed all private-enterprise media – would do well to start a campaign urging the Federal Government to cut funding to the ABC.
Fairfax in particular surely can’t exist along the ABC – they’re essentially selling the same message, but one of them gets free money from taxpayers to do so.

It is like voluntary redundancies in the public sector, those who have talents that others want will take the redundancy payment and the remainder will be those that are less employable. It is reverse Darwinism with survival of the weakest (in this case least read).

If anything it shows a weakwilled management team who cannot make a hard decision and so instead opt for medi(a)ocraty.

As a subscriber, not because I have to but because I believe in what Fairfax represents, I’m increasingly concerned that the very thing I support is being cut at the knees. This announcement is not helping, even though I understand the harsh realities that exist.

Investors in Fairfax need to start holding the board and Hywood’s leadership team cronies and their remuneration to account. Fairfax’s performance shouldn’t just be about total shareholder return, because lets face it, you chop out $30M of costs and next years NPAT gets a tidy boost.

How about the Fairfax Board introduce Culture as a performance indicator or reader feedback score mechanisms for a portion of their bonuses? Rather than kick 125 FTEs out the door, why not shaft a couple of executive directors, a couple of board members and ditch their generous long term share incentives in favour of keeping 15 or 20 journalists. Its funny how you never read about board members and executive leadership getting axed, the blood bath is always in the news rooms… a shame really.

For clarity, I should point out that “ROBBO” is not me, Alan Robertson but some other “Robbo”. If I’m going to comment, I always do so with full identity, not hiding behind nick-names.
On this Fairfax matter, I have no comment.

For anyone with a keen sense of humour, here’s an excerpt from Fairfax’s statement about its corporate responsibility:

Fairfax Media’s commercial success and financial performance is vitally important to the company’s ability to provide meaningful benefits to the communities we serve throughout Australia and New Zealand.

Across our business operations, we maintain a strong focus on environment and corporate social responsibility (CSR).

We play an active role in supporting local communities; and we utilise our position as a community leader to support and amplify initiatives and causes which are aligned with our business objectives. We do this through sponsorships, partnerships, fundraising campaigns as well as providing exposure across our extensive network of media assets.

By driving conversations that matter and creating connections that count in the communities we serve, Fairfax uses its trusted voice to deliver powerful public good.

Our journalism makes communities stronger – more civil, more open and transparent. We hold governments and the powerful up to public scrutiny and to account.

@robbo – do any of those bleating for cuts to the ABC seriously think that fairfax or any other struggling media business , would be saved – or even in better shape – if the ABC didn’t exist ? The media’s problems run far deeper and are far more structural than competition from ABC

Fact: the important folks at Domain don’t like this one bit.

Fact: if the “important folks” at Domain give a shit it’s because their business relies on the perception of value in the news product, including very clearly, print. No one who knows him thinks the Cat cares a jot fir anything beyond his lifestyle.
By the way, what do the unimportant people think?