‘People like to pick on Fairfax’: News boss insists newsroom is on board with changes
Fairfax news and business media chief, Sean Aylmer, has defended the latest round of job cuts and suggested newsroom staff fully understand that change is unavoidable.
However unpalatable it is to make people redundant “we would not have a business” if hard decisions had not made now and in the past, he said.
Speaking to Mumbrella on the sidelines of the International News Media Association (INMA) world congress in London, Aylmer also vehemently rejected suggestions the redundancy of 120 staff – some of them senior journalists – made a mockery of Fairfax’s continued vocal commitment to quality journalism.
Denying the job cuts were threatening the quality of the product, Aylmer said: “I just totally disagree with that. We still have more than 600 people in the newsroom. We still have a bunch of household names who write for us.
“We have a stable of great journalists, and I totally disagree with the proposition that we are cutting and there is no one good left. It is just wrong.”
Aylmer claimed people “like to pick on Fairfax” and question the quality of its journalism when the reality is that the quality, particularly on its digital platforms “is as strong as it ever has been”.
“Yes we have lost some good people, there is no arguments there, but we have a bigger audience than ever which suggests some things must be going right,” he said.
“No one wants redundancies. In a perfect world we wouldn’t have any, but consumer behaviour has changed. It is not just digital disruption, consumer behaviour has changed. Put all that in the mix and we have to change our business model.
It’s not just about cost cutting. It’s about the skills you need and the strategy you have going forward, so you need a different mix of people, and in our case we need fewer people.”
Aylmer, one of several senior managers subjected to a vote of no confidence by staff earlier this month, said “no one in the newsroom” disagrees with the need to change, adding the upheaval “has not come from leftfield”.
“When it actually effects themselves or their friends then it hits really hard but everyone understands that we have to change,” he said. “A lot of those [no confidence motions] are done in the moment, but I don’t think any individuals there disagree that we need to change the newsroom.
“Of course it’s incredibly frustrating and disappointing and I genuinely feel for the individuals who have to go. I also feel for the individuals who are managing this change, but it’s inevitable.”
Aylmer said he understood the need for unions to “vent”, but praised chief executive Greg Hywood and Allen Williams, director of Australian Publishing Media at Fairfax, who were also slammed by staff.
“I think Greg Hywood has done a great job in getting us to where we are,” he told Mumbrella. “I know there has been a lot of cost cutting, and it’s hard, but if we had not done it we would not have a business right now, full stop.
“It’s really hard but it’s the fact of where we are at the moment. I don’t take it [vote of no confidence] personally but I think they were unfair on Allen and Greg. What they have done in the past three years has basically saved us.”
Despite the friction between the union and senior managers, and Aylmer’s own assessment that he had been “hammered” in one resolution, he said “constructive discussions” had taken place with union officials.
Turning to the future of its print titles, Aylmer reiterated Hywood’s recent remarks by agreeing change was “inevitable”.
But whether the closure of print titles happens in “18 months or five years” was down to readers and advertisers.
Their behaviour will dictate the timing, more than Fairfax, he said.
“It is inevitable that print will change. I don’t know in my time in media whether print will disappear, I don’t necessarily think that. But I certainly think the frequency will change. In the end it is not up to us to make that decision. The consumer and clients will make that decision for you.
“The most important thing in my role running editorial is to make sure our newsroom is ready for that. That could happen in 18 months but it could happen in five years.
“When consumers stop buying Monday to Friday papers or Saturday and Sunday papers, when our clients – the banks and auto companies and retailers – stop advertising, that is when it will happen.
“To my knowledge we have no predetermined timetable saying this is when it’s going to close. That would be stupid because you are either shooting yourself in the foot closing too early or running too late.”
He described the Australian Financial Review as a “different proposition” to the SMH and Age because of its “specialist nature”.
The readership is also “quite phenomenal and certainly the highest value audience of any print play in the country”, Aylmer said.
“Things like the AFR monthly magazine is a really profitable strong product and it’s because of the audience it gets to,” he continued. “I never judge the Fin in the same light as the metros because I think the Fin can probably sustain itself on a lower print base than metros.”
The director added that Fairfax is no different from any other media company in its pursuit of new revenue streams to offset the decline of print
“We are all looking for new ways to make money, and subscriptions are part of that, as is advertising,” he said.
“Both digital and print are important but in our world events are really important. How Domain operates is also really important, as is our JV with Drive and the CarSales guys. So we are actively looking at new ways to find revenue, and it’s working.
“You can’t think of us a subscription and advertising player only. There are lots of other things that are growing.”
As a former Fairfax reader, I pick on it for being crap.
The amount of interesting, readable content has plummeted, replaced by click-bait and advertorials. It’s a chore trying to find the former in the growing mass of latter.
I finally gave up when I noticed I’d been landing on the front page and just staring blankly, to worried to click on anything for fear of it being conned by another piece of garbage. So I stopped landing on the front page.
User ID not verified.
How could they let cartoonist Rod Clement go?
Unbelievable..
User ID not verified.
Well said Jen. Fairfax execs keep talking about print or digital as if that’s the issue while the readers see a rapid decline in news content of any worth, a rising tide of click bait and promos for real estate in the editorial and a constant queue of people at the exits.
The evidence now explicit from serious publishers like the NYT and so on is that they must focus on what they do best to the EXCLUSION of the flotsam that is everywhere in the digital world.
If you look at what Aylmer says here and the backward-looking mouthings of Hywood you can see clearly that there is no strategy for the news value and an explicit expectation that to decline is to “survive”. (By which we must conclude that the “survival” issue here is exec salaries!)
On this evidence, which is now blatant, the owners should simply punt everyone whose name gets into the annual report.
User ID not verified.
People pick on Fairfax because it’s the quintessential example of how not to run a news site in the 21st century. Its failures are entirely due to its inability to understand consumer behaviour and trends and adapt its business model. Dumping its only real assets – quality journalists – is a sure sign that things aren’t going to get better.
User ID not verified.
Jen, the Sydney Morning Herald has the largest cross-platform audience out of any newspaper in Australia, by a long way. So, clearly people are still clicking on it. However, if you want to avoid clickbait and stupid ‘curiosity gap’ headlines, I’d suggest taking out a full subscription that includes delivery of the daily print papers. The papers are still filled with quality journalism and regular investigations. Subscribing is a fraction of the cost of buying the daily paper in a newsagent, and by doing so you are also supporting the journalists.
User ID not verified.
100% agree, Jen.
The SMH’s problem is the crappy quality of the content. Mostly click-bait, advertorial or something printed in the NYT, Washington Post or similar 1, 2, 3, 5, 10 days ago. Politically it seems to have shifted from an interesting, centre left paper, to a weird ‘conservative Green’ – ‘soft-Liberal’ hybrid.
A sharp competitor would wipe the Herald out?
User ID not verified.
You’re missing the point. Increasingly people don’t want or need a hard-copy newspaper. The idea that the only way to skip the crap click-bait etc is to buy the hardcopy is hardly a strategy for sustainable growth. I want a digital/online newspaper, minus the stupid headlines and advertorials. Happy to pay for this.
User ID not verified.
@Facts: the spin also makes people really angry. It is both cynical and arrogant to tell your once intelligent readership that this is quality. Go sell some used Ladas in Lapland.
User ID not verified.
Tom Standage of The Economist says: “what we do, what our mission is, does not depend on the medium with which you deliver it. And I know everyone says that, but in our case it really is true, because what we actually sell is what I like to call the feeling of being informed when you get to the very end”
User ID not verified.
If you want people to pay for something you need to give them something worth paying for. No-one is getting that from Fairfax any more.
User ID not verified.
Every point Aylmer makes is correct. Fairfax would be in a terrible position today if it hadn’t made the tough decisions. And it still has a lot of journalists, many of them outstanding. This constant harping on about the collapse of quality is an old, boring theme. For heaven’s sake, there is an awful lot of content flowing through the digital platforms every day – a lot of it appeals to diversionary tastes (nothing wrong with that) and there is a lot of serious reporting at the same time, all the time. I will bet that the same people who grump on about the SMH going downmarket and want it to remain so narrowly focused that it would die even quicker, those same people probably spend hours every week idling through their social media feeds looking at goofy videos. Facebook and Google are siphoning off traditional media’s audience and advertising – you bloody well can’t expect the SMH to remain suspended in the aspic of some golden past state that probably didn’t exist exactly as remembered. Anyway, the fact that Fairfax publications have a healthy digital subscription base and more readers than ever before tells you more about the company’s strategy than the carping nannas who claim there is no quality left. BTW, the London Telegraph has just announced another round of editorial cuts. Fairfax is not unique among quality publishers in having to reduce its workforce.
User ID not verified.
“The Sydney Morning Herald has the largest cross-platform audience out of any newspaper in Australia…”
Trust those metrics as much as I trust the real estate coverage.
“Independent Always,” strikes me as an outrageously ironic attempt at branding.
User ID not verified.
Did you say Aylmer is speaking on the sidelines from a conference in London? After he just harpooned 120 staff? And he reckons all is good and we just pick on Fairfax? And management over there are all top blokes and just a bit misunderstood? Someone call his mum (and the NSA). His body has been assumed by an alien life form.
User ID not verified.
@Jen those metrics would come from EMMA and Nielsen’s Digital Ratings Monthly. What’s not to trust?
User ID not verified.
While I agree that digital platforms have made it tough for everyone in print media and things at Fairfax couldn’t stay the same, part of the reason the company is in such a parlous state is because of bad management decisions made as much as 15 years ago.
There are still household names who work there, but the bulk of the work is done by fewer and fewer people, and the quality has been affected for years. I used to make contact and let them know about stupid grammatical or spelling mistakes on the website (it’s easy to change), but I’ve given up. There are too many, too often, and no one has the time.
It may be as much as eight years ago that someone used “curb” instead of “kerb” in a story that went to print… and no one noticed. Not the journo, the immediate editor, the subeditor or the check sub. Which speaks volumes to me. No offence to Sean Aylmer et al about the “quality” assertion, but they’re kidding themselves.
User ID not verified.
@tom: at what stage did the SMH compete with the Tele? Never. The audiences are totally different. So why is it vaguely relevant what enormous volumes of traffic come to the site? The question is about the product that people used to value as a reliable source of news.
Equally the volume of content is irrelevant. Especially when it’s clickbait.
When you guys start talking quality people might listen. Right now you’re talking redundancies and you picked a good example. The Tekegraph in London is sacking its bosses.
User ID not verified.
To all those people saying Fairfax has no decent content anymore, I sympathise, honestly I do. But But I challenge you to take a look at what are the most clicked on stories (bottom of SMH website); I think you will find these news organisations publish these types of stories for a reason – because that’s what the vast majority is clicking on, and in that respect, the audience is telling the paper/s what it wants to read.
Compare it to shopping for clothes; if a store puts an item of clothing on display, and it sells really well, they are going to A) restock/keep stocking it and B) other shops will also start stocking it or something similar. They won’t say ‘no, you should be wearing this instead because it’s better for you’.
User ID not verified.
Frustrated: with your logic Fairfax will save money and increase traffic enormously if they simply publish porn.
User ID not verified.
@Reader you still don’t get it. The point that I was making is that there is an awful lot of good content in the Fairfax titles, across all platforms, so stop harping on about there only being lighter material – my point wasn’t about the volume of content. By that I mean there is plenty of quality. And @usedtoworkthere you can nitpick about spelling mistakes being worse now than ever, but even back in the glory days of print, a story went from reporter to news editor to chief sub to sub to check sub to proof sub to second edition proof sub and you would still find plenty of howlers in the morning edition. SMH never did and still does not compete in the same way as the Tele, if you mean by that being “tabloid” in a nasty, lurid, sensationalist way. I mean, really, and for heaven’s sake – the SMH has a good audience, is what I was saying and you make it sound like a sin. The London Telegraph, btw is getting rid of more than just one or two deputy editors, they just grabbed the headlines. I’d hardly call them bosses
User ID not verified.
Terribly sorry Tom. Clearly the editorial product of the fairfax titles is wonderful. It is the best it has ever been. I apologise. Clearly we are the problem.
User ID not verified.
We should all feel sorry for Aylmer and Maserati Hywood because they continue to draw huge salaries and they’ve “saved” Fairfax after dropping the hatchet on staff, but saved it for what? Spare me.
User ID not verified.
http://digiday.com/publishers/.....ake-scale/
User ID not verified.
@Reader when you say “we”, you are speaking only for yourself and a small group of narrowly-focused critics. The wider audience has a different response.
User ID not verified.
Tom: quite right Great Sparrow.
User ID not verified.
A shame the Fairfax executive could not even get his facts right about his own business. Drive has partnered with 112 who own The Motor Report – a nothing website that does not even appear in the ratings – not Carsales.
User ID not verified.