 |
|
|
HonoluluNewsBlues
January 2000
The Year of
Stalemate and Sitzkrieg
Managing News and Threatening Attorneys
Dispatches from the Front by Burl Burlingame
|
| 1/5/00 It's a measure of the distrust that Gannett has created among
consumers that when the SaveStarBulletin site disappeared during the Christmas holiday, dozens -- if not
hundreds -- of readers immediately assumed that the media giant
had somehow shut it down. The fact was, the server where SaveStarBulletin
resided was thoroughly hacked by unknown outsiders. I don't know
who knocked it down, but we got it back up. |
| 1/6/00 Many of the excessive number of security guards hired to hang
around the newsroom were let go. Apparently, most were told that
the gig wasn't a temp position. |
| 1/7/00 Reporter Ian Lind actually made a count of newstands in a neighborhood, discovering
that Advertiser racks were double the number of Star-Bulletin
racks, despite supposed equal treatment by Gannett's Hawaii Newspaper
Agency. |
| 1/8/00 Uh oh. The SOS site noted that legal victories won by SOS had
been routinely buried in Star-Bulletin's print coverage -- not
surprising since we're owned by Liberty, the plaintiff. Pointing
this out made some of the staff extremely angry. Yikes! The Guild
had been the primary instrument in saving the newspaper so far,
but that was underappreciated or misunderstood by the staff, probably
because the Guild was busy actually doing something rather than
publicizing itself. But the reaction showed that the Guild wasn't
doing enough to make it's contribution known, even to our own
staff. At any rate, it showed that tempers are easily frayed under
the circumstances, and that the anger is misdirected -- it should
be aimed at Gannett rather than ourselves. The SOS site was due
for a retool anyway. Its initial purpose as an anti-Gannett propaganda
tool was giving way to a journal that viewed Gannett actions with
skepticism. |
| 1/9/00 In order to avoid being deposed under oath, Gannett and Liberty
executives and lawyers agreed to withdraw their motion demanding
that the SOS suit be dismissed. It meant that the suit can go
forward, which is good news, but also that it will occur some
time in the future, with all sorts of potential obstacles between
now and then. It's annoying not to get these guys on the stand
right away, before their memories fade and their files vanish. |
| 1/10/00 A major client, bullied by Gannett into seeking advertising options
elsewhere, left a 20-year relationship with the Hawaii Newspaper
Agency, taking nearly half a miliion dollars annual revenue. |
1/11/00 The SF Bay Guardian cited Honolulu as a model for community support for newspapers
under corporate assault: "For at least the next few months, and
possibly for much longer, Hawaii will have competing daily papers.
And the only reason there's not already a newspaper monopoly is
that the attorney general and the unions were willing to sue."
|
| 1/12/00 Liberty-owned starbulletin.com severs news links to the Save Our Star-Bulletin site. It's petty but not unexpected, particularly given the flap earlier
in the week. |
| 1/13/00 In a newspaper headlining CLONED MONKEYS SOON TO COME, the Star-Bulletin
noted that Gannett and Liberty were asking to have suits against
them dropped, claiming they were moot since the original agreement
to kill the paper had lapsed. This may not preclude, however,
a future, secret arrangement between the media giant and the media
midget to kill the paper, this time without warning. Details,
details... |
| 1/18/00 As the Queen Mum says, we were not amused by a Washington Post
story about business as usual at Gannett papers. It seemed that
at the Boise, Idaho, outlet, Gannett execs didn't see anything
wrong with allowing local businesses proof-read stories about
them. The paper's business editor, appalled, resigned after just
a month on the job. It's just "good journalism!" spun the paper's
lawyers. Yikes. I don't think I'd rely on lawyers, paricularly
Gannett lawyers, to define journalism for me. |
| 1/21/00 Both Gannett and Liberty filed complaints and lawsuits in attempts
to bully the state of Hawaii into a bargaining position. It was
a curious development. Whilst claiming on one hand that the state's
complaint is moot because there is no longer a conspiracy to murder
the Star-Bulletin, they also demanded a free hand to pursue the
conspiracy in the future. Liberty also sued the State Attorney
General personally, claiming losses in lawyer fees -- even though
Gannett had been covering Liberty's legal expenses. |
|
1/22/00 More information from Gannett/Liberty's legal counterattacks
came out, and were devilishly fascinating in the details. Gannett
vice-president Larry Gasho, for example, testified that producing
the Star-Bulletin costs $10.67 million every year. The cost over
the remaining terms of the JOA would be something like $130 miliion,
which Gannett characterized as a "loss." The rest of the world
would likely think of it as an "expense." After all, the only
reason that Gannett was making money at all in the Honolulu marbket
was because they controlled both news cycles advertising revenues.
To claim that revenue would remain constant whilst getting rid
of half the product take some creative math. But then, it's all
about denying customers a choice, isn't it? |
|
1/23/00 More details. Liberty paid $10 million to purchase the Star-Bulletin
in 1993 and created Liberty Newspapers Limited Partnership to
manage it, of which Rupert Phillips personally owned 31.25 percent.
His secretive, shadow partners were given cash payments early
in 1999 by divvying up $5 million they borrowed against the investment.
This raised their outstanding debt to $11,625,000 as of October
1999, the day theStar-Bulletin was supposed to die. This raised
interesting questions, particularly since Phillips claimed he
was forced into killing the paper by his partners, and that the
market didn't support the product. Would they have taken out such
a large loan against the investment -- one they claimed was a
loser -- if there were no assurance of a quick payoff? |
|
1/25/00 The Justice Department's insistance that the San Francisco Examiner
sale contain significant physical assets was viewed with a great
deal of interest. After all, Rupert's $10 million in 1993 supposedly
bought nothing but the paper's name and a promise to receive yearly
payments until 2012. Gannett hung on to ALL the physical assets,
including the Star-Bulletin's copyrighted archives and photo collection.
Who in his right mind would pay that kind of money to buy a paper
without a library? Unless, of course, there was a tacit agreement
at the time to kill the paper at their convenience. Physical assets
would have made things messy. |
|
1/26/00 The new edition of the Guild Reporter contained excerpts from
Ian Lind's daily digest of Star-Bulletin. That's pretty cool. It's also an acknowledgement
that this issue is of nation-wide import. It's the first time
that Gannett has been publicly dogged for their misdeeds, thanks
to the Internet. |
|
1/28/00 When Save Our Star-Bulletin presented evidence that the Gannett-run
Hawaii Newspaper Agency was conspiring to scuttle Star-Bulletin
circulation figures, HNA president Michael Fisch lost his cool.
Annoyed that the Hawaii Newspaper Guild was aiding SOS members
in saving the newspaper, Fisch squealed, "If (Guild director Wayne)
Cahill is interested in preserving the profitability of the Star-Bulletin,
then he, as well as the other union leaders, can work with the
newspaper in a more cooperative, pro-active (way) to improve the
productivity of the Hawaii Newspaper Agency!" He then scuttled
away in his imported car to dine at a private club. |
|
1/30/00 As we headed into the end of the ABC audit period, the Advertiser
frantically attempted to artificially boost their circulation
figures. These are the guys, after all, who used to claim 10,000
papers distributed free to schools as paid circulation. When they
were caught at it, the free papers to educate kids vanished. |
NEXT! February 2000
It's the Racks, Jack!
|
 |
These pages are always under construction. Links to other sites do not necessarily represent
endorsement by Pacific Electric Monograph.
These pages look best when viewed on my computer over at my house.
© 2000 Pacific Monograph
|
 |
|