New York Times to cut 100 jobs (8% of its news staff)

Source: CNNMoney.com

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The New York Times on Monday announced plans to cut 100 jobs from its newsroom, about 8% of its news staff, by the end of the year.

The newspaper will offer buyouts to staff who voluntarily leave the company, and it will lay off others if there are not enough volunteers, Executive Editor Bill Keller said in an e-mail to his staff. Employees will have 45 days to apply for a buyout.

The paper also slashed 100 journalism positions in early 2008, the first mass newsroom layoff in the company's history. The Times has since made other, much deeper cuts throughout the company. In addition, employees were asked to take a 5% pay cut for most of 2009.

News department employment rose to an all-time high of 1,332 positions in February 2008 before the paper began to trim its staff. The paper employs 1,250 people in its news department, making it by far the largest newspaper staff in the United States.

The Times said further budget cuts also loom for the paper's editorial, op-ed, and business departments.

Read more: http://money.cnn.com/2009/10/19/news/companies/new_york_times_layoffs/?postversion=2009101915

---

Sign 'o The Times.

Can't even imagine Sunday w/o the NYT. :cry:

... who then will withhold damaging evidence against Bush until after the 2004 election?

Who will op-ed endless lies about the war in Iraq and our reasons for going there?

I could go on, but I won't bother. If the Times folds tomorrow, I'll be a happy man. Along with the Globe and most other big-city newspapers.

They are only a little better than Fox - and that makes them worse because people actually think they are credible.

completely years ago, we won't notice any difference, I'm sure. Except perhaps worse spelling and grammatical errors.

You bet.

Yes.. Ad revenue is down. And even though I surf the web for news from sources that are not local; I buy my major daily newspaper.. The Times.. Don't buy the print edition advertisers won't advertise because their circulation is too small. Is the Times at fault entirely because readers think they can get something for free by web surfing . That won't support a Newspaper and it's staff.

when they tried to charge for premium content not many consumers bit.

their failure to initiate a coherent business model is their own fault. Apple pioneered selling music for a dollar. Prices were all over the place to get music before that. The Times had enough clout to set the tone early on. It's a failure of their own imagination and will in my opinion.

newspapers/news sites will always be around, just like radio, but the profits will never be the same.

The only question is who will lead in the name ledger,IMO.

It's the Huffington Post that feeds off of the various news sources and does not pay for services rendered.. How many news bureaus does the Huffington Post have around the country and the world. Can't collect news without news bureaus . And news bureaus won't exist if someone does not pay for the salaries of professional journalists..
That or else we'll have news decimated by the methods of Fox News.. They just pick it from thin air.

the content.

Why should New York be any different.

Everyone there deserves to be fired for their role in the illegal invasion of Iraq.