Workers OK deal in effort to save San Francisco Chronicle

San Francisco Chronicle employees Saturday voted to accept steep concessions to their contract as part of a deal that is expected to cut at least 150 jobs from the newsroom and other departments, yet which the company said is vital to keep the paper from closing.

By a vote of 333 to 33, members of the California Media Workers Guild approved the givebacks at a midmorning meeting at the Parc 55 Hotel in San Francisco.

"People realize that ... Full Story »

Posted by Kristin Gorski
Tags Help
Subjects: Media
Topics: Journalism
Editorial Help
Posted by: Posted by Kristin Gorski - Mar 15, 2009 - 2:32 PM PDT
Content Type: Article
Edit Lock: This story can be edited
Edited by: Fabrice Florin - Mar 15, 2009 - 7:11 PM PDT

Reviews

Show All | Notes | Comments | Quotes | Links
Fabrice Florin
3.8
by Fabrice Florin - Mar. 15, 2009

Solid reporting about concessions made by the California Media Workers Guild to help the San Francisco Chronicle survive. This article provides good factual evidence and context about this important topic.

See Full Review » (11 answers)
Donica Mensing
3.6
by Donica Mensing - Mar. 15, 2009

This is an event driven story that also provides good background about the reasons that the newspaper industry finds itself in such difficulties. It infers that the Internet is a major cause for the failing business model and only mentions tangentially near the end of the article that the Hearst company took on a lot of debt just before the market started to fall. It appears that the troubles of newspapers are a "perfect storm" of technological change, demographic change, poor business decisions and the economic downturn. Others would also argue that the content of newspapers also led to a lessening of consumer/citizen interest in what was being published. This article doesn't delve as deeply into those arguments, but does ... More »

See Full Review » (11 answers)

Comments on this story Help (BETA)

NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

3.7

not enough reviews
from 2 reviews (20% confidence)
Quality
3.8
Facts
4.0
Fairness
4.0
Information
4.0
Sourcing
3.5
Style
4.0
Context
4.0
Depth
3.0
Enterprise
2.5
Popularity
3.4
Recommendation
3.0
Credibility
4.0
# Reviews
1.0
# Views
5.0
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »

Topics

(See these related stories.)

Links Help

No links yet. Please review this story to add some!