Journal Star beginning to cannabilize itself

February 11, 2007
By Billy Dennis

The Journal Star has announced a slew of internal promotions after 12 editors, reporters and others retired or took a buyout offer.

Gone are: City Editor Jerry McDowell, newsroom administrative manager Donna Davis, head librarian Judy Howard, KJS and Hotline reporter Brenda Story, deputy opinion editor Shelley Epstein (whose position is NOT be filled), city desk reporter Elaine Hopkins, feature writer John O’Connell, Neighbors section reporter Sharon Oberholtzer, copy editors David Fleming and Steve Olin, and news assistants Maryanne Ganda Miller and Pam Hagaman. Assistant Day City Editor Terry Towery resigned in January.

This is a cost-cutting measure, and there’s no mention of whether anyone will be hired to fill all of the old jobs of those who were promoted. An new hired would certainly be paid less than those they replaced.

Naturally, the article states that readers will not notice any decline in quality. Really? If so, what exactly did these do so that their absences would have no effect on the newspaper’s quality? Is this an admission that the newsroom was bloated and overpaid?

I’m going to really miss Elaine Hopkins. Shelly Epstein, not so much, as he’s probably the one to blame for the editorial board’s unreasoning dislike of the Peoria Fire Department.

Not that any of it matters. All current owner Copley Newspapers is concerned about is making the paper more attractive for who-the-hell-ever agrees to pay the most money for the Journal Star. And no doubt that any new owner is goign to want to see additional cuts in costs, which means firing reporters and replacing them with lower-trained people, or not replacing them at all.

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

7 Responses to “ Journal Star beginning to cannabilize itself ”

  1. Ryan Johnson on February 11, 2007 at 12:10 pm

    The average reader won’t notice a difference at all. You, will notice a difference in the quality of articles.

    You don’t miss what’s not there because you don’t know it exists.

  2. another js'er on February 11, 2007 at 1:54 pm

    Exactly, Ryan!

    Compare the amount of local news in the Pantagraph with the amount of local news in the Journal Star. Do Pantagraph readers wonder where the local news is? No, they just think there isn’t any.

  3. Opus on February 11, 2007 at 2:19 pm

    IF you are so upset, then go buy the paper rather than read it free online.

    • Billy Dennis on February 11, 2007 at 2:24 pm

      Opus: I buy the paper quiote often, not daily, but at least once or twice a week. And when I visit PJStar.com, I help the PJS raise ad revenue by increasing their hit counts.

      I have also been known to click on an ad or two.

  4. MMJ on February 11, 2007 at 2:52 pm

    i’m gonna misssss them…

  5. merle widmer on February 11, 2007 at 6:38 pm

    Me miss them??? Hmmmmmm.

  6. justanobserver on February 12, 2007 at 8:12 am

    It’s worth repeating. Bloomington Pantagraph newsroom: 34; Springfield Journal Register newsroom: 53; Peoria Journal newsroom, before the retirements and buyouts, 104. The article stated they were trying to bring their costs in line with other newspapers. They’ve got a ways to go. For some time now they have run a column soliciting reader ideas for stories. What do all those people in the newsroom do? Can’t they come up with a few story ideas on their own? Now they give us the YouPage, another news page that requires no work on their part except to design it. If they are cannabilizing themselves it’s because they have become slow, soft and lazy.