Letting go might be the answer

"We must be willing to let go of the life we have planned so as to have the life that is waiting for us."
 --E. M. Forster


In the last three years alone, I can point to numerous examples of people arriving at places in their lives that were totally unexpected. The recession drove people like me -- former newspaper journalists -- out of a dying occupation. Some got out while the getting was good, taking buyouts and other incentive packages from large media companies like Gannett Inc. Thousands of others became layoff victims through no fault of their own. Very few of us had any plans related to what we would do next. As the recession dragged on, the anxiety increased.


Some of us are getting by, and some aren't. A rare few are doing better than ever. Many are in limbo, piecing together some sort of existence through odd jobs, freelance work or contract positions. I know of people who are glad to be out of the newspaper business, which was always a hard life with late hours and other tough demands. However, no matter how bad those hours were, and no matter how much we knew the constant pressure from deadlines and dysfunctional newsrooms were horrible for our health, there are probably very few of us who would have left that world on our own. A paycheck and familiar skill set that provide some sort of comfort aren't easy to walk away from, especially with double-digit unemployment and age discrimination running rampant throughout our society.


The paths in and out of our careers take a significant toll on our mindsets as well as our bank accounts. Yet, there are worse things than losing jobs or starting over in new fields at half the pay. I believe our lives are altered in ways that we can't even imagine, influenced by big and small events. There is almost always something new to contend with or celebrate.


Some events are tragic. Suddenly we're alone in the world because of the loss of parents or a sibling or a spouse. Or perhaps we lose our ability to walk because of disease. Or our faith is shattered by one too many personal setbacks. Where those losses take us seems somewhat dependent on our resiliency, but there is also a randomness to it that has nothing to do with our character or ability to get back on that proverbial horse.


There is also a vague feeling that there are clues all around us as to what we should do, where to go next, how to survive and maybe eventually thrive. Why some people find those clues while others resign themselves to living out their lives in a dark corner is a mystery. It's not simply a matter of tough-mindedness that determines who rebounds and who doesn't. Life isn't a basketball game. You can't always will yourself to victory or happiness, regardless of what some successful people claim. I certainly don't feel particularly tough, yet I've come back from a number of personal setbacks -- setbacks so severe that it felt a lot easier to give up than to get up. I suppose most people have been at the crossroads at some point in their lives.


Where you land, how you cope with your new realities appears to be predetermined to some degree. You can potentially pave the way to that new place by getting an education or knowing the right people or seeking counseling or spiritual guidance, but that doesn't mean you will get to where you are meant to be. Something else is often at work. Something outside of ourselves. The fortunate ones do seem to get to that place,  but I believe most of us fall a bit short, which is why we probably need more than one lifetime to complete our journeys. Of all the people I know, there is only one or two, who if pressed, could say they are truly at peace and in a place where they belong. Loving your career or your family doesn't necessarily mean you're in balance. Acceptance of the other stuff -- the not-so-obvious things that challenge us all -- is what completes the circle. To get to that place, it seems voluntary or involuntary sacrifice is often required.


Even when we're not willing to let go, it seems that something comes along to force us to abandon our plans in order for us to move closer to our true destinations. The cosmic script must be followed or we begin to feel disorientated or frustrated. But how do we find that script? Is the final chapter always a happy one? How do we know when a wrong choice or bad luck is nothing more than that? How do we know if that choice was truly ours?


I guess if we knew that our lives were predetermined we could all relax a bit. Whether you get cancer or not may be somewhat influenced by lifestyle, but perhaps not as much as we think. What state we live in or profession we pursue isn't so much a choice as it is a process of following the clues that either are forced upon us or that gently sweep into our lives in a way that often seem like pure luck or bad misfortune, but are neither.


In hard times, we tend to look for answers to profound questions. We want to escape the pain. We want things (the economy, job market, our standard of living) to return to pre-2008 levels, even though most economists are now saying things will never be the same. We want one more conversation with a brother, sister or friend suddenly lost in an accident, even though we know that's not possible. We need to let go so that we can continue our journeys, yet is there anything more difficult than true acceptance or bold change?


The last three years have been harder than the previous three decades for many Americans. Some experts in the mental health or social services fields say that our collective spirit has been broken by job losses, wars and an inability to pull together even on issues we should all be in agreement on. Perhaps the harder we try to extricate ourselves from the traps we've gotten entangled in, the more the traps tighten. Maybe the way out of this mess is to let go, to put aside our preconceived notions and to allow things to flow or play out in a more natural way.

Another loss for journalism, society

Bob Herbert's final column in The New York Times is essentially a summary of what I have been saying since I started this blog. Our failing economy (as well as many other societal problems) is the result of institutional and individual greed at the very top of our society. Unemployment, record deficits, pollution -- heck, the disappearing of pollinating bees -- can be directly linked to the worst instincts and actions of the most powerful people and greediest corporations.

However, we must also look at ourselves. Columns like Herbert's aren't as well read as they once were because people are not only moving away from reading quality newspapers and becoming apathetic about current events, they are morphing into imbeciles -- refugees of a worn-out, dumbed-down culture who are unable to hold political leaders and the mega-wealthy accountable. Self-inflicted ignorance, as much as anything, is the reason we're on the edge of figurative and literal extinction.

We let it happen -- allowed the rich and powerful fool us into thinking they were somehow on our side. All we needed to do was elect them or put them into the corner office. Then the money and jobs would flow. Well, all they've done for us is take our jobs and support each other in their lies. They lie about war. They lie about profits. They even lie about global warming.

There is no place left for aging writers and editors like Herbert. In this troubling era, when we need thoughtful commentators and smart, objective editors, we are tragically left with Fox News and large newspaper chains that only care about their own stock prices and reducing newsroom payrolls.

Click here read Herbert's last column.

Back in the saddle with a new twist

It should appear obvious by now that Calvacca Blog has been somewhat revived in recent weeks. What is not so obvious is that I am back in the saddle again in terms of having a "regular job" -- a place where I go each day to work, learn and share.

The the details of the job that I started this week aren't as important as the fact that I have ventured outside of the mainstream media for the first time in my three-decade career. I am working in the communications department at a quasi-governmental organization in Northern Virginia. Many of my journalism skills are expected to transfer well as I get deeper into the job, which is not to say that there isn't a whole lot of new stuff that I need to learn in the meantime. I am grateful for the opportunity and welcome the challenge.

While I have sometimes questioned the usefulness of former journalists starting blogs -- it's almost a cliche, particularly since the start of the recession/layoffs in 2008 -- I can report that blogging (and all that goes with it) appears to have been a worthwhile endeavor that helped me land my current position, which required online and writing skills, in addition to a journalistic and design background. In fact, this was the second regular job that I was offered in recent weeks with similar responsibilities and technical requirements. Both hiring managers came from the newspaper world and seemed to have an appreciation for the time that I spent at USA Today and other papers. Neither employer made age an issue, which was a nice change from what appears to be the new norm at many other companies.

While the job market remains pretty tough, particularly for former newspaper professionals with ink in their blood, there does seem to be some glimmer of hope for folks who are able and willing to make a few sacrifices and to learn some new tricks. But be prepared. One's prior credentials or pay grade don't always carry the same weight in a new field. In some ways, you have to embrace starting over. Depending on your financial obligations, that isn't always easy to do.

The vibe of a newsroom is a fairly unique thing. It grows on you. It's hard to duplicate in other businesses. Back in the day, if you were patient and did your job well, you could eventually make a decent living on an editor's salary at a large publication. Those days are just about gone, as journalists with big paychecks are being shown the door at an alarming rate. But there does appear to be life outside of the newsroom, and with any luck, it will be an acceptable life -- one that doesn't involve the constant threat of layoffs that has poisoned the newspaper business and cut tens of thousands of careers short.

Note: I expect my blogging to be light for the next few months. However, I do want to continue to have a presence here, so please feel free to check out the blog from time to time.

Are things looking up for newspapers?

I have been seeing some positive signs regarding the revitalization of the newspaper industry. That's certainly good news for seasoned guys like me who are looking for a way back into the business or related professions. There are thousands of unemployed journalists with a lot of talent out there -- victims of the recession -- so the competition for good jobs will be intense even if newspapers do rebound. But at least there are some signs of life and hope for those with ink (and pixels) in their veins. Too many good folks are either out of work or are pulling double and triple duty in newsrooms across America. A strong, credible media -- one that doesn't just run on fumes and interns -- is a must for this country. Read the latest from Editor & Publisher.

UPDATE: More good news.

Recruiters have a bird's-eye view of job woes

I e-mailed a newsroom recruiter acquaintance. He has worked at a Florida newspaper for over 25 years. The newspaper, which I won't name in order to protect this man's privacy, has always attracted top talent. The publication benefited from the efforts of this recruiter. It's been one of the best papers in the country, winning numerous awards and doing well in terms of circulation.

I discovered this week that the recruiter's job was eliminated last year. Another casualty of the recession. However, the company that he works for let him stay at the paper in a non-managerial editing position. I am sure it isn't ideal, but it's a job. As a senior staffer, at least he was given the option of remaining on the payroll when his recruiting job was eliminated. He didn't have to go on unemployment or relocate in his 50s.

I talked to another recruiter this week. She is at a well-regarded publication in Virginia. She is a couple years older than me. I told her of my situation. She was impressed by my resume. But I noticed a shift in her tone when she learned more about my extensive efforts to find work. She went from professional and complimentary to sounding scared and pessimistic -- scared for herself and her job, seemingly realizing that if I can struggle, so could she.

I figure my story scares a lot of people. Folks look at my credentials and can't believe I was laid off, let alone unable to find work for more than a year. They then look at their own precarious situations, wondering if they are about to fall through the ice.

The woman from Virginia told me how money is still being made at some newspapers, but that profits aren't going into hiring. Some papers are using revenue to pay down debt. She ended by saying she'd pray for me.

Another recruiter I know in another profession recently had to leave her job. It's not just newspapers that are struggling. Fortunately, she found a new job before being laid off. She saw the writing on the wall. The large company she worked for had lost a lot of employees in the last two years and wasn't hiring. Her position became unnecessary. She got out while the gettin' was good, something I regret not doing when I had the chance.

If you can break through the HR-speak, many recruiters will give you the real scoop on how bad the job situation is in this country. They are very well aware of the millions of very talented, very eager folks waiting in lines for jobs that don't exist. It has to be tough for these recruiting professionals to remain optimistic in the face of certain realities.

Reflecting back while looking forward

In 1994, after less than a year at The Associated Press in New York City, I was selected to go to Atlanta to cover the Super Bowl between the Buffalo Bills and Dallas Cowboys. It was quite an honor, especially considering there were far more experienced editors at AP than me at that time. I was so proud of being chosen that I kept my press pass for all of these years.

Even after I left the AP, I was contacted about a year later and asked if I wanted to return. I was flattered. They were offering me a better job than the one I had before. I declined for personal reasons. Soon after, I went to work at USA Today in Northern Virginia -- one of my favorite newspapers in those days. After hopping around a lot for the first 15 years of my career, I figured USA Today could be my last stop -- one of those places one goes to where they earn their gold watch after a quarter of a decade of service. I got my five and 10-year anniversary awards, but fell far short of 25 years.

Career moves came easily for me back then. In my first job out of college, I was promoted into a managerial editing position within my first six months. I was soon on a track to become a publisher in a small chain of newspapers, but I decided I wanted to live in Florida more than I wanted to be a publisher in Virginia. So after a short stint on the Eastern Shore of Maryland, I got a job as sports editor at a small paper south of Miami. I covered the Miami Dolphins and Hurricanes as well as the high school sports scene and professional boxing. Those were good years. Not much pay, but a lot of fun.

It never took me more than a few weeks to find a new job when I was younger. Sometimes they were marginally better jobs, sometimes they were significant leaps. It didn't dawn on me that I would be without work. I was fairly versatile and had a good work ethic that my bosses always seemed to appreciate. And it certainly never crossed my mind that I would be laid off.

Then on December 2008, as readers of this blog know, I was was laid off from USA Today after working there for 13 years. That was quite a shock.

The real harsh surprise for me came in the months following my layoff, when I began to search for work and encountered walls that were never there earlier in my career. I turned to friends and former colleagues, seeing if they could help. This was always a good method of finding work in the past, but not now. The recession wasn't helping, but there also seemed to be other forces working against me. The newspaper business began crumbling. A couple potential employers shockingly held it against me that I had worked at USA Today for so long. The national newspaper and parent company that owns it aren't well-liked within the industry for various reasons. It was guilt by association.

My early days at USA Today were filled with fancy office parties, views of Washington, D.C. from our windows and a pretty good newsroom staff. It was always tough work, but as a third-generation journalist, I was accustomed to the late hours, deadlines and contentious nature of the newsroom.

Here is a picture of me (left) at my first USA Today Christmas party in 1995 with two of my former colleagues who are still at the newspaper -- Dash Parham and Dave Merrill. These parties were very extravagant. The paper was doing well. The booze flowed. The shrimp were large. If you worked in journalism, it was a good place to be. Lots of resources. In fact, USA Today's parent company, Gannett, more or less had a hands-off policy when it came to its flagship newspaper. We enjoyed our independence and did good work. Eventually, Gannett got more involved with USA Today, which led to layoffs at the newspaper most people thought was immune. Read about the bonuses received after those record layoffs.

A lot has changed in the news business and my own career since the mid-1990s when that picture was taken. Essentially, I don't have a career right now. While I feel far from obsolete or incapable, I can't deny that finding work at this age is far different than finding work at 30 years old. There are days when I think back to how easily things flowed, the people I have met, the places I've been. And yet, things are so different now that it often takes my breath away how quickly one can go from cruising along in a modest career to ... well, I will let you fill in the blank.

One of the many lessons that I have learned from this is to never take anything for granted -- not even your own abilities. There is always something lurking out there somewhere waiting to take you down. If it's not a layoff, then it could be an illness. If it's not an illness, it could something else. So it's good to treasure what you have and not get too caught up in the little difficulties of a career, relationships or just everyday life, because when it's prematurely gone, it's awfully hard to rebuild.

Whether or not I get another shot remains to be seen. Whether I work inside or outside of the media, my batteries are recharged. I have a new perspective on work and life. I believe I have more to offer to an employer now than I did when I got laid off. Finding that right fit isn't going to be easy, but if I do I know that the latter years of my career probably will surpass the early days in some profound ways. Job satisfaction, I suspect, will come from other sources that don't necessarily include fat paychecks, free Heinekens and trips to the Super Bowl.

Journalists struggling to survive

Gannett, the publisher of USA Today (my former employer) and dozens of other newspapers, shed 8,100 jobs since 2007, according to Gannett Blog, which is published by a former employee, Jim Hopkins. The blog apparently has a large following and is worth a look for anyone interested in the media business.

That 8,100 number surprised me. It's about twice as many job losses as I previously thought. Read about it here.

Pictured at the top of this post are Gannett headquarters and USA Today in McLean, Va. -- two towers joined by one of the largest lobbies you will ever see in an office building. The pricey complex in a high-end part of Fairfax County is relatively new. Some refer to it as the "crystal palace." However, the palace has a low occupancy rate of late, not that all or even most of those 8,100 job losses came at this campus. The job losses were spread throughout the country. List of Gannett newspapers.

While the building is impressive and was a nice place to work, this level of splurging doesn't take place at other Gannett properties. For instance, here's the office of the Gannett-owned Daily Times in Salisbury, Md., a modest-at-best place where I worked in 1980, before it was bought by Gannett. It apparently hasn't changed much and is typical of smaller newspaper buildings.

Gannett has always been known for running lean operations at their community newspapers. But so have other media companies. Thomson Newspapers owned The Daily Times when I worked there and paid and staffed very poorly, despite fat profits from lots of paid advertisements and decent circulation on the Eastern Shore of Maryland. Of course, those were the days when newspapers had high-profit margins -- higher than most businesses. Not sure exactly where the profits went. Most folks in the newsroom made less than first-year school teachers. That hasn't improved much over the years.

The Gannett building in McLean might give the impression that journalists are rolling in cash. I can say with certainty that isn't true, which makes all the job losses in that industry even worse because many laid-off employees couldn't pad their savings accounts enough to weather this storm. Still, many journalists are hoping they can re-enter the field once the economy improves.

Workaholics aren't good for business

I saw a job ad today titled "Workaholic wanted." I am seeing more of these types of ads where the demands of the job are rudely spelled out. I guess in a depressed job market employers don't feel they have to sugarcoat anything. The ads have a take-it-or-leave-it tone that border on threatening. And most of the employers who take this macho approach won't even bother to respond to your application if you don't sound willing to take a blood oath to work until you drop.

When the economy turns around, I wonder whether anyone will ever want to work for these places that treated people so badly during the tough times of this recession?

I think certain employers, who are sounding more like Southern plantation owners than modern-day business leaders, are shooting themselves in the foot with their total disrespect for the majority of people seeking employment. Advertising for a "workaholic" is like placing a help-wanted ad seeking emotionally unstable people. Anything with "aholic" tacked on to the end of the word is a sign of a potentially unbalanced human being who should not be in the workplace, let alone put at the top of the list of prized job candidates.

The person who placed this ad that I saw today should be removed from his or her job. It's that stupid, trite and shortsighted. There are plenty of better ways to state work-ethic requirements. If using the word workaholic is the best this ad-placer could come up, they shouldn't be involved in recruiting or any form of strategic thinking.

Employers who believe it's cute or effective to demand such traits in applicants will most likely end up with burned out employees in a very short period of time, or ones who move to the next job rather quickly. Ultimately, it does the bottom line little good to have a workforce filled with workaholics and high turnover. It doesn't spark innovation. It douses creativity. It causes illnesses (and lots of sick days) and eventually will eat away at the core of businesses. Look no further than the failing newspaper industry to see where buildings filled with underpaid workaholics lead.

There is a better way.

Instead of seeking workaholics, businesses (including newspapers) should hire smart, responsible folks with relatively healthy minds and grounded lives. People who can keep life, including work, in perspective. Spending 16 hours a day in a cubicle isn't a sign of a good employee. In fact, it's often a sign of someone who is either inefficient with their time or doesn't have the talent to work at a reasonable pace. It could also mean that that person is not functioning well in other areas of life, which can really come back to haunt an employer or colleagues of the workaholic.

Of course, there are times when long days are necessary. Emergency workers often have to push themselves to the brink for a greater good. But that shouldn't be the norm. I don't want a surgeon operating on me who has been working 18 hours straight. I don't want my pilot pulling a double shift.

Any business owner who thinks he or she has found gold in a workaholic is living in an antiquated world. They will create a business environment that produces results contrary to what they thought workaholics would bring to the table. Workaholics are often broken people with limited range and identity issues. It might look good to have a room filled with folks burning the midnight oil, but does it really produce positive results over the long run? Do these overworked employees have time to think, plan or form strategies that will improve business? I am a huge proponent of solid work ethics and living up to one's responsibilities, but I don't support the concept of a proving worth and character via the overtime sheets.

Google does it right. They don't advertise for workaholics. They are more enlightened than your average plantation owner from the 1800s and are a good model for the next decade. They don't go to the whip or find honor in burning out employees. They hire people based on the correct criteria and give them breathing room. That space and life-work balance helps inspire some pretty neat products. Those ideas and products keep the profits flowing and put certain companies, that keep trying to find workaholics, out of business.

Unreliable news: A recipe for collapse

Here's an interesting article about how downsized newsrooms and the outsourcing of reporting/editing can lead to inaccuracies, journalistic ethical problems and credibility issues in the stories we read or watch on television/online: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/18/business/media/18papers.html?hpw

Credibility is worth its weight in gold to most legitimate media companies. It's the lifeblood of newspapers like The New York Times. The public is well served by media that strive to get it right. So if the trend of errors and embarrassing mishaps continues, it could mean another financial setback for mainstream news organizations. An unreliable product is not a recipe for success. Without the professional newsroom gatekeepers, almost anything the public reads or views will be suspect and less attractive to customers.

Most adults still read newspapers

A new Scarborough Research study has found that 74% of adults (about 171 million) in the U.S. read a newspaper in print or online during the past week. The percentage is even higher among affluent folks. Yet, newspaper companies continue to struggle to find new revenue streams and are still shedding jobs.

The newspaper business seems to be one of the few industries that produces a product (credible information) that people want and routinely use, yet it still can't seem to financially right itself enough to satisfy boards of directors and nervous investors. Despite massive layoffs and other cost-cutting measures that have watered down content, profits remain flat because of the lack of advertising due to the recession. Circulation is down because of free news offered online, but circulation is not the main source of revenue for most papers.

However, one must keep in mind that newspapers historically have outperformed many other businesses in terms of profit margins. Journalists are generally paid a lot less than comparably educated folks. Most newspaper buildings are modest to say the least. Amenities and perks are few except at the largest media companies.

People go into journalism for various reasons, but money is generally not high up on the list. When a journalist loses his or her job, it's extra painful because it's unlikely that they have accumulated enough savings to ride out an extended storm. And we are in the mother of all storms right now.

What some papers are experiencing in this recession are margins more in line with other industries. The panic, which has included thousands of layoffs, does not seem to be as warranted as some might think.The companies carrying the most debt are the ones in the most trouble. Laid-off workers are paying the price for the mistakes made by people at higher pay grades. But some of the smaller chains are getting by because they did not overspend during the good times. Many newspapers, big and small, are still profitable. If you didn't follow the business closely, you might think newspapers were like certain automakers, losing millions every week. That simply is not the norm for most publishers. Some newspapers that were hurting the most have closed their doors. But most live on.

There is a necessary transition more than an extinction going on in newsrooms, but tell that to people, like myself, who lost their jobs after 20 or 30 years and are struggling to find new ones. I support that transition to digital-news gathering and high-tech delivery systems, but loathe the way some companies are going about it.

After the loss of so much institutional knowledge via layoffs, one has to wonder what condition the business will be in when the smoke clears. Will readers still be there if content becomes less credible? Will investigative reporting be deemed as too costly? Will journalism schools bother teaching the basic principals of fair reporting and artful photo editing, or will they just offer courses in how to design web sites and sell pop-up ads? Will journalists have some life experience and perspectives that enrich their stories, or will everyone over 50 be forced out of newsrooms? Will front pages become massive advertisements? As a side note, I always found it admirable that Google refuses to put a single ad on its home page. They see creative and marketing value in keeping the page pristine.

I am convinced that for news products to remain viable, the basics need to be taught in universities and on the job by seasoned journalists. Just as an astronomer needs to understand math, a web designer better receive some instruction on libel, story editing, headline writing and freedom of information laws. Those building blocks help form strong news products that distinguish themselves from supermarket tabloids and off-the-wall blogs. I fear some decision-makers are losing sight of that and are therefore their own worse enemies in terms of ruining newspapers.

Whether the news is in print or online, content is a valued product that takes a diversity of talented people to produce, design and sell. When I see organizations like The Associated Press laying off a 70-year-old photographer, as it recently did, I fear something other than a paycheck is being lost. Many newspapers try hard to acquire ethnic and racial diversity in their workforce, but seemingly do little protect older workers anymore. It wasn't always that way.

The Scarborough study proves there is still an appetite for news. Walk into almost any coffee shop or onto any commuter train and you will see people reading the paper. It's up to industry leaders not to wreck the business while trying to survive the recession. If traditional companies continue on the path of torching everything in sight in order to improve bottom lines, I believe media startups will spring up to satisfy the public's need for news -- online, on Kindles and iPhones, and yes, even in print to some degree.

Newsprint still works for historic events

The Killeen Daily Herald set single-copy sales records in the aftermath of the Fort Hood shootings last week. You hear this quite often, after a tragedy or other big news event, that newspapers still sell out quickly. A Yankees World Series win meant big sales for the New York papers. Last year's presidential election was a banner day for national print publications like USA Today.

Yet, we also hear that the newspaper business is dying. Being a layoff victim of that industry, I often feel there is no future for print publications. But then along comes these big news days and customers flock to the stands to read all about the good, bad or ugly. And while readers also go the the news web sites, they seem to have a insatiable desire to feel paper in their hands when it comes to historic events.

I think there is a lesson for publishers and journalists in this phenomenon.

Unemployment increases to 10.2%

The news today is worse than expected. Unemployment jumped the 10 percent mark. The unemployment rate only measures the number of people actively seeking work. Many have stopped looking for a job for various reasons. And many more have become underemployed and are hanging on by a thread. They are not counted in the unemployment figures. They have little hope of returning to once vibrant careers.

Meanwhile, layoffs continue. Businesses are still closing. Borders books announced this week that it will close many of its smaller stores. Storefronts remain empty. The newspaper business, the profession I worked in for 29 years, continues to get rid of journalists, ad reps, circulation managers and others.

It's hard to see anything positive happening in this so-called economic recovery.

Update: Read more about the real number of out of work or underemployed people at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/07/business/economy/07econ.html?_r=1&hp

More on the decline of USA TODAY

The Wall Street Journal is poised to move back into the No. 1 position of weekday newspapers, displacing USA TODAY. Some theorize the price increase is mainly responsible for the circulation decline at USA TODAY. However, as a former long-time employee, I don't believe the problems at USA TODAY can be blamed on just one thing. More about that in a future post.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/usmediaindustrynewspaperswsjusatoday

USA TODAY's circulation takes a major hit

USA TODAY, my former long-time employer, is facing some dismal news. According to an article in Editor & Publisher, the "nation's newspaper" will report circulation losses of 17 percent in the last six months. The actual number of newspapers: nearly 400,000 copies. To put that in perspective, that's more papers than the total circulation of many metropolitan daily publications.

For anyone who has worked in the newspaper business, you know these are staggering numbers, even in the age of readers migrating to digital platforms. They are particularly bad for the national paper because unlike many other newspapers, USA TODAY counts heavily on circulation for revenue. Other papers rely more on advertising.

E&P article: http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1004021019

Working smart more important than ever

Reflecting on the YouTube video on my previous post, one of the biggest challenges for newspapers is in continuing to publish the revenue-producing print products while creating online versions that are attractive to readers and advertisers. Newsrooms essentially have to pull double duty with fewer people because of all the layoffs and cutbacks in recent years. Not the best environment to spawn innovation. Yet, it has to be done in order for big and small media companies to survive and thrive in the future. And it has to be done fast because the old model is failing.

How does any company build a new product when the old product still exists? Imagine suddenly making a car-repair place fix cars and planes, with no new staffing and minimal training. The difference between online and print news products are often that stark. Gathering content for each has enough variations to require training and additional skill sets, not to mention time. Most newspaper folks will tell you they were stretched 20 years ago, before having to concern themselves with the web. So no wonder the stress level in newsrooms these days is off the charts.

Working smart is more important than working hard. I've always believed that. Those newspaper publishers and editors who subscribe to that belief will probably survive. Those who think everyone can work 70 hours a week and everything will be fine, well, they probably won't last much longer.

Music died for print monopolies

Sadly, journalists will appreciate this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CqRcCHk_Pc

Digital is hammering print in the news business, and still some companies don't get it. The more stubborn mega-media companies are being brought down by dudes with funny haircuts and iPhones.

With that said, I do believe print journalists have many desirable skills that can transfer to digital platforms. It's just a matter of getting on board and working for a company that understands the benefits of moving to digital. Too many papers are wasting too many resources trying to keep print alive. Print should be a billboard, sort of speak, to promote web sites and other electronic delivery systems. But the real money and time investments must go into web site development and marketing, not in cutting down more trees and delivering a product that is yesterday's news.

Another first in a year of firsts

Unless a miracle happens, I just realized that I will soon celebrate a birthday without a job for the first time in my adult life. I turn 52 on Sunday.

I began a real career at age 21, right after graduating from Lynchburg College. For nearly three decades, working at newspapers helped put food on my table. My only prior work experience was in a smelly summer job as a teenager at the highway department, picking up trash and watching the older guys (the drivers of the trucks) figuring out new ways to do less work. Now I am an older guy trying to figure out a way back into a career.

Post-layoff world at 50something

OK, we've all heard the horror stories about the current job market. The evening news gives us the statistics. The human aspects of the unemployment struggle are seen in the personal relationships we have with those who have fallen victim to layoffs. We know many of the reasons for the layoffs, few of which have anything to do with wrongdoing or shortcomings on behalf of those who have been let go. The financial strains are very real. The self-esteem issues that arise can be jarring. I intuitively knew all of this before last year. Yet nothing prepared me for what was to come in a post-layoff world.

Last December, in the blink of an eye, my job as an editor at USA TODAY came to an end. Relationships that evolved over 13 years were suddenly terminated after a few parting words and expressions of sorrow. Out of sight, out of mind quickly took on new meaning for me. The details of my layoff are not important for this entry. Needless to say, I have some issues about the circumstances behind my dismissal. Regardless, last December was a dark day. Not the worst day in my life, but in the top 5. Not only because I lost a job for the first time in my 29-year career, but because I was being rejected in a place where I showed the most loyalty of my career and sacrificed so much to do a difficult job. Even with all of my editorial skills and experience, there was no place for me in a rather massive media company. I thought, how can that be? I have design, editing, writing, photography and management experience. There is virtually nothing in a newsroom that I haven't done. I've covered the Super Bowl as a photo editor and was a beat reporter for the Miami Dolphins. I wrote about crime and politics as a reporter in southern Virginia and Maryland. I redesigned newspapers and led entire newsrooms at community dailies. In doing all of this, I also lost some balance in the rest of my life - a mistake I won't repeat when I find a new job. It's healthier to not live to work and studies show employees are more productive when they are able to disconnect from work on weekends and other times off.

At USA TODAY, I essentially was the lone print graphics department manager. Others had left or been driven out (their words, not mine) in the previous year or so and were not replaced. I couldn't understand how I could be deemed as expendable when in fact I could have been easily transferred to another department or another property within the parent-company, Gannett Corp. My layoff seemed hyper-personal. I had no issues with Gannett or USA TODAY per se. I liked working there. Had good reviews. I took pride in the brand and rarely missed a day of work. I often worked until 1 a.m. or later. Yet, this still happened.

Closure has been difficult to find. At age 52, I am in a gray area. Too young to retire and apparently a little too old in the eyes of some to be given a chance to start over. I stayed where I did, at the "nation's newspaper" because I thought I had job security -- an important thing to have in a terrible economy. Loyalty, good work ethics and competency use to yield job stability. But the rules have changed. What I am finding out now is that by my staying with USA TODAY as long as I did, at that stage in my life, I actually hurt myself. Sort of got pigeon-holed. One or two publishers of smaller newspapers have recently said they are reluctant to hire folks from bigger organizations. Said those who have worked at the larger papers are, for lack of a better word, spoiled. All I could think of was how untrue that was in my case. I never took anything for granted at USA TODAY and rarely took advantage of the many perks offered by the flagship employer. My ethics were formed at the smaller papers I worked at early in my career. I never felt spoiled in any way.

The biggest challenge that is on my plate is in selling myself to a potential employer at my age and in this horrible recession. Yes, the recession continues despite what some politicians want you to believe. What I have accomplished professionally in the past doesn't seem to matter. In one way or another, I have applied for about 300 jobs in nine months. There is rarely a day that goes by that I am not networking or online searching for jobs in and outside of the journalism field.

Finding work is often a lot harder than actually having a paid job. The rewards are almost non-existent. The ego is under siege on a daily basis because many employers don't bother responding to job inquiries, regardless of one's credentials. Being ignored can make a person feel small. And the isolation can be daunting. Day-to-day survival becomes more important than long-term planning. Staying healthy and living in the moment take on greater importance. Each day starts off with optimism and often ends in tiresome anxieties.

I think there are many wrong perceptions about being 50something that aren't good for our society as a whole or as individuals. Fifty is NOT the new 40 except for in the movies or on Madison Avenue. Fifty is simply 50. If I were a baseball manager, I'd be marketable at this age. But I am a journalist. An "average Joe" in a once honorable profession where I learned from my elders. Journalism has taken a hard turn towards the young, the flashy the trendy. It's probably no coincidence that mainstream media continues to slip on the public credibility polls. But the young also bring ideas to the table and reject old models that no longer work. I respect that.

Regardless of how up to date one is, or how many blogs they write, it's still a tough stereotype to beat when age equals inability to stay current in the minds of some. Age discrimination is alive and well in America. And if that isn't all enough of a barrier, the newspaper industry is hurting in epic proportions. I believe some of the pain is self-inflicted through mega companies obtaining ridiculous amounts of debt and compounding the problem by making poor decisions on getting rid of so much institutional knowledge and diluting print products so that they are less desirable to readers. But there is also no doubt that readership patterns are changing and that the business model for publishing needs to evolve. More and more folks are talking about newspapers needing to become non-profits, which I think has some merit. A free society without newspapers in some form will not stay free for long. If big business can't keep newspapers viable, maybe it's time to take an entirely new approach, one that isn't driven by ad revenue or online page views. Probably would help journalism return to more substantive reporting in certain venues.

Trying to convince employers in other industries that being a lifelong journalist has in many ways prepared me for a variety of vocations is another tough nut to crack. These non-media employers don't easily see how journalism prepares one to write, research, edit, speak intelligently on a variety of topics or to be an effective advocate. They don't understand how we are trained to deal with deadlines and to embrace technology, and how those skills would be an asset in almost any business. Journalists are hard-working folks. We work nights, weekends and holidays and rub elbows with every segment of society. But I remain hopeful that someone will eventually be able to connect the dots, see the tangibles as well as intangibles that I can offer. There are many of us out here in unemployment land who could be hired at bargain basement prices and would be profoundly grateful to be employed again.

I have to hope that the smartest employers will eventually tap into the wealth of experience that is available. There is no other choice. Hope, of course, is everything, particularly when you're 50something and looking for a job.