I'm tied up on other matters today, so I wasn't planning to post anything. But I was very taken with Juan Antonio Giner's assessment of the financial problems at the New York Times. (And thanks to Adam Hodgkin for bringing it to my attention). By Senor Giner's laconic standards, it's unusually long. Though I'm uncertain about the point of the President Bush analogy, there is wisdom in this controversial statement, so read on...
"Despite a difficult print advertising environment, we continued to make progress on our strategy of introducing new products, developing our content verticals, building our innovation capability, aggressively managing costs and rebalancing our portfolio of businesses," said Janet Robinson, the New York Times company president and ceo.
So... down again. Again. And again. Here is my point: the New York Times is better than ever online and offline. The editorial quality of these two products is outstanding. If they cannot make money, I am sorry, but who can make it?
The New York Times has the best editors in the country. The best reporters. The best columnists. The best designers. The best photographers. The best graphic artists. And it is the best media branding in the world. If this is right, let me ask a very serious question.
Are Janet Robinson and her business team the real problem for the New York Times? Are all these managers doing the job needed to save this paper? Are all these professionals delivering the results that this paper deserves? No. It's very clear to me.
Many times, in many countries, in many markets, I hear the same comments and excuses from editors of papers in decline: "You know, Juan Antonio, the problem is these business managers that don't know how to sell the paper." Perhaps they are incompetent, lazy, arrogant and the real problem in this company. The Sulzberger family [the owners] are only culpable for not firing them.
They are the ones to blame; not for their personal performance -- if the United States can work with Bush in the White House, I don't see why the New York Times can't work with the Sulzberger family. They're the ones to blame because they're the ones who keep these people. Fire them and save the New York Times!
That's almost all of Giner's posting. And he certainly doesn't hold back, does he? But is he correct?
