Letter: WoMag Owners On The Wrong Track
To the editor,
I read your article in the December 8, 2008 issue of the Worcester Business Journal regarding Worcester Magazine (“New WoMag Ownership Looks For ‘Edge’”) with more than a passing interest, as I was the managing editor of that publication until Aug. 29 of this year. And in the interest of full disclosure, my employment with Worcester Publishing Ltd., the magazine’s parent company, lasted 17 years.
On that day in August, I was fired — along with six others — by Mssrs. Davis and Charter. We were told that our dismissals had nothing to do with performance, so it must be presumed that “the bottom line” governed our terminations.
While it’s true that our job cuts, along with other seemingly ill-advised “business decisions” by the new ownership likely saved them in excess of $300,000, it must be stated that Worcester Magazine was, prior to its sale, already operating in the black — a rare event indeed in print media these days. And while the magazine’s new owners did little more than look at the bottom line, they obviously failed to take into consideration that our “exorbitant” salaries were the result of literally decades of rewarded service, coming in such small annual increments that all of us were still paid less than our colleagues with similar experience at other publications of equal or greater reputations.
Yes, it’s cheaper to have less-experienced writers and editors working for you, as Worcester Magazine has now, but is that in the best interests of the product and its consumers? By the way, we were not “laid off” as you state in your article, we were fired. “Laid off” implies an eventual return to employment with the same company. Those calls have not come, nor do we, the unemployed, expect that they will.
And while we're on the subject of reputations, it is still difficult for me (and many others) to believe that Worcester Magazine - or any publication for that matter - could summarily dismiss individuals of the talent, expertise and accumulated wisdom possessed by Charlene Arsenault and Chet Williamson. Sure, the rest of us had years in the business, loved our jobs and did them extraordinarily well, but Charlene and Chet did more than report the news from the arts and entertainment communities - they were both integral parts of that scene, their collective voices were the manner of the magazine, and the "new" Worcester Magazine clearly suffers from their loss. To state, as Mr. Davis did in your article, that he believes in "the importance of local media," and then to immediately fire the very people who endowed Worcester Magazine with that gravitas, indicates either a fundamental misunderstanding of the business -- or worse, he doesn't care.
In terms of "edginess," Davis and Charter take great pride in the recent cover story which shadows Worcester police officers during a night shift. I can tell you that this story has been on the magazine's editorial calendar for more than a year, so "edgy" may not be the best description of its final appearance in print.
Perhaps most telling in your story was the acknowledgment by Davis and Charter that they were caught "off guard" by the backlash that ensued following the announcement of their purchase of Worcester Magazine. If, as they assert, the pair had spent more than a year courting Allen Fletcher to buy the publication, and if they had done their due diligence (or even bothered to find out who we were and what we did), they would have known the effects their staff cuts would have had on the quality of the magazine and on the public it serves. To not have known or anticipated that reaction, speaks volumes about how these men do business.
Very shortly, the New England Press Association (NEPA) will announce its selection of "Newspaper of the Year" for 2008, and Worcester Magazine has been nominated to receive this prestigious award. But in the event the magazine wins, it will not be because of the people who now own and run it. That award - and its nomination -- are a testament to the dedication, diligence, competence, pride and love the now-departed family of employees of Worcester Magazine had for their product.
Finally, Mr. Davis says he and Gareth Charter are "long-term thinkers." Those of us who used to work at Worcester Magazine were long-term thinkers as well. We also had a passion and enthusiasm for what we did, and a devotion to our labors that made coming to work every day a pleasure. We honored our readers and their intelligence, and never took their loyalty to us for granted. We consistently gave the best of ourselves for their information and enjoyment. Time will tell if any of these qualities mean anything to the new ownership of Worcester Magazine. Sadly, so far, there has been no indication that this has been the case. The pursuit of revenue seems to have supplanted respect for employees, advertisers and readers alike. Yes, business is business, but Worcester Magazine was, until the end of August of this year, so much more than that, and it will be missed. The time will come when the "speak highly" of the magazine's name can no longer be sustained by those of us who made it what it was. And only then can the true motives and competence of the current ownership be judged.
Lester W. Paquin
Barre, Massachusetts
WBJ Web Partners
Most Recent
Most Recent
0 Comments