Things must be getting pretty rough at Fairfax if they can’t get a job response for the General Manager’s position via their own advertising network.
[My contacts] inside CT report a major shake-up underway which may see Canberra’s only daily rag reduced to a tiny operation operating out of someone’s mum’s basement. Printed edition to be dropped entirely.
Does anyone care? Or do people only access CT to backdoor the Fairfax “paywall”?
Loading ...
c_c™ said :
Maybe he meant there was another food poisoning story, this time at a curry restaurant.
That can be a much broader issue in toilet.
WillowJim said :
Interesting, thanks for posting.
c_c™ said :
I know someone involved in that matter, and the story (at least, the first one) was written by a CT reporter.
There’s much more to the matter that will come out, too.
dungfungus said :
Well his exact phrasing was “hot shit” indicating broader subject matter, but I prefer wording that doesn’t demean my intelligence.
c_c™ said :
hot story = record high temperatures.
Wasn’t this the BOM and CSIRO story earlier in the week?
c_c™ said :
Very interesting point – I looked at the story, but didn’t take note of the byline (smacks self over wrist). Perhaps it has something to do with the the need for “the Canberra Times business to have close relationships with government…..” – either that or there’s interstate links in the alleged misdeeds in the PTO.
Interesting development, Noel Towell spoke of colleagues working on some hot stories, but seems those colleagues aren’t Canberra Times. Story about the public trustee fraud today (http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/alleged-fraud-at-act-public-trustee-carried-out-over-seven-years-20140306-349jp.html) is credited to John Silvester, crime reporter for The Age in Melbourne.
Is the story really so big that a metro newsroom wanted to take it over? Are the CT really so short on people they had to shop a big story out interstate?
It’s interesting, wonder what it means.
NoImRight said :
+1
c_c™ said :
Dont feed the trolls. Obvious troll is obvious.
Roundhead89 said :
Gosh, a woman with aspirations and ideas running the joint, can’t have that can we.
This is a truly Mr G level of misogyny. If this is the calibre of people in local media, no wonder it’s such a waste land.
bundah said :
The CT was a very good paper in the 1980s with Crispin Hull as editor. Inexplicably in 1991 Kerry Stokes sacked him and appointed Michelle Grattan as editor. It just went down the toilet. Grattan said she tried to turn the paper into another Washington Times but I – and other readers – didn’t want a woman as editor and we told Stokes of our disapproval. At that time Stokes was trying to get Murdoch to buy the paper – despite the fact that the predecessor of the ACCC had blocked a Murdoch takeover of the CT in early 1987. Stokes appointed the former editor of The Australian David Armstrong as editor in 1993. When it was clear Murdoch wouldn’t take over the paper Stokes sold it to Rural Press in the late 1990s.
CT manager online would be a perfect role for JB – why the laughter? He could actually make a way, way better version of Riotact under the aegis of Fairfax. Riotact and CT have lots in common. Fairfax should be going out of their way to actively recruit JB. AND he is far more professional in terms of balanced reporting than, say, Jonathan Green on ABC.
c_c™ said :
Sounds like more of those click-worthy python pics on the way!
EvanJames said :
Digital journalism combined with precipitous falls in advertising revenue have taken their toll on newspapers. If the crimes goes under I can’t envisage anything successfully replacing it.
The CT was a good paper, right up until, the 90s? It’s hard to fathom what caused such a massive decline. A one paper town, and yet that paper still failed. And when it’s gone, I bet someone starts up a new paper, and it does OK.
c_c™ said :
Don’t sweat it CC, RA is probably protecting itself from a big sook backed by corporate cash who can’t handle having the spotlight reversed.
I’ve heard such sooks often get bitten by karma, once before and soon to be bitten again. Hope that isn’t too cryptic.
c_c™ said :
ok, now they are posted. No worries, carry on.
Oh come on what was litigious about the two comments that didn’t get posted?
Sounds painful!
I’m sure if the CT just switched to a “pictures only” format, and just did a weekend only edition full of bad parking photos, readership might improve?
Speaking of bad parking…why no 2014 threads for it?