I responded to this message earlier today and used a link from an old story from Maclean's Magazine to illustrate my point, but the post was pulled, because I assume Kirk, and according to an email you sent me, you feel the information in the link is "out of date."

I agree, the info in the link is out of date, but the sentiment within it is not, and as such it doesn't seem like a good enough reason to pull my comment, but it's your blog, your rules. At other blogs the owner would simply debate the validity of the post, and in some places maybe even take a shot at the poster in an effort to drive them off the site. Pulling it doesn't make sense because blogs work best when they are transparent, not censored.

In another segment of your blog (How can newspapers create better blogs?) I commented that newspaper blogs adopt too many old world rules, but unfortunately that post also disappeared from your blog. Maybe there's a technical glitch here, as indicated by your email asking me when it was posted, so I'm prepared to give your blog time to settle in, but if you keep pulling posts because you disagree, or because you feel the comment is too personal, your blog won't have much appeal or value to anyone.

I appreciate that you took the time to respond to me via email, and to make clear the rules of posting on your blog. Consequently, I'm going to suggest that you post the rules where everyone can see them. It's ironic that after my previous comment about newspapers adopting too many traditional rules, I'm now asking you to post more rules. It is also not lost on me that I've been trying to get you to consider my perspective regarding other matters for years, and it took this blog to get your attention. However, now that you're slumming don't expect special consideration like you receive from your employees. Considering how newspapers impact a community, it's all personal.


So . . . I'll gladly ask the question again, but use another link to support my perspective, and I'll also use the euphemism "downsizing" instead of "layoffs."


If things are, as you write, in such a "comparably good state in Canada" for newspapers, why all the downsizing at CanWest?

Excerpt from The Tyee Nov 8 2007;
Standing beside the city editor's desk in the Vancouver Sun newsroom late in the afternoon of Nov. 7, editor-in-chief Patricia Graham wanted the 110 newsroom staff assembled in an attentive semi-circle around her to know she took the news she was announcing very seriously.

"This is the most important discussion I've ever had with you in my time as editor," Graham said, according to a source who was at the meeting.

Like her counterpart Wayne Moriarty at The Province, who was presiding at a simultaneous meeting in his paper's newsroom in the same building, Graham was announcing editorial staff reductions in newsrooms that have already been cut 50 per cent in the last decade and a half ... end of excerpt

The comments posted below the Tyee article are also interesting - a few are mine.

You can read the entire Tyee article here;
http://thetyee.ca/News/2007/11/08/JobCuts/