Business Two major newspaper chains dropped the AP. What will it mean for readers? - Both Gannett and McClatchy say they will have no trouble filling their pages with news, but some observers warn that the cost-saving move will rob readers of a reliable source of reporting

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Two major newspaper chains dropped the AP. What will it mean for readers?
The Washington Post (archive.ph)
By Laura Wagner
2024-03-21 20:49:41GMT

Since the Mexican-American War of 1846, newspapers large and small have turned to the Associated Press for reporting from places inaccessible to their own reporters.

With more than 200 bureaus around the globe, the AP remains the biggest brand name among what came to be known as the wire services, transmitting its articles and images to news outlets for a licensing fee. Some smaller papers came to rely so heavily on its content that “AP” was their single most frequent byline.

But now, two major American newspaper chains have said they will no longer use the AP for news. Gannett, the publisher of USA Today and more than 200 local newspapers, and McClatchy, which publishes the Miami Herald and Kansas City Star among more than two dozen other newspapers, said this week that they were ending their content relationship with the AP.

In memos to staff and public statements, executives with both companies described it as a cost-saving move — in the “millions” of dollars, according to McClatchy brass — and said they will have no trouble filling the news gap.
“We create more journalism every day than the AP,” Gannett executive Kristin Roberts said in a Tuesday memo obtained by the Wrap.

But some media observers — including staff members at the affected newspapers — warned that the decision will cut off a vital source of reliable reporting that their readers have come to depend on.

“It’s a loss,” Ilana Keller, a content planner and reporter at the Gannett-owned Asbury Park Press in New Jersey, told The Washington Post. “As our reporting staff got smaller and smaller, we relied more on more on wire services to help fill in the gaps, and losing that is incredible.”

Margot Susca, an American University journalism professor and author of “Hedged: How Private Investment Funds Helped Destroy American Newspapers and Undermine Democracy,” said she is worried about what might now fill those pages.

“The Associated Press is one of the most reliable organizations that provides … national and state coverage,” she said emphasizing the role “objective reporting” plays in an election year.

“For anyone who cares about news in a functioning democracy,” she added, “this is just another nail in the coffin.”

In an emailed statement, AP spokeswoman Nicole Meir said the news service hopes Gannett and McClatchy will continue to use its content news services and that conversations with both chains are ongoing, suggesting the publishers’ decisions could be part of a contract negotiation strategy.

“We appreciate that these are difficult decisions to make and deeply understand the challenges the news industry faces,” Meir said in the statement. “At the same time, this would be a disservice to news consumers across the U.S. who would no longer see fact-based journalism from the AP.”

McClatchy did not respond to a request for comment. Gannett spokesperson Lark-Marie Anton told The Post that the decision to drop AP news “enables us to invest further in our journalism.”

At a journalism conference in Atlanta on Wednesday, Gannett CEO Mike Reed expanded on this idea. According to two attendees, Reed said that AP content was not as well read as locally produced stories; as such, it made better financial sense to save the money and hire local reporters to produce more of what readers want. (Indeed last year, Gannett sparked a mini-controversy by posting job openings for reporters dedicated to covering Taylor Swift and Beyoncé.)

But despite these recent efforts to beef up newsrooms — Gannett also recently pledged $2 million to building up operations at the Indy Star — there’s widespread skepticism about its intentions for its local news empire.

“It’s a pattern of we’re being told, 'Oh, we’re going to do whatever we can to save money so we can reinvest it in the newsrooms, and we’re not seeing that,” said Mike Davis, another Asbury Park Press reporter who is acting unit chair of the union that represents the paper. Last year, hundreds of journalists at Gannett newspapers in several states went on strike to protest the company’s newsroom cuts.

“The lowest earner in our unit has been here for 33 years, and makes $39,000,” Davis said. “We’ve had jobs open for almost two years and we haven’t filled them.”

Tim Franklin, senior associate dean of Northwestern’s Medill journalism school and director of its Local News Initiative, said it’s fair for staff to be skeptical.

“The big question is, is this going to be reinvested back in local newsrooms?” he said, adding that doing so would be “good journalism and good business practice.”

Susca thinks Gannett’s recent history speaks for itself, noting that the chain’s total staff has shrunk by 47 percent in the past three years.

“For Mike Reed to say that Gannett wants to provide robust local news, when over the course of four years that company has cut more than half of his staff as the largest newspaper chain in America, it’s laughable,” she said.

Both companies have struggled financially in recent years. In 2019, Gannett merged with GateHouse Media under New Media Investment Group, a subsidiary of private equity firm Fortress Investment Group, in a deal that left Gannett saddled with debt. McClatchy was sold to hedge fund Chatham Asset Management in a 2020 bankruptcy auction.

“Certainly I hear people say that these are bad years for newspapers, but it’s never a bad year for executive pay,” Susca said. In 2021, for example, Reed earned $7,741,052 according to SEC filings, while the company continued to lay off employees.

Gannett said it will continue to license the AP’s election data and its stylebook, a set of language and grammar guidelines for newsrooms.

The AP said U.S. newspaper fees account for around 10 percent of its annual income and that the loss in revenue from Gannett and McClatchy would not drastically impact its finances.

Correction
An earlier version of this story misspelled the first name of Gannett executive Kristin Roberts. The story has been corrected.

---

Gannett, McClatchy news chains say they will stop using Associated Press content
Associated Press (archive.ph)
By David Bauder
2024-03-20 03:19:05GMT

NEW YORK (AP) — The Gannett and McClatchy news chains, publishers of more than 230 outlets including USA Today and the Miami Herald, have said they will stop using journalism from The Associated Press amid continued financial pressures for the news industry.

The decision by Gannett, the nation’s largest newspaper chain, severs a century-old partnership. It “enables us to invest further in our newsrooms,” Gannett spokeswoman Lark-Marie Anton said on Tuesday.

A memo from Gannett’s chief content officer Kristin Roberts directed the chain’s editors to stop using stories, videos and images provided by AP on March 25. The memo, obtained by The Associated Press, was first reported by The New York Times.

Shortly after, AP said it had been informed by McClatchy that it would also drop the service. A McClatchy spokesperson did not immediately return messages seeking comment.

Like most newspaper companies, Gannett and McClatchy have been struggling financially for several years. Gannett’s workforce shrank 47% between 2020 and 2023 because of layoffs and attrition, according to the NewsGuild. The company also hasn’t earned a full-year profit since 2018, according to data provided by FactSet. Since then, it has lost $1.03 billion. The hedge fund Chatham Asset Management took control of the formerly family-owned McClatchy, with outlets in 30 U.S. markets, in a bankruptcy auction in 2020.

The AP was disappointed, considering there had been productive discussions with both news organizations, spokeswoman Lauren Easton said. The news cooperative remains hopeful that both chains would continue to support AP beyond their current contracts, she said.

“We appreciate that these are difficult decisions to make and deeply understand the challenges the news industry faces,” Easton said. “At the same time, this would be a disservice to news consumers across the U.S. who would no longer see fact-based journalism from the AP.”

Those involved would not specifically discuss how much money the news chains would save by this move, although it is likely to be in the millions of dollars.

In an earlier era, when fees from U.S. newspapers provided AP with virtually all of its revenue, such decisions would have represented a financial earthquake for the news cooperative. But AP has diversified its services with the decline of newspapers and U.S. newspaper fees now constitute just over 10% of its annual income.

With reporters in all 50 states and nearly 100 countries, The Associated Press provides news through text, still photography, audio and video for news organizations that can’t afford such reportorial reach on their own. The company says that AP’s journalism is seen by over half the world’s population every day.

The AP won two Pulitzer Prizes last year for its coverage of the Ukraine war. Partnering with PBS’ “Frontline,” AP last week won its first Academy Award, with the film “20 Days in Mariupol” honored as best documentary feature.

AP’s diversification efforts include offering its journalism directly to consumers through an advertising-supported website. The company also provides production services and software to newsrooms across the world. This week, AP launched an e-commerce site called AP Buyline, run by the company Taboola, that provides product content and reviews for consumers.

Gannett said it would continue paying for two of AP’s most visible services: its extensive election-related polling and vote-counting, and the AP Stylebook that sets guidelines for journalism practices and word usage. It said it has signed an agreement with Reuters to provide news from around the world in multiple formats, including video.

“Key to this initiative is ensuring that we extend the reach of the work we do to more readers, viewers and listeners nationwide,” Roberts said in her memo.

With a contract for AP’s content that lasts to the end of 2024, it was not clear why Gannett is choosing to cut things off next week. While there remains the possibility that it represents a negotiating tactic for AP to lower its fees, Anton said she was not aware of any contract negotiations.

McClatchy’s latest contract with AP was due to expire early next year, Easton said.
 
Last edited:
Gannett said it will continue to license the AP’s election data and its stylebook, a set of language and grammar guidelines for newsrooms.

Continue to boycott any agency that uses this woke stylebook that mandates apologia for felons, racist obfuscation of minority crime, and reference to illegal aliens as "undocumented citizens"
 
“We appreciate that these are difficult decisions to make and deeply understand the challenges the news industry faces,” Meir said in the statement. “At the same time, this would be a disservice to news consumers across the U.S. who would no longer see fact-based journalism from the AP.”

Does this actually make it harder for readers to read AP material? I assume AP is so widely distributed that anyone who wants it can go to any other paper's website and get it. This might be part of why the paper found that AP material wasn't as widely read as their locally produced stories - if Yahoo News (MSN, etc) is your homepage, or you also subscribe to a national newspaper, your local also pulling from the AP is redundant. If you don't fit into either of those groups you're probably a news consumer who's less likely to be hungry for AP material.

Edit: which is to say, I'm skeptical that this is actually a problem for journalism at all despite what the people quoted in the article is. If consumers were actually not able to get AP material, that would be one thing - but it's nearly ubiquitous. It strikes me as a savvy business call - as consumers are no longer stuck with a limited new supply, continuing to pay the AP because it's the done thing doesn't make the same kind of sense it used to. Why keep wire services when you can specialize? (or, just cut costs) Papers are eating shit these days, it makes complete sense to take what seem like radical steps to keep their business viable.
 
Let us all laugh at journalists: THEY PAY FOR THE AP! lol! That outlet is one of the lower of the low. Not MSNBC low, but not too far from it. They're like a literate MSNBC*.
* I think NPR used be considered the literate MSNBC for a while, but their literacy has mostly vanished.

Id rather get my news from white nationalists on twitter than journalists.
That's easy though. With WNs it boils down to: the jews. Often enough that's going to be the root cause of almost any worldly horror, but still, it's like cheating. You can point to any dastardly doing and yell, "the jews did this!" and odds are you're right. They've got the evil market cornered.

Does this actually make it harder for readers to read AP material? I assume AP is so widely distributed that anyone who wants it can go to any other paper's website and get it.

There's no avoiding the AP. It is everywhere. It owns internet search results like few other firms do. They are in a safe, commanding position for now.

I wonder if this this article is about getting in front of a potential divestment, to prevent others from ditching them. It is likely that smaller outlets could replace them with some AI-generated stuff in the near future. The AP, journalism is general, is going to feel that, if not be outright gutted by it. At least their staff will be. Higher-ups will be stacking the biggest bonuses anyone has seen before.

Imagine how good it will feel to cleanse an entire organization of journalists and replace them by robots. That's got to feel amazing.
 
Last edited:
“The Associated Press is one of the most reliable organizations that provides … national and state coverage,” she said emphasizing the role “objective reporting” plays in an election year.

“For anyone who cares about news in a functioning democracy,” she added, “this is just another nail in the coffin.”
Get the fuck out of here. All the fucking way. Really can't hate these fucks enough.
 
Gannett and McClatchy have made it so they no longer really provide any service.

First they took away all the local reporting, consolidated large numbers of newspapers, cut days of the week from circulation. Then they are cutting out wire services, which provided the only remaining news they were publishing.

At this point any remaining print or online editions will be, what, local announcements, classifieds, and display ads from boomers? What is even left in a Gannett rag?
 
McClatchy and Gannett don't stop paying for AP wire service: they go bankrupt a few years earlier than they would have otherwise

BFD
 
Gannett and McClatchy have made it so they no longer really provide any service.

Sued for enabling sexual abuse of paperboys in New York and Arizona​

Nearly three years after the first lawsuit filing, in July 2022, Gannett defense attorneys notified the court of their intent to file a motion to have the former paperboys' Child Victims Act cases taken "out of the state court system and turn them over to the New York Workers' Compensation Board" stating that the 11–14 year old paperboys [who were raped] should have applied for workman's compensation at the time of their injuries in the 1980s or upon enactment of the CVA in 2019.
"Were you a paperboy raped by your local news globomegacorp? You could be entitled to workers compensation."
If only executives were required to go down with the ship. Journalists will mostly stop existing soon enough - humanity wins for once! - but those that control them will walk away fat and fancy.

I'm going to live on the moon now. Don't try to follow me.

In that same memo, Gannett said it signed an agreement with Reuters to publish the newswire's global content.
So it's a wash then? Reuters is the same trash.
 
executives with both companies described it as a cost-saving move — in the “millions” of dollars
To save money in your newspaper, you're going to print less news...interesting.
according to McClatchy brass — and said they will have no trouble filling the news gap.
>Open Twitter
>Ctrl+F - orange mane bad
>Ctrl+p
>"Send it to circulation!"

lol,lmao even.
 
Back
Top Bottom