Ann Marie Lipinski picked an odd time to quit her job as editor of the Chicago Tribune. Wheels were in motion -- she'd just launched a crash project to redesign and shrink the physical paper and also shrink its staff. Committees were meeting for hours a day about the first and editors were working out guidelines for the second. Now what? Has all that work been wasted? Gerould Kern, who takes over Friday, surely has his own ideas about how to cut, and onlookers who applaud Lipinski's news values must fear that Kern's ideas won't be as good. (He was, apparently, the guy in corporate who came up with the daffy idea of counting bylines to judge the value of staff.)
I've just been listening to someone inside the Tribune who's trying to think it through. (This person's years and experience add up to a perspective I've learned to respect and trust.) Lipinski had been editor seven years already, and Sam Zell and his cowboys were obviously not her style; if she thought of herself as a short-timer why put herself through the agony of deciding who stays and who goes? Yes, but who knows better than she does who's dispensable and who isn't, and who better to defend the Tribune's highest values than someone who's spent a career serving them?
Lipinski came back from a week's vacation in Korea with her husband and daughter with her head clear and her mind made up. It was time. She told her bosses last week, her top editors Sunday night, and her staff Monday. She works through Thursday and the farewell party's that evening at the Billy Goat.
But why did she take a vacation in the first place, while everyone around her was working overtime trying to reinvent the paper? This strikes my interlocutor as oddly insensitive. Lipinski had her friends at the Tribune, the celebrated Friends of Ann Marie -- or FOAMs -- but otherwise, this person says, she was not an impassioning leader. In recent months she'd been no Henry V -- or John Carroll or Dean Baquet, fallen leaders at the LA Times remembered for rallying the troops against the barbarians.
Of course, she's entitled to her own style. And those paladins in Los Angeles could make a strong case that they were right and the bean-counting bosses back in the Tribune Tower were wrong. But now Sam Zell and his crowd have swept those bean counters aside, and it's a lot easier to say the new crowd's arrogant and boorish than to say it's wrong. Plenty of staffers in the Tribune newsroom who'd lay down their lives for the traditional news values Lipinski represents think of Zell, nevertheless, as the paper's only hope of staying afloat.
So what was Lipinski supposed to rally the troops against? Well, against their deepening foreboding, the fear that things can only get worse. And inspiration wasn't her style. Which may be why the newsroom seemed oddly unemotional, I was told, after Lipinski made her announcement, even if the staff universally felt regret. Fearing the Goths in the hearth, it appears they'll miss what she stood for more than they'll miss her.
As for Kern, he lost a battle for managing editor to Jim O'Shea after Lipinski moved up to editor, and thereafter moved out of the newsroom and up to corporate. There are surely editorial staffers hired in the past five years or so who have never heard of him. But out of editorial's eyes, he was in Zell's. It's curious the bosses could settle on him so quickly -- they didn't even make him acting editor while they conducted a more careful search. Maybe Lipinski's resignation wasn't such a surprise.
I called William Gaines this morning and asked for his thoughts. A longtime Tribune investigative reporter, Gaines later taught journalism at the University of Illinois before retiring a year ago and moving back to Munster, Indiana. The Tribune's months-long investigation of City Council corruption in 1987 earned Gaines his second Pulitzer. He shared the award with two other Tribune reporters, Ann Marie Lipinski and Dean Baquet.
Baquet wound up at the LA Times. He became editor in 2005 when John Carroll, his predecessor, quit to protest staff cuts demanded of him, and the next year Baquet refused to make more cuts and was fired. (The publisher who fired him, David Hiller, fell out of favor with Zell and the other new bosses in Chicago and resigned Monday. That development was completely overshadowed here by Lipinski's resignation.)
Gaines was full of praise for Lipinski. He said she'd expanded the horizons of investigative reporting at the Tribune, which "had been predictable -- nursing homes, City Hall." In 1998, when she was the managing editor, she actually teamed him with jazz writer Howard Reich, who'd come across some old letters by Jelly Roll Morton complaining that he'd been cheated out of royalties by his publisher. Gaines did the digging and proved it was true. His series with Reich turned into a book.Thinking about 1988 reminded Gaines of Ellen Soeteber, who was the Pulitzer-winning team's metro editor. Soeteber later moved on to become editor of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. That paper was sold in 2005, and the new owners decided to cut the staff. So Soeteber quit.
And Gaines remembered Jim O'Shea. He was Lipinski's deputy ME at the time of the Jelly Roll Morton project, and he and Gaines worked on several stories together. "It’s a passing era, I think," Gaines reflected. "Over the years we had a certain type of journalism I don’t think anybody else was able to match. It seemed like we could take on any challenge."
O'Shea was the Tribune's managing editor when the Tower sent him to LA to replace Baquet. Coldly greeted at first, O'Shea wound up resigning early this year after fighting with Hiller over staff cuts.
And now we have Lipinski's inscrutable resignation.
Are there enough swords to supply all the editors falling on them? Are we seeing the birth of a proud new tradition?



It's difficult coming up with explanations for my journalism students at Columbia College Chicago as to why they need to learn hard-core traditional reporting and editing when the industry doesn't respect those skills or the people who developed them.
.
Now Lipinski apparently is leaving with no parting gift. But, after years in the big money editor's job, she probably can afford to leave. And she's getting out with her good reputation intact.
.
Except for the inconvenient fact that she leaves a newsroom full of reporters and editors who can't afford to walk out and who now (with the departure of George De Lama two months ago) have no longstanding, proven champion in the big glass offices. Moreover, those left behind are left under the nincompoop tutelage of Gerry the Byline Counter.
.
Brilliant.
But as to the withering emotional fire that an editor faces on finances and inventiveness, I do know a few things.
First, there are lots of derogatory comments on this failing from people who never had to face it, or haven't faced it for years. It's a brutal free fire zone on that topic now and has been for several years.
Trust me on this one. The answer from financial folks to the pleas and demands of an editor hoping to do better work with just a few more resources is often a polite version of "shut up and go sit down."
You can be told that as often as you have the tolerance for fundamental rejection. but people who write the checks have a decidedly low tolerance for debate and will send you into the darkness if you insist on your point.
The fact that an editor is supremely justified in asking for financial latitude has no bearing on the chances of actually getting the help.
True, those of us who spent our lives in newsrooms might be accused of a failure of vision.
We were not astute enough at commerce. We spent our careers trying to be better at a complex artform only to find out we should have been studying finances and marketing.
At some point, editors craved only the chance to think of great story ideas and surround themselves with great storytellers.
As to the Internet and why there was muted enthusiasm among senior newsroom folks, that too was largely out of their control for years (until very recently when money managers suddenly decided the Internet might save them, too. Some of us knew that all along and begged for support to launch initiatives..but got none...)
Many great ideas were simply vetoed by corporate managers who couldn't see the wisdom of any investment. If you believe editors were ultimately in charge of investment and development strategy, you just don't understand how newspapers worked.
Maybe Lipinsky simply got tired of a tilting-at-the-windmills war that was never going to be won. Critics may lament that her withdrawal shows some form of moral failure.
I suggest a more human answer. Fatigue makes fugitives of us all.
Lipinski wasn't considered very good at either, making the newsroom vulnerable to Zell and any other forceful business tilt to Tribune Co. Kern sounds like he's even worse in both areas -- he wants to put a ruler to reporters' annual output to gauge their productivity and he is beholden to Zell, Michaels, Abrams and others for the (out of his depth) position he now holds.
Newspapers have been run for way too long by managers, while badly lacking real leaders. Look where they have wound up.
A leader is not someone whose "news values" only work when operating a monopoly. Any moron can run a monopoly enterprise.
It is not surprising that she was out of country while her staff toiled in agony - a real heroine!. What did she earn as a Tribco VP? $550k plus bonuses?
.
At the Tribune, the point is made in defense of the problematic Internet operation that Col. McCormick himself was no wuss when it came to new media, investing in radio and TV as they came along.
.
But it's a stupid comparison. Radio and TV are, like newspapers, high-cost and (potentially) high-profit media. The Internet is exactly the opposite. Anyone can dive in with relatively little investment, and the audience is very dispersed, to such a degree that advertisers don't see much benefit from it.
.
There was a survey recently of UIC students asking them what online services they used and found most useful. Large majorities answered either MySpace or Facebook. Further, only 5 percent of them had ever even looked at any kind news site online, including news aggregators.
.
If news purveyors are hoping to capture young eyes online, they are damned fools.
.
Thus, it requires organic thinking about a business-type in transition and that's been very apparently missing not just in Chicago but nationwide. The irony is the early disdain for the web as if it were something college kids did in their dorm rooms. Actually the dot-com bust some years back assured business structure would include profit margins, understanding of operational costs and a deep understanding of opportunity loss.
As Kern's leadership begins, it is ridiculed for framing output of reporters against input from sales staff. The synthesis may be faulty but it's going down the right road.
All of you still working in the Tribune newsroom walk in the restroom right now and look in the mirror. No, really look at yourself and see if you can stand to keep looking when you ask "what did I do to help newspapers accept the change of an information age?"
Now try that water you've splashed on your face off, pull up your big boy pants and check the calendar. It's 2008. Not 1988, when Squires and Fuller ran big investigative pieces. When circulation piggy backed on the success of Michael Jordan and the Bulls.
The web has taught those who paid attention precisely what information consumers are interested in. Ironically, as I read through the manner in which photographers and designers have been treated -- the worm has turned. Visual information is among the most compelling bits carried around on a cell phone or viewed online.
Tribune staffers revolt! Tear your bibs off. Walk upright in an electronic age. And for god's sake, quit whining about Gerry and Rupert and blah, blah, blah. If you want to be a communicator evolve to the communicator you must become in an ever-changing journalism landscape.
Newsmen who cared about covering news were pushed aside.People who worked around the clock and turned in no overtime were passed over for editors jobs and people who worked from home and then wanted to bill the Tribune for a birthday party they gave there kids because they shot photos and did a story.
I stood in the editors office and asked the head of the graphic's department if there was a bridge over the Chicago river on Columbus Drive.She said No after I pointed to the bridge she said the readers don't know that so the graphic is OK. I said they drive across it ever day.A tornado hit just south of Chicago and we had photographers on the seen. The metro desk was told Reg Davis who later became my boss walked into the page one meeting and said we are not sure there was a tornado we have been calling but all the phone's are out of order.He was moved up in the Tribune chain .
Was it better before No!The problem now is who will be the gate keeper ? Where are the people who what to be journalist ? Were are the people who don't want to go home?Has the Tribune shot it's self in the foot yes. Do we need the Tribune you bet.If you build it they will come. Newspapers are the watch dog. I fear for Chicago the stae and the nation.
The Tribune was, in brief, a stupid newspaper shaped at all levels by stupid, mostly overpaid people who spent far too much time telling each other that they were wonderful.
It all added up to a long, painful path to decline and decay.
Perhaps new owners less married to the past and less rooted in the Tribune's dysfunctional culture, can yet save the once-proud newspaper, but I wouldn't bet the rent. Even innovative, forward-looking newspapers are struggling to reinvent themselves and for the most part are failing miserably. The way to go with the newspaper itself is to give up on the masses and aim squarely at the better-educated, more affluent readers, who can still be served up profitably to advertisers. The website, meanwhile, can become that medium for the younger, dumber generation, but not for free. With luck, some of the website users will eventually become addicted news junkies and embrace the print version as well, but there are no guarantees. Meanwhile, perhaps cable and broadcasting can become part of a coordinate mix of media that distribute the rich Tribune-produced content across multiple media. The future is not as a "newspaper" but rather as a "news COMPANY."
The first step, I think, is to bring in more new blood, meaning people who have actually seen the world outside of Chicago and know it to be round. To that end, dumping Lipinski and others with minds buried in the arrogance and isolation of the past is a necessary step in the right direction.