The Blog

We *must* be the change we wish to see in the world. -- Mahatma Gandhi With change comes opportunity No man- or newspaper- can be an island in these scary times. Independent voices must stick together. Newspapers are yellowing as Web pages refresh. The CL buy could be the beginning of the end... or the start of something huge. I like huge. Chin up.

I wish I could say with enthusiasm that Ben doesn't meddle with the content of his papers - but c'mon, this is the guy who raised cash to do a hostile takeover of his mom's company.

Ye gods! Right when I'm on vacation from the paper for three weeks! Sure hope you're all there when I come back. (Hell, I hope I'm there when I come back . . .) Au revoir!

"So back we go to these questions. Friendship. Character. Ethics." oops, that's not my line ...

"Well, we'll go out to Miller's Crossing ... and we'll see who's smart."

okay, i read the CL press release and am not so sure anymore. i still have my chin but not sure if it's pointed up or down or if i just want to tuck it in and assume fetal position.

I'm with Jerome; supposed to be coming back Friday, I am, and...what the heck. Well, I don't know what to think or say, but coraggio!

"We have built our Creative Loafing brand by offering valuable content to people who influence public opinion and public tastes in culturally vibrant markets..." “The addition of two top-ten markets--and two of the industry’s most respected alternative news products--offers us a pivotal gateway of connectivity with the young adult audience...” "The real opportunity lies now with our advertising partners, who can advance meaningful marketing initiatives through our unparalleled ability to engage the most creative and involved community leaders through our print, internet, and new mobile and event opportunities..." sounds like this guy is interested in one thing and one thing only: making $$$ get ready chicago reader: you are no longer a newspaper but instead officially a "news product"

Crain's http://chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=25766&seenIt=1dug beneath the surface a little: "He plans to move the paper's ad and page design and some other production functions to Atlanta, and may shift printing to Fayetteville, N.C. As for newsroom staff cuts, he hasn't decided." And in the City Paper blog, their editor is said to have told editorial staff "that the editorial budget is likely to be cut in the coming months to bring City Paper’s editorial expenses in line with other alternative weeklies." http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/index.php/2007/07/24/washington-city-paper-sold-to-atlanta-chain

Dills and I are sorry to hear about this.

It's disappointing to read such pessimism. I only wish I could share the excitement and enthusiasm we all felt this morning in Tampa when we learned the Reader was now part of our family. I've been working for CL-Tampa since January and a reader since I was in high school. I can tell you that enriching lives and strengthening communities isn't just a slogan. It's what we do. I understand your fear at a time like this but your courage is what is needed. Give Ben and the rest of us a chance. Who know's... you might actually like us!

I cannot speak to the reasons for pessimism from readers, but I suspect the pessimism from staff members has much to do with the possibility of unemployment (vid. Harold's comment).

"I can tell you that enriching lives and strengthening communities isn't just a slogan. It's what we do." I only wish John Houseman were alive to whisper this in my ear.

amen to "not so sure." from looking at the CL home page it appears as if they brand themselves as a "shelter from the mainstream." must everything be branded? Must all edges be smoothed? i guess we will just have to have faith and keep positive. it's good, talented, people that made the Reader what it is today... and those same people (hopefully) that will keep it moving into the future. in ben we trust.

no shit. also on vacation (hi Jerome, hi Liz!) and not exactly reassured by corporate platitudes about "strengthening communities" when the professional one i've been a part of for 9 years is now by all appearances about to be blown to bits. miss you guys.

God, I just hope Ben has enough sense not to "re-brand" the Reader or its website with that awful CL moniker.. Interesting to note that Ben's mother, Deborah, was the first person (sorry, Dan Pulchrano)I ever met who was hip to the internet and what it meant for the future of our business. This was before Mosaic and the emergence of the web--couldn't have been any later than 1993 or 1994. Poor thing, she was way ahead of her time, but Ben's a better businessman...which may not be saying much!

indeed! although it appears our city might be added to the list on their home page, one happy family of rags beneath a satanic looking logo. seriously, check it out. ben posted a blog (see link) about the acquisition. "This is a big step for us," he wrote. "I am confident it will enhance our mission: to help urban explorers enrich their life and strengthen their communities." oh yes, strengthen their communities! by zoning national advertising and having Starbucks ads instead of Milk & Honey and true local businesses. that's rich. and why does his "mission" sound like gobblespeak? somehow i feel like the mission four college friends had sitting around a table in 1971 was a bit more noble. but those friends built an indy empire and deserve to retire. where's the next table, and if it ends up not being at 11 e. illinois, who's in? http://blogs.creativeloafing.com/blurbex/2007/07/24/creative-loafing-expands-into-chicago-and-washington/

Dang. You forget sometimes that the Reader is a business as well as a cultural institution. I'm riveted to this news and I'm not even on staff anymore.

Well, as a former employee (and therefore blessedly immune from the all-seeing eye of the new Southern master), let me just say that this fucking blows. I grew up in the shadow of Creative Loafing just down state highway 78 in Georgia and it was always considered an inferior product by the intelligentsa, but then in Atlanta the bar was never set very high. Eason seems to be under the mistaken, though admittedly hilarious impression, that what plays in Hotlanta and Raleigh and Tampa will play in precisely the same way here. What wanton hubris. My condolences to everyone.

...and it can't even be a cultural institution if it doesn't succeed as a business.

"oh yes, strengthen their communities! by zoning national advertising and having Starbucks ads instead of Milk & Honey and true local businesses. that's rich." I like the way you think the Chicago Reader is so unique. Have you heard of AAN? They have these kinds of alt-weeklies everywhere. EVERYWHERE. They're all part of the same industry. They all cater to their local communities, local businesses, local artists, local everything. Except they're a big fat corporation and have to mind their shareholders. And bitter former employees need to shut the hell up. There's a good reason they're not with the company anymore. Those of you with talent that deserve to be where you are, will remain where you are.

let us not assume. all we know about ben is that he wrote a check. money can buy a newspaper as soon as the check clears. but money even in an instagrat world like ours can't buy instant respect. instant allegiance. trust. like the loyalty we have to our paper and our readers have to it. every thursday. sure, we live in a world where everything has a price, but we came to the reader for a reason. a mission. and we're nervous. we're itchy. we're distracted. we're trying to watch a movie but our mind keeps drifting. we're simultaneously wishing it were tomorrow afternoon and hoping it never comes. we're hoping that if ben reads these blogs he'll understand. he'll put himself in our shoes and wonder, or his hubris will get the best of him and he'll stomp around like the lipless chimp running our country. or he'll laugh and want to meet us. see our desk tchotkes and buy a round of drafts. tell us stories about growing up in the south. and.... in the very worst case scenario which i hope doesn't happen, if ben doesn't understand our hesitation, our initial fear, then that is not the kind of operation I want to be part of. and yes I ended my sentence with a preposition. it might be a fitting end. but let's hope for a grammatically correct future. with ben.

To you, you know who you are. You might consider there is a difference in being a pioneer and being in that city and creating a paper, setting up jobs, being part of local history and forming a great journalistic landscape... And those papers are not everywhere. **** faces, that's a different story.

"And bitter former employees need to shut the hell up. There's a good reason they're not with the company anymore." I doubt if this comment is actually worth responding to, but most ex-employees I know are ex-es because eventually they resigned, for a variety of reasons and almost always on good terms. But don't belligerence and anonymity make an attractive couple!

I really wish that something besides business-speak were coming from these new owners, and that this hadn't been sprung on everyone on a Tuesday, and that it didn't seem like the entire production staff were about to be laid off. Maybe there is reason for optimism, but I haven't seen it yet. Then again I don't actually work there anymore. Good luck, everyone I know.

"I like the way you think the Chicago Reader is so unique. Have you heard of AAN? They have these kinds of alt-weeklies everywhere. EVERYWHERE." I'm not sure I see your point. There are families everywhere--seriously, there are hell of a lot of people all over--but only one of them is mine, and despite the fact that they all perform the same general function, I'm loyal to mine for obvious reasons. I can say the same about friends, institutions of higher learning, and athletic teams. What will happen to the Reader as a newspaper is obviously something of a mystery, and an entirely separate question from what will happen to it as a place of employment. That's increasingly concrete, and I think that's a lot of what's being mourned here.

How did your news staff either not know or not report anything about this? You say it just came out of nowhere, but it seems like a long-developing story that needed some coverage before the hammer fell. Anyway, hope it doesn't alter some of the great coverage you provide to the city.

Top secret in case it fell through; no leaks.

I see in the Trib story that the building at 11 E. Illinois has been sold. Was there ever a thought to selling the building and moving to cheaper digs to help out financially?

Why, as broth@chicagoreader.com hands the keys to ben.eason@creativeloafing.com, does the phrase "soup to nuts" come so insistently to mind? Let's talk logos. The Reader's backward R has long been dated, but it dates to the paper's origins, a genuine fossil. CL's--you don't mind if I call you CL?--fallout symbol is self-conscious (albeit non-Satanic) retro. But oddly--you don't mind if I call it kitsch?--appropriate. There's more than a hint of cold war in contemporary business-speak. Perhaps you will like Get On the Bus. Perhaps "Ben" will buy a round of drafts--KoolAid, your shelter from the mainstream. Perhaps you should be paying at least as much attention to the men behind the curtain, the private investment firm in Chantilly, Virginia, that just bought a spot in the boardroom (www.biadigitalpartners.com). But enough speculation. What do we know already? That Creative Loafing has an amateur-looking website, and (last I saw) its papers don't look any better. If the new bosses have the business sense they pretend you, the Reader and City Paper design and production staff should not be the visualists worrying about their jobs--they should be in charge of "the brand" by next week. (But then BIA Digital appears to share CL's designer. . . .) Hope for the best--huge seems unlikely, so here's to not horrid. In the meantime--company time, that is--polish up those resumes. PS to Sorry Charlie--Can you point me to an article on Eason Jr.'s hostile/oedipal takeover?

This could be good news for the Reader if the takeover/sellout leads to a sharpening up of the paper. Let's face it, aside from Ben's admirable TIF crusade, media goss from MM and the occasional lengthy investigative crime features, there's actually not that much worth reading in the Reader. Less alternative, more relevance will make a better paper.

For those who dont know, Creative Loafing is a wonderful paper with great heart and a great sense of every community. I've been a big fan of the Reader, The City Paper, The Scene, and more my entire life ... and read them all online every cahnce I get ... and am excited about Creative Loafing coming in... yes, there will be some changes, but give CL a chance, guys. (Oh, and dont worry to much about Ben's choice of words... he and his staff have the best at heart .. even if the business lingo is heavy)!

wow, creative loafing is sending in sock-puppets to try to reassure us! Raise your hand if you'd heard of Creative Loafing before this week. Now, stand up if you work in the industry. This is a sad day. I hope that CL doesn't screw with the Reader's editorial staff. But, just so CL knows, I will switch to TO Chicago if the Editorial staff gets downsized or whacked.

From the Archives of the St. Pete Times: Weekly Planet* Back In It's Own Orbit http://tinyurl.com/3ylp9v

Jerry 101- I raise my hand

Back in the early 90s one of the CL (pretty sure it was Raleigh) papers ran, unattributed and unpaid for, a column I had written for a (paying) website. When contacted and informed that they ought to PAY for what they had poached, the editors scurried for the nearest mouse-hole, tossing a quick apology behind them.

I wish I could be optimistic about the new owners, though my limited experience with their paper and my years of reading ours tells me that all you need to know about the difference in the approaches can be found in the papers' titles. I don't blame the Reader owners for selling--the financials are daunting at best, and any new owner would have their hands full just bailing things out. But with all due respect, Mr. Roth, did you at least call Rupert first?

Sure Jerry 101 - you'll switch to Time Out Chicago if the Reader cuts staff - until you realize you're gonna have to pay for that subscription. Then you'll be be back readin' the Reader in no time.

I'm not really sure of the Reader's demos, but this strikes me as a bit off. Is the Reader really "a pivotal gateway of connectivity with the young adult audience"? I can't imagine young adults reading Ben's stories about TIF districts with rapt attention. I hope we don't see the Reader get dumbed down in order to court a younger, hipper, more affluent demographic.

Oh come on. You can't pretend Creative Loafing isn't kind of awesome as a name. It is insane. I love it. I had heard of it, btw. It's hard to forget a name like that!

I'm going to go ahead & voice cautious optimism. Please please please new kids, don't futz up my favorite paper. I was just on vacation back home in Minnesota and must have referred to at least a dozen past Reader cover stories; I was like that guy who can't stop talking about how great his girlfriend is. "Oh, and there was this other time? When she wrote about this sluiceway? Full of heavy metals? It was totally awesome." Go ahead and re-re-format the page design, remake the logo, rearrange the columns-- just leave the meat (the great writers with sharp eyes). Or better yet, reduce cost by relegating all the dozens of pages of classifieds to an online bank and leave my beloved writers alone entirely.

Whatever Creative Loathing paid, it's too much. Face it, the Reader's been unnecessary since the mid-80s, when the owners and the board became greedy, conservative, and hopelessly out of touch.

Please don't change the name of the company. And please don't try to soft-sell the obvious layoffs that will be coming shortly. Treat us with some respect.

Fear of the unknown has caused the minds of some bloggers to propose the farfetched. If you have a paper loved by many, why would you change the logo or the name or lay off the favorite writers? Perhaps, maybe, the staff might be moved to cheaper sq footage, given computers or see the paper printed on a cheaper press?

It's fear of the known that's the problem.

The previous owners of the Chicago Reader are media pioneers who for decades put out some of the best papers in the country. They are also exceedingly honorable people. Nothing lasts forever but we all should be thankful that they did it for so long.

Thanks, Sorry Charlie, for the URL. Worthwhile reading, folks--it's not clear that buying out mom was a hostile act, but it does suggest that the business blather is not transient or incidental. I had heard of, and seen, Creative Loafing (Atlanta edition). Content was so-so, tending to fluff, and presentation cluttered. Best case, from a Reader perspective: CL recognizes that its new "product" is of a higher grade than thing 1 through thing 4, and makes the Reader the model for its would-be empire, keeping if not promoting much of the staff. Time Out Chicago has never really been a competitor--no substantive, much less in-depth, reporting, and mediocre editing (whether the Reader's editors are more fundamentally talented, less overworked, or given better-written manuscripts to start with, I don't know). I would consider TO as an alternative for listings if the Reader tanks or is screwed over--listings, especially for visual art, have been atrophying even on Roth's watch. Anyway, TO subscription is not that expensive. And for good reporting that also happens to be good writing, I'll follow the writers, especially (pause to flip through the clips "filed" next to my desk) Conroy, Marlan, Joravsky, Bogira, Henderson, Williams, Miner, Paghdiwala (and, though sometimes infuriating, Isaacs--a guilty pleasure). If the claims for CL's good citizenship are worth the ether they're printed on,* these writers, and the editors who back them up, will be kept on. I doubt many writers in Tampa have comparable knowledge of Chicago's arts, business, and politics. ______________ *Stalking horse -> stocking horse -> sock puppet.

In the Know asks, "If you have a paper loved by many, why would you change the logo or the name?" I suppose we could ask Macy's. "Perhaps, maybe, the staff might be moved to cheaper sq footage." Yeah, Reader staffers (bitter, ex-, or otherwise), any word on where you'll be sitting once the building sale closes? Separate transaction, the Trib said, which I presume means separate buyer, which, given prime location, has to be a developer with a wrecking ball and, given River North precedent, no architectural taste. Any plausible rumors about price paid for the paper (papers--let's not forget Washington) or for the real estate? Did company own, and is it selling, City Paper HQ? Which sale landed Roth and company more moolah? Who are the other nine (former) owners? And how much of their haul are they committing to a golden-handshake fund for their (former) non-owning employees? ("Exceedingly honorable people" would make such a fund a priority, wouldn't they?)

The Reader is no longer the great paper it once was, sad to say. It has been in decline for the last five years or so. That may be why the sale is unsurprising. Creative Loafing has always been mediocre.

This just in from a friend in Atlanta who used to live in Chicago: "Creative loafing sucks compared 2 the reader! Tragic! U would luv atlanta tho. No more frostbite."

don't suppose reader staff had the foresight to unionize?

Hey, at least Starbucks didn't fail their health inspection like Milk & Honey recently did!

The most appalling thing about the sale of the Reader is that the new ownership is based in Tampa Bay, FL. I mean, please... Tampa isn't even a city, at least in the way that word is usually understood. It's stucco and rivers of blue-hair dye.

What ever they do, please don't bring Liz Armstrong back, or anyone like her. It seems like all media is increasingly trying to attract more kids, without actually being of any interest to 13 year olds, all the while losing the interest of the demographic that actually use (or used) their service. Why is mediocre dumbed-down content always management's idea of "attracting younger audience?" This is true across the board - news, print, television, film, radio, music, etc. It is bad enough to have this horrible quality in mass media, but now smaller, independent voices are losing ground. And the big bosses and consolidated corporate powers wonder why everyone is going to blogs, podcasts and youtube and leaving traditional media outlets. Whet Moser is the best writer the Reader has brought on in years. I really enjoy reading (his or her????) work. Please keep the Reader a place where we can read quality work.

Liz Armstrong still writes for the paper. She never stopped. Also she is awesome and a lot smarter than, you know, most people.

In (brief) defense of Liz Armstrong (whom I met once or twice very briefly): As someone around about her age demographic but being a painfully square shut-in, I should probably have found her Antisocial column as alienating as some people seem to, but I liked it for a very specific reason. Perhaps because I'm really vanilla, I usually found her portraits of people living almost inconceivably odd lives to be really compelling. Often her pieces described lifestyles which I was at best ambivalent to and at worst sort of offended by, but the reminder that people are out there building lives that are totally perpendicular to every conventional portrait of how to live one's life was, as a reader, quite refreshing, even if I'm content to wear khakis and play fantasy baseball. I might be going out on a conceptual-literary-journalism limb when I say this, but: I saw Antisocial as a cracked, 21st-century version of Ben Hecht's 1001 Afternoons in Chicago, one of the foundational texts of local journalism. http://chicago.about.com/cs/newspapers/a/01_Ben_Hecht.htm The compliment on my work, by the way, is much too kind, but I am appreciative nonetheless.

In response to Devil in da Tails, Forbes puts the sale in the eight figures, quoting Bob Roth: http://www.forbes.com/media/2007/07/24/creative-loafing-reader-biz-media-cx_lh_0724bizcreative.html

let's leave liz out of this, shall we? she was a ploy that failed, as evidenced by recent events, otherwise irrelevant to said events.

Thanks for the ref, Kates. Article also IDs two more owners: Bob McCamant and Tom Rehwalt. Seven more to go--anybody? And it adds some insight on Tampa--who even knew there were "famed newspaper designer[s]"? (Stucco, by the way, is no basis for dissing a city--ever been to Frisco? Being in Florida, on the other hand . . .) And there again is "BIA Digital Partners, a private investment firm." I agree with whoever said it that they may be the ones to watch out for. Anyone got the skinny on them? So, something between $10 and $99 mill for the papers. (Come on, someone in the company was privy to the exact figure--and isn't getting a cut. Spill already.) Still want to know what the building (or really, the lot) went for. And where the three surviving staffers (Crystal, True, and a tech guy) will be parked. Oh yeah, and where will we continue this conversation if the new bosses cut off this thread?

Sorry Charlie, did you ever, uh, work for the Creative Loafing empire? (I did.) Your sounding like you're on a first-name basis got me wondering. To me, the Reader became irrelevant when Neal Pollack left.

I'm sad about this as well, and I don't think it bodes well for the paper. The Loafing site is cluttered and ugly. Their calendar listings are truncated and difficult to navigate. The Reader was slow to get online, but the result is a functional minimalist design with easy to locate and comprehensive listings. I hope Creative Loafing realizes one thing keeping the Reader solvent in hard times is its local connection. Most of the staff - and not just the reporters - are eager, curious residents. It does get a bit incestuous - like when the fashion reporting seemed limited to one staffer's pals - but overall they have a devotion to the city. I don't see the Reader's local vision getting stronger with this: "He plans to move the paper's ad and page design and some other production functions to Atlanta, and may shift printing to Fayetteville, N.C." I wonder what this means for the Reader's devotion to using local illustrators and graphics whenever possible. I wonder if Loafing can or will underwrite the same long-form journalism. There's a bunch of features which seem far outside the Creative Loafing brand. Will they keep doing the "these parts" special editions which connected Chicago to the greater midwest? Will they keep doing the special fiction and lit issues? Will they devote as much time to the in-depth food section? Also, will the Reader keep their stand-alone Matches section? It's a rare independent paper which has an independent online dating service, especially one as simple (in a good way) as the Reader. Loafing content is underwhelming and being brief seems the primary goal. In recent years the Reader had been printing tighter articles without sacrificing depth for brevity. They let the material determine the length. By Loafing standards, all content beyond the capsule reviews is long. My other concern is the listings. In my opinion, the Reader had already damaged the viability of the print edition when made the complete listings online only. One of the main reasons to keep picking up the paper was the comprehensive list of events. When the Reader cut that, it lost much value. My big fear is Loafing will not only reduce the print calendar more, but cut the comprehensive nature of the online listings. Right now, not only does the Reader accept listings from every level, it seeks them out. Loafing has an inadequate layout and search function. My big fear - and everyone else's I know - is the Reader will end up being just another version of Loafing, which will make it little more than a slightly better funded version of New City, except without as much local pride and idiosyncracies. I mean, even looking at the comments function on this site one finds such individualistic quirks as "I am a living being with a valid comment" option. This is what I hope they keep.

Also, am I right in reading the article to say they are going to PRINT the Reader in another state? What will that do to the timeliness of the content? Why does buying a business require moving as much productive as possible out of the community that supports it?

All we can do now is sit and watch the process, there are so many changes being made.

It's a sad day for Chicago. Creative Loafing is a disgrace, an embrassment to Tampa and to journalism. Unimaginative, inept and ethically challenged. Apologies, Chicago, for what Tampa has wrought.

This Southern boy isn't impressed. CL let one of the weeklies in Raleigh wither for years before selling it off to a stronger crosstown rival. The papers I've picked up in Atlanta were so thin and cluttered that I avoided them in Charlotte and elsewhere. I know it's a tough business, and that someone's been doing this for the glory rather than for money, but that makes its inevitable decline that much sadder to see. What's with moving printing to Fayetteville? That's nearly 700 miles away by plane -- printing a newspaper that far away, even a weekly, seems expensive given the rising cost of just-in-time shipping.

Some Dude must be Neal Pollack's mother. Can't imagine who else would hold him up as a standard of adequacy, much less excellence. Just talked to a friend in Atlanta, who said the Journal-Constitution loves Creative Loafing - makes them look hip and literate!

I can recall mentioning, upon moving to Chicago from Charlotte, how satisfying it was to pick up a hefty, black & white Reader-in-four-sections before the weekend. It's not the paper it was then, but I'm still getting plenty out of the relationship. The Loaf never met my informative, entertainment or intellectual needs in the slightest, and I dumped it halfway through our first date. Now, someone's obviously got big dreams down South, and I'm all for a future where I get the kind of free weekly I am ENTITLED to as a citizen of CHICAGO (which is not like Tampa at all). But if I have a LOUSY, EMPTYHEADED weekly FAILING to console, entertain and inform me while I ride on the SLOWEST rail commute EVER, I will become very, VERY upset (and move back to Seattle). Reader staffers: Best of luck to all of you, thanks for the memories, and I hope that, for those who still want them, you can keep your jobs and keep doing them the way you think they're done best.

I've been a Reader reader since the 1970s. As it has gotten thinner, it's gotten more conservative in style and content. I think it shouldn't try to compete w/ Time Out and try to be trendy and reel in the 20-somethings. What's wrong with continuing to appeal to Baby Boomers? Aren't there enough of us out there to support the Reader? I think the Reader starting going downtown when it went to color and stopped having the beginning of stories on the front page. It needs to get its edge back. Looks doubtful that that will happen under CL, though. (I've also written for the Reader, weird stuff that wouldn't be published there now.)

CORRECTION. I meant the Reader started going downHILL, not downtown. Sorry.

i lost interest in the reader once it began publishing stories on food and interior design. if i wanted that crap, i could pick up chicago magazine, or any rag anywhere. the reader used to tell stories, and it was fun to read. now it might as well be creative loafing (whatever that is). this eason could surprise us and make the reader good again.

"Also, will the Reader keep their stand-alone Matches section? " they already ditched it a couple years ago. they now hook into selectalternatives.com, which is the same system as CL.

what am i surprised by? - this eason went through three publishers in a matter of weeks -four editors in five years -he housed his beloved staff in temporary quarters with port-o-potties - 40% seems to be the magic number. that's how much of his Tampa editorial staff he cut. EXERPT from Weekly Planet -Perhaps because of his tight control on the purse strings, the Planet is profitable, Eason said, with revenues of about $5- million. It has the second-largest circulation in the chain, at 94,000, behind Atlanta's 140,000. Charlotte's circulation is about 62,000, while Sarasota, the only one of the group not yet turning a profit, has a circulation of 24,000. While Eason was battling with Cox, he also was re-evaluating the leadership of his paper in Tampa. Jim Harper, a former St. Petersburg Times reporter and editor, had taken over as editor of the Weekly Planet in February 2003. He had been recruited by Neil Skene, a Creative Loafing senior vice president and shareholder who had been an executive with a Times affiliate in Washington, D.C. (Skene left his full-time position with Creative Loafing in October and now serves as a consultant.) Harper said he struggled with limited resources at the Planet, with his editorial staff cut 40 percent while he was there. "I'm proud of what we were able to do in that environment," said Harper, who was fired from his position this month. "But it was very hard to keep my head above water. To do good journalism takes time and money." Eason said he slashed the Tampa news staff because it was not up to his standards. He blamed Harper for not being able to rebuild the newsroom fast enough and said he has high hopes for the Planet's new editor, David Warner, who has experience as editor of the Philadelphia alternative weekly. "I still underestimate how tricky alternative newspapers are to people who have not been in the industry," Eason said. "You've got to get eager, excited, inexperienced reporters and coach, train and inspire them. There are no resources. It's you." - Kris Hundley can be reached at hundley@sptimes.com or (727) 892- 2996.

"...inexperienced reporters?" Just why is it necessary to have reporters who are inexperienced? Could it be that Eason pays pennies?

[Warning: unnaturally long blog comment. My first comment on a blog, so I'm using all my previously unused space in the blogosphere.] This comment string and the situation of the sale brought to mind the day when I was 12 and my parents told me we were moving. The seemingly unexpected news abruptly sapped the comfortable everyday diner exchange that had been going on. I became uncharacteristically on the verge of tears. (Fortunately, the approach of teen years enabled me to disguise them as a bout with conjunctivitis.) Maybe on some level, l I was intuitive enough to sense the changes this meant. Even though only 15 minutes away by car, the immediate rituals of my friends being across the street would inevitably change things. I would no longer be a part of this neighborhood's daily culture. The comforts and familiar discomforts of our house and the old neighborhood would become anecdotal. One way or another I would be a part of the new culture in the new neighborhood. Which was uncertain and just an idea at this point. Another metaphor might be when the owners of a longtime, neighborhood centric diner decides to retire. The atmosphere that the owners started the diner was completely different. For the locals, the home of diner grew through the years. Filling it with experiences, friendships, and meaningful wall clutter. The new owners may keep some of the memorabilia on the walls as tribute. Keeping a business viable and putting their stamp on it will be their priority. In the more gentrified surroundings and financial realities. Hopefully the people are able to create something just as distinctive in the new environment. The paper is sold. Things will change. If people are going to create and contribute to a vital working environment, the two cultures, which seem to speak similar language but have a different vernacular and possibly sensibilities, will have to meld without self combustion. Some of the tension seems to rise from the fact that many know they will not be a part of this process's struggle. They may share aspects of 20 years of experience, get their severance, and be onward to another part of their career. Acknowledgment that postmodern media reality bites, doesn't do much to cushion the blow. Somewhere west of this building, two art students, an English major, and a business and communications grad sit in an apartment above an empty storefront. Talking about what they would do with the Reader if they could have bought it. Probably 20 years or more from having a viable bid. Maybe thinking of starting their own venture.

There would be equal panic by some if it was bought by New York Times or Wall Street Journal or USA Today. It's the fear of the unknown, but for all you know, it's going to be a better place to work at and a better product produced. Give it time instead of throwing it under the bus. And if you don't like it, leave. No one is forcing you to work there. There are plenty of people who'd kill for your job!

May I share a blurb from the Creative Loafing Wine Club? (I like Reason #2, I'm SO totally sold.) 6 Reasons Why You Should Join Creative Loafing's Wine Club: 1. To escape the wine snobs and drink in peace. 2. to learn more about wine. 3. Discounts at your favorite Tampa Bay wine bars, wine friendly restaurants, and retailers. 4. Exclusive invitations to regular CL Wine Club events. 5. To meet other Tampa Bay wine drinkers, and swap your famous drinking stories. 6. ...and finally : It's FREE! Convinced this is for you? JOIN NOW! Membership Registration:

"Also, will the Reader keep their stand-alone Matches section? " they already ditched it a couple years ago. they now hook into selectalternatives.com, which is the same system as CL. Not true. Selectalternatives is a software system, not a national dating site. Many papers use it, but it's customized for each paper and each paper's members/ads are separate.

"There would be equal panic by some if it was bought by New York Times or Wall Street Journal or USA Today." First it would be a total suprise as only one of those papers is part of an expanding change. That aside, it would be totally different as those papers have clear, well-known reputations and a level of professionalism which Creative Loafing does not. "Another metaphor might be when the owners of a longtime, neighborhood centric diner decides to retire..." Man, I despise these type of "change is inevitable and good" Tom Friedman style ramblings. Change is inevitable, but the quality of change depends on how it is done. Just because one is making a change doesn't make the decision good. Many inept, shallow or selfish choices use change as an excuse. In this case, the metaphor goes as follow: long time diner owner retires and sells the place to folks known for cutting corners on the food, and the first thing they do is the kitchen staff and outsource the cooking to a staff in another state who have no idea how to prepare dishes with local ingredients. The diner is changed to look like diners in other states. What's likely to happen is a lot of customers are going to go elsewhere and those who stay do so beause there's few other options.

I can only hope this results in an improvement for The Reader. Despite the occasional good article, the paper long ago turned deadly dull. EVERY issue has the following: 1) article about con/ex-con who says he was railroaded/tortured by the cops, but he's really innocent. 2)article about local business that is failing or on the road to failure, or local artist that is leaving the city for greener pastures. 3) politically correct article about the city 'beating up' on some local minority/community organization who has some ridiculous agenda 4) profile of pretentious indie band I haven't heard of etc. etc. The only good bits are Savage Love, Straight Dope, and Rosenbaum's film reviews. PC-ness is rampant, I hope they make some changes. There's a reason it's free.

Yeah, I know *I* only like to read articles about bands I already know about.

Just for the record, amidst an admitted ramble, although I threw in the obvious statement that change is inevitable, my intent wasn't that it is always good. I've lamented the passing of many a diner. When they close, what will take it's place, a condo, a franchise, or a small, independent store based on someone who knows the neighborhood and wants to create something distinctive. How much does the city encourage the later? Through all the changes, will the Reader stay grounded in the city that created it? This will be judged from Thursday to Thursday.

The Reader screwed itself. The editorial slide has been obvious, yet no one did anything to stop it. This Creative Loafer guy won't fix it, that's for sure. I am pissed at the Reader's owners -- and at its editor. Why did you let this happen? Laziness? You screwed Chicago out of an institution.

As someone who works at the Reader, and because the question has been posed a number of times, I feel I should let the readers know that there will be no local production department. Every single job is being outsourced to Atlanta where they do ad design and page layouts for every single one of its papers. As for the rest of the layoffs, I cannot speak definitively on that subject but there will be quite a few jobs lost. I have very strong and clear opinions about this sale, the owners (past and present), the publisher, and how and why jobs are being lost but I shall hold my tongue in this forum. What I do want to get across to the people out there wondering, and without passing judgment publicly, is that within the VERY near future your Chicago Reader will not be designed or produced by anyone who lives, works and breathes in Chicago. And, finally, as a current Reader employee I want to thank all of the people (from former co-workers to random readers) who have commented on this blog in a positive and empathetic way about our jobs, our lives and what the Reader has meant to each of you. It means a lot that people do care about the paper and the people who work for it and we (the rank-and-file) have made great sacrifices to bring you the best product we can with what we are given to work with for this great city and all of our readers. Here's to the Reader, all of the employees, and all of the readers but most of all to Chicago... Cheers!

Has anyonce considered the possibility that CL hopes to learn and improve through an association with a higher quality company? One can dream.

"The only good bits are Savage Love, Straight Dope, and Rosenbaum's film reviews." "Let's face it, aside from Ben's admirable TIF crusade, media goss from MM and the occasional lengthy investigative crime features, there's actually not that much worth reading in the Reader." "To me, the Reader became irrelevant when Neal Pollack left." It's kinda like when I go to the grocery store and they have all this mac n cheese. I don't like mac n cheese, it's not as good for you as vegetables. And tonic water. Who drinks tonic water? Selling it is thus dumb.

to Reluctantly anonymous: The Reader has meant the impending arrival of the weekend since I was in high school and started reading it religiously - I don't think I've missed an issue when I wasn't out of town in going on 20 years. none of the current crop of entertainment-oriented rags have the soul the Reader does, that soul comes from the people who work and write for the paper and the fact they are all passionate about the City and their respective fields of interest. that said, Jonathan Rosenbaum should have been dumped ages ago. there's a not-very-fine-line between being a sophisticated reviewer and talking down to your audience. I've read some of his reviews where he didn't even mention the damned movie he was reviewing until a few paragraphs in - that is pretentiousness, pure and simple. Liz Armstrong was sort of the flip side of that (although I liked her piece on the rock posters, a hopeful sign that when she isn't trying to make herself sound like an Andy Warhol scene she can actually write something compelling). She took what might have been a fun story here and there about her skeezoid adventures and tried to turn it into a regular piece - doesn't work when your idea of being hip is doing at 30 what your readership was doing when they were 16 and long got over it (swimming in other people's pools? borrrrring). I read the Reader for the stories, for the incredible investigative journalism that the Trib long bailed on, and the fact it still surprises me - a few weeks ago I stumbled on a critic choice pick that showed Digital Underground was playing that night in Wicker Park - I called the venue, it was $5 - $5! - me and a friend couldn't believe our good fortune. barring a mass exodus of the writers and editor (who I think is great even though you all insist on calling Lake View "Lakeview," which drives me batty) I and I'm guessing most people of my generation who grew up here are lifers, keep at it folks, we need you.

All of you talking about how irrelevant and conservative the Reader is are either nuts or just really spoiled. I've lived in lots of cities with lots of inane, boring weeklies and nothing has ever come close to being as intelligent and informative as the Reader. Maybe I missed some halcyon days back when I was reading some fluffy bullshit in Dallas but you guys have no idea how good you've had it. Guess you may find out soon.

The very first Reader I picked up in 1971 had a total of 8 pages. A homeless looking guy was handing them out on Lincoln Ave. I was unimpressed then, I'm unimpressed now. A new owner and new editors ain't gonna hurt.

I'm a native Chicagoan now living in Atlanta. I'm sorry for what happened, for three reasons. 1) Chicago has a reputation for good journalism, at the Reader and other places. Atlanta, not so much. In fact the commenter who said that CL makes AJC look good is dead on. 2)Three people review the same 8-10 restaurants every week. None of them are outside the Perimeter, or advertise in CL. Half will close within the first year. That's the best part of the service copy. 3)Deadtree CL is a physical mess. Ink bleeds and color shifts all over the place and on the thinnest newsprint available. Atlanta's not as far from Fayetteville as Chicago is.

A Correction: The Reader Does Not Suck Now I can't help but roll my eyes at the comments snorting about what they call the decline of the Reader. Sure, the Reader's had some tough times lately. Most papers are, and I'd be lying if I didn't miss some things about the Reader--of course, it took me a while to adjust to Neil Tesser moving off of Hot Type. (Don't worry, Mr. Miner, I've come to love you too.) But the Reader on a marginal week is still so much better than 99% of the alt weeklies that there's no comparison. The fact that there are so many comments here is testament to just how good the Reader is. (How many people would get their knickers in a twist over editorial changes at CL? Indeed, how many CL readers would notice or care if that dog's lunch were stirred?) What made the Reader great wasn't just that it was literate, though it's always been that. It was a local product, with local sensibilities, produced by local people who know their readers. Anyways, to the Reader staff past and present: I salute and thank you all for putting out a great paper. And to the CL people who undoubtedly aren't reading this, here's what yer boss got for his 8 figures: He got a great brand with huge loyalty--that's bleeding money in a town with plenty of competition. Go ahead and drag the production down to Atlanta or Fayetteville or Bentonville or wherever--but once you flush your current readership, you'll be left with a pile of wet papers sitting in the doorway of He Who Eats Mud, attracting as much attention as the Onion's entertainment listings. Mr. Eason may just be what the owners of New City have been waiting for.

I cannot believe the news. I used to work at CL in Hotlanta when Mom Eason and Scott W. ruled. Does everyone know how the loaf came into being? A poker game. Dad Eason won it in a game. The $$$ Ben wants-runs in the veins of the family. One time the once free weekly was charging $1 back in the 80's. It was a huge success. Not. If Atl office only concentrated on what it has already it would be a great paper.

I haven't weighed in up to now, but with the return of la Liz I have to express my heartbreak at the prospect of losing our talented, dedicated, altogether irreplaceable production staff. It's hard to imagine the Reader without them, and the thought of a fourth-floor ghost town threatens to send me running to the exit door screaming. Creative Interloping's other papers look like crap based on what I've seen. And it was beyond shabby for us all to learn that production had been shitcanned by reading it on Crain's. I don't resent the owners for selling, and I'm trying to remain optimistic about the paper's future, but such despicable treatment of employees who've been at the core of the Reader doesn't have me feeling very friendly toward our new overlords.

aww man... been thinking about you all from CT and checking in from time to time...very sorry to hear about this.

aaawwww....the guys/gals at CL aren't THAT bad!

did you know that production found out they were losing their jobs by reading a story posted on crain's chicago business? after that sort of treatment how can anyone who works for or is a loyal reader of the Reader be expected to worry what kind of people (good or bad) work for CL?

Wah, wah, wah. I have never seen such bullshit from grown adults. All I have seen here is speculation and hysteria. Why don't all of you negative assholes start your own newspaper where you can call the shots - you may find out that it's not that easy. There's little money in publishing a newspaper. How many start up new weeklies have failed in Chicago? Own up to the reality that Media is changing - like it, or not. P.S. Fuck you Chip!

I totally second the well thought out and beautifully penned comment by Cry Baby. And what a great name, too! I wish my parent's would have been more creative. Instead they named me Josh and they taught me about things such as empathy, politeness, respect and made sure on their very limited budget that I was able to go to college and learn how to write well, among other finer things. Not that I am saying there is an inherent contradiction in using language reserved for the comments section of a 14-year old high school girl's online journal because I am not. We all have our linguistic limitations and that's all right. Maybe I will even give it a try and see what it's like. Let me think. Got it! Fuck you too, Chip!

The industry has surely contracted in the last couple of years, but the suggestion that newspapers make "little money" is inaccurate. Perhaps in Tampa this is the case, but the Reader made gobs and gobs of money for a long time. And I'm sure that Mr. Eason and his venture capital partners didn't spend tens of millions of dollars to not turn a dime. In fact, newspapers are, historically, far more profitable than other enterprises. The old saying "license to print money" comes to mind. Anyway, I'm sure that there are a lot of people with negative attitudes right now, but that hardly seems surprising, since, well, lots of people are going to lose their jobs. If the reverse were to have happened, I'm quite sure that our Tampa friends wouldn't be rejoicing over their friends' loss of employment. I would also argue that the quality of being negative isn't necessarily always bad, especially in journalism. Some of the country's best reporters, or at least the most well-known, were/ are jaded, cynical assholes. Lastly, I think what most people are worried about, whether they are still currently employed by CL Chicago or not, is this absurd mission-speak which CL, as an enterprise, seems to be saturated with. I mean, for instance, and here I am referencing the CL employee from the top of this thread, who gets authentically excited when their company purchases another company? Hmmmmm? When the Reader bought part of the Stranger, I don't remember anyone talking about. There was no buzz. No high-fiving in the office. Nothing really. So, why is the culture in Tampa so different? Therein lies the angst that a lot of Reader employees and fans feel. Oh, and "fuck you" seems a tad strong don't you think?

Oh, and one for Mr. Eason and his employees. When you speak of the Reader joining your "family," it instinctively makes a lot of people want to hurl. Nothing personal, of course, it's just that the idea of you calling your company a "family" is rather nauseating because it is a deliberate misuse of language to achieve a certain purpose. That is, to mask the fact that you are, in fact, a corporation. Better to embrace your corporate self rather than try to hide behind wretched metaphors. If you insist, however, and I know you will, then I think it would be prudent for you to consider the Reader as the crazy, eccentric uncle whom you never see, but always here great, hard-to-believe stories about.

Josh, I think you owe 14-year-old girls with online journals an apology.

I think I owe a lot of 14-year old girls apologies and not just about their blogs. Ahem. Moving on . . .

Hey Josh, Since you'll have some time on your hands why don't you bring that rim-shot humor of yours over to Sharkforum? Condolences to all y'all.

You have my email. I have a snare drum. Could be good.

The only reason there wasn't any high-five-ing or complaints when the Reader bought into The Stranger was because the Reader was kept as a minority shareholder. Seattle took their money, but ensured nobody at the Reader could interfere in any way--especially in terms of content. It is indeed a shame the Production crew is being offed--why oh why couldn't it have been Editorial? Well, I suppose all we have to do is wait.

As a long-time Reader reader (10+ years in Chicago) and now a Tampa resident, all I can say is - prepare for a whole lot of suck. I just picked up a copy of this week's Loaf and realized why I no longer bother to read the city's only "alt-weekly." Savage Love? Nope. We get a sad, bitter, unfunny weekly column. Bar reviews? A guy goes to the mall and hates the people in the bar he visited (no description of the bar, only the nearby shoppers that annoyed him). Upcoming band tour dates? They took those out of the paper years ago to save space. I actually miss great bands that come to town because no one in the city publishes a complete upcoming band list any more. 80 pages of gorgeous color ads, but no content. I was always hoping that the Reader would take out the Loaf, not the other way around. Goodbye great paper....

My hope is that, once the shock and retooling is done, meaningful exchange happens between the people who want a rich, local, engaging editorial and the people who are making decisions to keep the paper financially viable. Otherwise, these comment strings are just venting opiate of the masses.

That will be super so long as the exchange goes like this: "Here's some money!" "Thanks! We'll go put out the paper now."

well, not exactly. just putting out a paper and having money from our owners in which to do it is no longer good enough. it was for a very long time, but these are difficult times, and newspapers- especially newspapers- are not exempt. what we love has stopped turning profit. if we want our children and nieces and nephews to one day read the newspaper we have to find a way for it to make money right now. that cliche time is of essence applies here, as does the fact that every one of us still employed by the reader should be drawing on a sense of urgency every minute of every work day, regardless of what floor we work on, or what our function in the beehive is. from what i've understood, editorial voice will not be compromised. at least one sales rep has vowed to not sell botox ads. ben in a 1-1 meeting appeared very interested in not reinventing the wheel, and open minded toward ventures that could restore profitability. we can easily blog ourselves into a corner... in fact we're so busy blogging and speculating in our individual silos lit by computer screens that few - myself not excluded- are doing anything but waiting and seeing.

Creative Loafing, please don't touch the film review section. And keep letting Ben Joravsky and Mr. Miner do their thing. Otherwise, it wouldn't be the Reader, the paper I've never missed an issue of in the 12 years I've lived here.

Just noticed the BIA Digital Partners release: http://www.biadigitalpartners.com/common/pressitem.asp?id=1016

OH HAI! YOUS READ MY BLOG? http://loloafing.wordpress.com/ LOL MAIL ME!

It's pretty obvious that the character of the Reader will change significantly, and probably not for the better. This might be the time for local people to come up with a local alternative to the Reader (forget about New City).

Let's not forget to mention that the delivery drivers are getting totally shafted by this "independent contractor" bullshit. Also according to a letter posted on the mayreport.com we'll be "WOWed" by the new look of the reader. WOWed = dumbed down.