voiceofsandiego.org: People... Doing More With Moss
an independent nonprofit |
Support This Service

Doing More With Moss

Ed Moss is publisher of the San Diego Union-Tribune. Photo: Sam Hodgson



Friday, Oct. 30, 2009 | Ed Moss, 55, has served as The San Diego Union-Tribune's publisher since May, inheriting a newspaper that now has lost half its staff in the last three years. The paper's new owner, Beverly Hills-based Platinum Equity, hired Moss days after laying off 192 employees. Another round of layoffs followed in August. The company now employs 700 people, Moss says, with 175 in its newsroom.

"The death of the printed product is way, way overstated."
— Ed Moss,
Union-Tribune publisher
Since the Baltimore native took the helm, some newspaper employees have reported feeling more optimistic about the business's future. But readers continue to cancel subscriptions and head online. The newspaper's Sunday circulation has dropped 30 percent since 2004; its daily circulation dropped 10 percent in the last six months (compared to the same timeframe in 2008).

The paper recently launched a campaign emphasizing its readership (1.15 million weekly, it says) and that it's not going anywhere ("Here to Stay," it says). We sat down with Moss to talk about the paper's future in print and online, what's in store for its editorial page and how he plans to produce more local news with fewer reporters on staff.

It's Oct. 29, 2014. What do you imagine this business looking like? What's different?
We're going to continue to be very much focused on our printed product. The strength of the printed product is much greater than what residents and people in the marketplace realize. We've got over 1 million readers every week. The death of the printed product is way, way overstated. We are growing and expanding our SignOnSanDiego.com website. We're looking for ways that SignOn can be very much tied to every individual community throughout the county.

Will you still be publishing seven days a week?
Yes. We have no plans to change our cycle.

Is there a way to make and keep the newspaper profitable that doesn't involve staff cuts going forward?
We are profitable today. We have built an organization as of today that can be profitable based on the revenue the company is generating today. We feel we're in a very good position to grow our organization.

How do you grow the paper in the face of the declining print readership?
It's all about being more local. It's all about connecting with the community in ways that metropolitan newspapers traditionally haven't. What I ask our people every day is how do we differentiate ourselves? That's where the connection is. We've seen an increase in circulation since Aug. 1, as we've gotten more focused on our local news coverage and local advertising strategies. Despite the fact that newspapers overall have lost circulation, we're amongst the best performers in the country in terms of our readership overall.

You say the newspaper is among the best in the country. But in the most recent audit figures from the ABC (Audit Bureau of Circulations), you posted a 10 percent drop. Others added circulation.
Others had much more significant losses than we did.

But some newspapers added circulation. It would seem those would be the best performing newspapers, not the ones losing subscribers.
Right. Since the time we've been here in May we've been growing our number. The audit period is over a longer period of time. There were investments we've made in our circulation sales that are driving our number today that quite frankly were not being made a year ago.

Those figures were from the end of March until the end of September. You would've been here for 5/6ths of that time.
I got here in May and we developed our strategies, which kicked in in July.

In one interview, you attributed the majority of the newspaper's economic troubles to the economic downturn. Staff cuts here started a year before the recession did. How do you reconcile that?
This has been the longest recession of our time. Certainly the downturn started before then. I wasn't here then, but I would assume adjustments were begun to be made at that time to get costs more in line with revenue. When we got here, we saw clearly that we needed to get the size of the company to where we could sustain profitability.

Do you anticipate more staff cuts in the next year?
It's all going to depend on revenue trends. We don't have plans to have further across-the-board reductions. But I can't promise that. No business could promise that. It comes down to whether we see a stabilization in the economy and in our revenue.

Are you at that point of stabilization?
I don't think anyone knows. We hope so. We've seen stabilization over the last few months. I'm optimistic. We're all cautiously optimistic as we enter 2010 and hope we see an uptick in the economy.

As more and more readers shift online, do you see a way to monetize them in the same way newspapers traditionally have with that same person reading the printed product?
It's much tougher. The model online has been free. Advertisers want to be online, but they have not seen the same value in spending ad dollars online. That's why the balance between the two (internet and print) is so key. The other piece is at what point can we charge for our content online? We're going to be testing that over the months and years ahead to see what consumers are willing to pay for. As we learn, we'll adjust.

What lessons do you take from the pay wall experiments other newspapers have done to date?
You need to do those kinds of experiments. In Minneapolis, people have to pay for Vikings coverage. As we go forward, we'll need to experiment as well to determine what the model can be in terms of free and paid content. There will be an expectation that a certain amount of information will be free. We'll experiment to see where it makes sense to make those pay walls. No one has a clear answer yet.

How does more local coverage translate to the paper?
I want more coverage of all our local communities and, more than anything, news that affects peoples' lives.

Does that local focus include Tijuana, Sacramento, Washington, D.C.?Certainly Tijuana. The community is joined. And key coverage out of Sacramento that affects Southern California is absolutely key.

The paper cut its D.C. bureau. Is there any plan or potential for having D.C.-based coverage again?
Because we subscribe to so many news services -- The Associated Press, Washington Post, New York Times -- we have adequate coverage from Washington.

The newspaper's news gathering staff has been about cut in half. There are some reporters that instead of covering one city are covering two, three, four or five. I'm curious how you get more local with fewer people making the connections.
That's a good question. Any company in business today has had to learn to do more with less. We're all learning how to do that. The ability for our news gatherers to cover multiple beats is very common in the small and mid-sized newspaper business. Before I got here, that's all I was used to. I don't look at what we had. I look at what we have today. We have a lot of really talented people and an adequate (sized) reporting staff to have more local news coverage.

Doing more with less. Is that something that actually translates?
Absolutely. It's the number of stories our news gatherers write each day, each week. It's how we present it in the newspapers through briefs, shorter stories, lists of information. All those things are local news. It's through story counts, investigative stories, briefs, all these different ways to get local news in the paper.

The tagline on your current advertising campaign is: "Here to Stay." Does that refer to the business or its new owners?
It's the newspaper. It was really important that the community understood that the Union-Tribune is a very viable newspaper, a very viable company. With our print readership, we felt we needed to be very clear to the marketplace how strong it was, both to readers and advertisers.

I asked readers for questions. Several were very interested in what the new ownership means for the paper's editorial views. There's been a segment of the population that's felt disenfranchised from the paper because they view it as being conservative and anti-union. I'm curious if you can speak to that.
The new ownership leaves all decisions to us locally. Since I've been here, we've been accused of being too liberal and too conservative. What I think is the most important thing is that we provide a balance of both views, whatever issue we're referring to. If the editorial board has one view, we want to open the pages for an opposing view.

Has that balance existed historically?
I don't know. I've heard different views on that. I don't think it's really fair for me to comment on what it looked like before.

One reader told me he was thinking of canceling because of your editorial page politics and because he could get news from other sources now. Can you make a pitch for him to renew?
Absolutely. I'm making pitches every day. It gets back to our focus on being local and differentiating ourselves from all others. We're working harder and harder to provide news and information you can only get in the Union-Tribune. Because we have the largest news gathering staff in San Diego, we're in the best position to do that.

-- Interview conducted and edited by ROB DAVIS




17 Comments so far on this story...

Moss either hasn't looked at the U-T's editorial/opinion pages during a typical week's cycle, or is just lying about the editorial/opinion stance. Is he misinformed, uninformed, or lying? Does it matter? We are cancelling when the next renewal notice arrives. The U-T is toast!!

Posted by Hillcrester | reply to this comment
October 31, 2009 7:02 am

The man deserves a chance to prove himself.

Posted by Jim | reply to this comment
October 31, 2009 9:18 am

If the LA Daily News is any indication of what's to come for the UT, it's a waste of time to continue my subscription. Also, I'm not very enthusastic about the new Web site. I too, will be canceling my subscription.

Posted by Atticus II | reply to this comment
November 1, 2009 9:15 am

I never understood why the UT’s editorial pages continue to be so conservative, especially as San Diego’s population became less so. I reluctantly stopped my subscription 10 years ago when the editorial pages commented on a suburban city council decision while the news editors didn't cover the important meeting. The editorial was woefully misinformed about what happened at the meeting, but took a knee-jerk conservative position anyway. I’ve always tried to support good local journalism because it’s extremely important The same suburban city government is very happy now that no news organization is shining its light on their activities. The UT’s remaining reporters (who I'd have to admire) may well be covering more neighborhood “news,” but it’s not the same quality of, say, the investigative journalists who exposed Randy Cunningham or the CCDC. Things like that are still happening but aren't being reported.

Posted by Tom O | reply to this comment
November 2, 2009 1:48 pm

First line says Mr. Moss "has served," but a more descriptive verb is probably, simply, "has worked" or even "has been." Think about how often "served" is misused in print and how it connotes some sort of deserved credit for just doing one's "work." Please consider this point next time you want to write "serve" -- are you describing true, dedicated "service" or simply "doing one's job"? Forget what Webster's allows way down in usage ... That little peeve out of the way, some good reporting here. Timely interview. On a side note: No idea whether this is a likable person or a good leader. He also hasn't shown much willingness to be closely involved in this community. He spouts from other newspaper publishers' playbook with confidence, but just because everyone else is jumping out a fifth-floor window ... May I ask how this interview was conducted. By e-mail?

Posted by S.R.M. | reply to this comment
October 31, 2009 8:07 am

S.R.M. -- Thanks for the feedback on our word usage. To answer your question, the interview was conducted in person, Thursday, at the Union-Tribune's offices.

Posted by Editor | reply to this comment
October 31, 2009 8:32 am

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to determine an editorial page's slant. Just look at who they endorse when it's election time. How often has the U-T endorsed a Democrat for president? When the city of SD's voter reg is almost exactly 50/50 with many independents and your editorial page consistently tilts to the right, you are alienating a huge chunk of your potential readership. Great way to run a business, no wonder the U-T is dying.

Posted by TC | reply to this comment
October 31, 2009 9:29 am

Conservatism is growing -- smaller govt! Hope the paper will continue. The website has certainly improved.

Posted by Carole Mayo | reply to this comment
October 31, 2009 12:08 pm

The U-T generally endorses INCUMBENTS, regardless of political affiliation. Especially in local elections. No one seems to notice this ongoing trend. Check back on the paper's endorsements. Most people -- regardless of political affiliation -- will be stunned to find how many Democrats the paper endorses. It's obvious that the paper endorses incumbents for the simple reason that incumbents almost always win. Because the paper (like too many other groups that lack principles) wants to tout its influence, it endorses who the editors think will win the race. Hardly a meaningful endorsement, when viewed in that context.

Posted by Richard Rider - Chairman - San | reply to this comment
October 31, 2009 12:28 pm

All papers are suffering from the growing availability of information on the Internet. It's doubtful the SD U-T is losing it's 10% readership loss primarily because it's not liberal enough, as some claim. During that same timeframe, the liberal LA TIMES lost 11.1% of its readers, and the uber-liberal SF CHRONICLE lost an amazing 26% of its circulation.

Posted by Richard Rider - Chairman - San | reply to this comment
October 31, 2009 2:14 pm

The idea posited by one commenter that the U-T editorials should be more liberal because the city is now collectively slightly left of center doesn't hold water -- for two reasons. 1. The paper's area demographic is the entire COUNTY of San Diego, which overall is still right of center. 2. More Republicans than Democrats read papers. Don't get huffy, elitist Dems. It's a fact of life. Your voter registration base is the low income folks, many of whom don't read English well. They don't want to read any English language paper, nor can many afford the paper.

Posted by Richard Rider - Chairman - San | reply to this comment
October 31, 2009 2:25 pm

The former Editor of the Editorial Page, Bob Kittle readily admitted on KPBS FM's "Editor's Roundtable" that the UT's editorials reflect a "conserverative", Republican point of view. I submit that view permates every news story's content and headline. For our only major daily to operate with that mindset is bad marketing. If they are losing readers, they should re-invent themselves and serve the entire market better.

Posted by brettv | reply to this comment
October 31, 2009 2:30 pm

Yes, Brettv--From the wording of headlines, to the location in the story of comments from interviewees, to the choice of stories, to story placement among the shrinking pages, oh I could go on, the Anti-Union-Tribune has no wall between editorials, opinion, and reporting. It is becoming a West Coast version of Faux News. It is a failing venture. Fortunately.

Posted by Hillcrester | reply to this comment
November 2, 2009 7:31 am

Do you really think Mr. Moss cares what you think? His plans are years ahead concerning what he plans to do with the UT. If the UT sinks or swims will not be determined by what YOU think of him or the UT's past or present operations , but by their systematic planing and strategies for the future. Its OK to vent your negative feelings online, but all of you have to remember this: Blogs are for entertainment purposes only, for all of us to enjoy. They have no bearing on decisions made by companies or their publishers. For all we know, he might be laughing at the comments on this blog and thinking "you all got another thing coming!"

Posted by Ray | reply to this comment
October 31, 2009 2:36 pm

I think Platinum Equity’s only concern for the UT is that it does not cost them too much money on the way to leveraging their real estate investment, and ultimately, selling the UT to another company. Personally, I don’t see anything wrong with Platinum’s approach to the UT. Mr. Moss will probably whittle the paper down to a very thin, and possibly free, daily publication found in coffee shops, restaurants, and hotels. The UT may become profitable by dramatically shrinking direct and indirect costs through layoffs and selling off plant and equipment. The new UT will probably become a shadow of its former self. Platinum will probably position the UT for sale to a media company like the MediaNews Group, the owner of LA Daily News.

Posted by Atticus II | reply to this comment
November 1, 2009 9:19 am

Dear Ed Moss, UT failed to respond and continues to fail responding to the needs of its readership. Do you know the current demographics of San Diego? Do you publish stories from the country of origin of the ethnic residents of San Diego? UT has been very insensitive to ethnic communities like ours - The Filipino American community. Look at our local newspapers - the Filipino Press, The Asian Journal, The California Examiner and the Philippine Mabuhay News - all published in English. They are growing, why? Because the Filipino American community with a population of more than 175,000 the largest population group next to the Hispanics need for news from what is happening in the Philippines is not being addressed. You don't even support their festivals or write about the many events happening in their community. Worst, you don't have a Filipino in your staff.

Posted by Aurora S. Cudal | reply to this comment
November 2, 2009 10:39 am

The news readers of San Diego don't need the UT; most of its contents are available for free on-line, albeit in several different places, including their own website. What San Diego does need is as large and easily accessed a platform as the UT editorial and opinion pages for swapping and promoting ideas and conversation about public policy. Even in their distressed state, these pages can still reach, and therefore influence, more people than any journalistic enterprise in San Diego. That's the upcoming gap that will need filling. Hopefully someone is working on it. As for the UT editorial slant: I find it rancid and believe its done as much harm as good to San Diego, which is why I canceled my paper. Try it. You'll be surprised how pleasant breakfast can be without the UT.

Posted by Bob | reply to this comment
November 2, 2009 11:40 am


Reader feedback
  • Users may post more than one comment, but should not pose as multiple users. Multiple posts from the same IP address but with a different user name on each will be reviewed to determine whether abuse has occurred.
  • Posts with overly personal attacks or unsubstantiated allegations may be edited or deleted.
  • Please be patient with the posts -- there may be a delay before they appear on the site -- and make sure to enter the code in the "image verification" box.
Post a comment
Name:
Email:
Comments:
Current Word Count: Verification Code
326bc75



MOST POPULAR STORIES:


Copyright © 2009 voiceofsandiego.org. All Rights Reserved.