The Indianapolis Star will cut its business editor position as part of a contract agreement between the local Newspaper Guild and the daily metro, Anthony Schoettle of the Indianapolis Business Journal reports.
The Star’s online directory does not list a “business editor” position, but it does list a “team leader” for business.
Earlier this year, the paper eliminated its standalone business section during the week. A number of Gannett papers made similar moves.
The paper had decided to cut the standalone business section in 2007, but reversed that decision shortly thereafter. That same year, it had combined its metro and business desks. Steve Berta, senior editor for state, metro and business, oversees that operation now.
Read more here.
The Advocate is looking for a savvy reporter to cover the Baton Rouge business scene…
MLex, a LexisNexis company, is an independent news organization for breaking news and forward-looking analysis…
The Austin Business Journal seeks a staff writer to cover economic development in one of…
A Russian court on Saturday placed Sergei Mingazov, a journalist for the Russian edition of…
Justin Nielsen of Investor's Business Daily writes about the newspaper's 40th anniversary. Nielsen writes, "When the…
Clare Fieseler has been hired by Politico and subsidiary E&E News to cover renewable energy,…
View Comments
Our reporter took a shortcut in reporting this story. That shortcut—not calling Dennis Ryerson—resulted in an error. A phone call to Ryerson would have cleared up the reporter’s misinterpretation of a union statement about the future of various editor positions at the Star. Our story erroneously reported that four editor positions, including a business editor (not “the†business editor, as written in this blog), would be cut. In fact, those positions wouldn’t be eliminated. They’re leaving the Newspaper Guild and will be exempt from the contract. IBJ regrets the error, which has been corrected on our Web site and will be the subject of a correction in tomorrow’s IBJ Daily.
As an aside, Ryerson is usually complimentary of our news organization, at least privately, so it’s unfortunate he took this opportunity to imply we print rumors. He knows better. Our reporter talked to at least one union leader and attempted to reach others. This was hardly a matter of hearing something on the street and putting it in print. But it was a mistake, and it shouldn’t have happened.