Is it a good idea to lay off a Pulitzer Prize winner? I don’t think so.
What is the Chicago Sun-Times trying to prove? That reporters and freelancers are better than Pulitzer Prize winners?
If the Sun-Times didn’t have the money to keep employees, I would understand if they let go some of the staff. But, the entire photography staff? Blasphemy. What’s more sad is that the Sun-Times is unprofitable, and I feel like they were trying to cover that up with the sorry excuse that they wanted to appeal to their digital consumers. Being in debt is not the same as trying to appeal to a certain audience.
While this may be an attempt to get out of the red, I agree with media analyst Alan Mutter when he said that we will lose iconic and memorable photographs. Is sacrificing quality for quantity really worth it? I don’t think so.
Expecting less people to do more work is counterintuitive and will eventually wear out the staff that hasn’t already quit. While this may be a trend according to Mutter, I believe it is the wrong road to go down.
It would be interesting to compare the quality of photographs before and after this massive firing to see if there really is a notable difference.
Who can imagine a paper without a photography staff? I can’t.