January 1, Saturday

A new year? Am I going to be chained to this diary for another year? Only the Shadow knows. For now, it's one day at a time.

The day began, as usual, with a sunrise walk, which like the whole Y2K thing, failed to meet expectations. Judge for yourself.

The only Y2K problem I've run into so far is with TheCounter.com, which provides the free counter used on this diary. Certain of its statistics are not Y2K compliant, since it reported no visitors yesterday, while showing quite a number in its listing of recent hits. It's just that today, January 1, 2000, doesn't properly remember yesterday's log because its in the wrong century. I think.

We stayed home last night and fretted as Hawaii's traffic in illegal fireworks finally reached its intended market, the crazy New Year revelers. The sounds of bombs and rockets had the cats scrambling for cover or huddling in dark spaces with wild eyes. One cat, a former wild cat who has not yet learned the intricacies of civilized behavior, didn't show up for dinner and was still out when we barricaded the cat door. Of course, that meant that I worried throughout the night, not feeling whole until Silverman strolled out of the bushes behind the house midmorning.

The following report also arrived this morning courtesy of a Star-Bulletin colleague who was on the midnight watch:

subject: happy new year!

The scene: The rooftop of the Hawaii Newspaper Agency building.

The time: Just before the millennial rollover.

Six or so Star-Bulletin staffers are there. Maybe 40 Advertiser and HNA staffers.

Everyone is facing in the direction of the Aloha Tower.

The Advertiser staffers are in the front. The Star-Bulletin staffers are in the back of the bus, standing at a distance.

An old pal who works for the Advertiser approaches a Star-Bulletin staffer and gives him a big hug.

The S-B staffer notices that the Advertiser person has a nice, attractive, real, actual wine glass of champagne. The S-B staffer has champagne, too, but in a flexy, bendy plastic cup.

Then Mike Fisch, the person in charge of the Advertiser and HNA, appears, and with flawless graciousness, wishes each Star-Bulletin staffer a Happy New Year with a touch of drinking vessels.

When the Star-Bulletin staffer who's writing this note has his turn, he notices that instead of a ringing tone, the touch of the glass and plastic drinking vessels produces a "thunk."

And he thinks, "Well, that pretty much says it."

January 2, Sunday

The fireworks tapered off today, finally. They've been a major part of the environment since midweek as people seemed intent on revving up for a loud New Year celebration.

But when it all stopped, or virtually stopped, this evening, the pleasure of silence suddenly became obvious once again. When the firecrackers and assorted bombs and rockets were going off at random intervals, I found myself nervous and frustrated, but I didn't immediately identify the absence of quiet as the problem.

In much the same way, we've normalized the absence of silence, or its mental equivalent, in the newsroom since the September 16 announcement that they want to shut us down. The "noise", anxiety, occasional fear, tension, jumpiness, etc., have just been accepted as part of the environment we work in. We may not become aware of it all until the threat is removed and we can enjoy the silence again.

January 3, Monday

A little empiricism never hurts. In light of the anecdotal evidence that Star-Bulletin street sales have been hindered by the removal of sales boxes, I decided to count Advertiser and S-B boxes between the heart of downtown and the state courts, just a few blocks away. Below is the resulting count, along with a separate count of boxes along Waialae Avenue in Kaimuki, a mixed residential-commercial area near the University of Hawaii, done while driving past late this afternoon.

The overall result: There were more than twice as many Advertiser boxes as Star-Bulletin boxes on the street. There was no location where a Star-Bulletin box appeared without an accompanying Advertiser, but fully half of all locations had only a lone Advertiser box.

Location	Number of street sales boxes
	Advertiser	Star-Bulletin
Alakea & King	4	1
Bishop (between Beretania & King)	2	1
Bishop & King	3	2
(one of the S-B boxes was empty at 12:45 p.m.)
Bishop & Merchant	1	1
Bishop & Queen	1	1
Queen & Alakea	2	1
Queen & Richards	2	1
Queen & Mililani	1	1
Halekauwila (Fed Bldg.)	1	0
Halekauwila & Punchbowl (bus stop at Fed Bldg.)	1	0
Punchbowl @ Restaurant Row	1	1
Queen & Punchbowl	1	0
Queen & South	1	0
Waialae Avenue (St. Louis Dr. to Koko Head)	11	5
Total	32	15
(percent)	68 %	32 %

This is a distribution designed to reduce, not promote, Star-Bulletin circulation. A Gannett-created self-fulfilling prophesy, it appears.

January 4, Tuesday

Attorneys for Gannett and the Hawaii Newspaper Agency (which control and operate the joint operating agreement), and the Liberty Newspapers Limited Partnership (which owns the Star-Bulletin) were notified last week that attorneys for a group of community leaders wants to question Liberty Newspaper representatives under oath. The community group has a federal antitrust lawsuit that is running on a parallel course to the one filed by Hawaii's Attorney General.

The notice of deposition of Liberty Newspapers was hand delivered to local counsel, and mailed to mainland attorneys representing each of the parties. It is not clear from the court record whether Rupert Phillips or one of the local officials will be deposed. That should be clarified shortly.

Some insight into the intent of the scheduled deposition appears in a report of a telephone conference held on Dec. 20 between attorneys for the various parties. The report was filed in federal district court in Honolulu.

Attorneys for the community group say they intend to probe "the existence of a conspiracy to close the Honolulu Star-Bulletin, the nature and extent of economic competition between the Honolulu Advertiser and Honolulu Star-Bulletin, the extent of injury or threatened injury suffered by Plaintiffs, and the nature and mechanics of the newspapers' operations under the joint operating agreement," which includes the extent of editorial and reporting competition, the hiring of reporters and editors, the selection of syndicated columns, and other issues.

Attorneys say they also want to look for "circumstantial evidence of Defendants' conspiracy to close the Honolulu Star-Bulletin (e.g., efforts to sell the Star-Bulletin)."

Attorneys for the community group say they want to take up to 30 depositions, while Gannett wants to a limit of just 10 depositions for each side.

The attorneys report: "Settlement is unlikely at this time, but the parties are open to future settlement discussions."

January 5, Wednesday

famous photog George Lee takes a break in front of the recently rebuilt guard post.

Word around the building yesterday was that the extra security guards who were brought in after the September 16 announcement were to be reassigned to other job sites at the end of the day. They apparently learned of the move earlier the same day, but they blame their company rather than Gannett for the lack of notice. As of this morning, we are supposedly back to just a few guards, but we'll see.

 

January 6, Thursday

As announced, the extra security guards deployed around the news building disappeared yesterday. Their departure left the side entrance to the building, used by most employees, unguarded for the first time since September 16. Readjusting to normalcy will take a day or two.

Now we have to see whether this is signals a broader cease-fire or just a pause between rounds.

January 7, Friday

In the words of that famous 60's song, "Something's happening here, what it is ain't exactly clear..."

A friend called yesterday after getting back from a business trip to the Big Island. He was there for four days, based in Waimea.

"There were plenty of Star-Bulletin racks, but no newspapers," he said. "I could not buy a Star-Bulletin on the Big Island."

He said there were racks in front of Safeway and elsewhere in the Waimea Shopping Center, all empty. Checking back several times a day found the same thing. "I tried for 3 days, but there were never any papers."

Fellow worker G.S. said it best: "I was a hunter back when I was young and insensitive. The feeling is like knowing there's something in that thicket. Even though you can't see it, you can feel it. Something isn't right."

Finally, the San Francisco Bay Guardian ran another short story on our situation, headlined: "Hawaii Shutdown Postponed, for now."

[Note: as of 7 a.m. this morning, Hawaii time, TheCounter.com, which provides the free counter used on this page, was "down". So if the counter image below still isn't loading, it's probably not the fault of this page, but of TheCounter's server. ]

A simmering ambivalence towards the SaveStarbulletin.org web site blew up this morning when S-B webmaster Blaine Fergerstrom took offense at comments posted yesterday. A memo that quickly went up on the newsroom bulletin board was drawing curious readers through the morning.

 

January 8, Saturday

Okay, "we make waves" is our motto, but they're not supposed to be within our own newsroom. Unfortunately, that was the situation yesterday, as tempers flared and emails flamed. It was kind of like watching a legislature do its thing. If you weren't attuned, you might not have noticed much going on, other than the memo that came down off the bulletin board sometime after noon. Attention to detail, on the other hand, yielded repeated reminders that all was not well.

The immediate issue was a comment posted earlier on SaveStarbulletin.org by Burl Burlingame, features writer and Guild rep, which appeared to "dis" the hardworking team that creates the Star-Bulletin's own web site, Blaine Fergerstrom and Ken Andrade, by implying reports of recent legal victories had been "buried".

By this morning, those involved seemed inclined to let the matter drop, and I don't want to unnecessarily upset the delicate balance, but the exchange reveals underlying differences in perspective, reflecting not only interpersonal conflicts but broader strains, tensions and issues.

Burl observed that the Guild's role in blocking the closure of the Star-Bulletin has been underappreciated by S-B staffers. It was the Guild, he says, that immediately joined other unions to put pressure on the governor, hired expert antitrust lawyers, and moved to rally community support.

All true, perhaps, but the Guild has for its own reasons stayed in the background, never identifying the web site as its own. The Guild has even denied its central role, while maintaining only minimal contact with its membership--in this case, us. So it's no wonder it remains "underappreciated."

Blaine and Ken also took exception to barbs appearing almost casually on SaveStarbulletin.org which suggested the webmasters, both rank and file Guild members, joined some of our local management and editors as part of the Gannett conspiracy, certainly an unfair accusation against all of them. It's the same casual conspiracy tone which suggested that a lack of updates to the S-B's own web archive was part of an intentional management effort to downplay the issue, something all now agree is untrue.

The SOS site's lack of normal journalistic responsibility can be criticized, but Burl, while acknowledging that some prior criticisms have been "too edgy," replies that SOS isn't journalism but rather "anti-closure propaganda...part of the scramble to drum up public support to slow or halt closure." I can't be hyper critical of that sense of paranoia because I've fallen victim to it several times, although I've tried make quick course corrections whenever possible.

The ultimate meaning of this incident remains unclear, at least to me, except as further evidence of the pressures we're under, and the different strategies we've adopted to assert ourselves.

I'm indebted to BlueEar Forum contributor Andy Starkis for his image of all of us riding stoically inside the barrel as our newspaper heads for Niagara, doing what we can while being driven towards the brink by political, social, and legal forces that are largely outside of our control.

January 9, Sunday

We are all walking a tightrope, although most of the time we aren't bother by the height because we forget to look down. From our routine and practical perspectives, we forget that the Star-Bulletin is owned by Liberty Newspapers and its general partner, Rupert Phillips, who want us gone. Toast. History. Pau.

It's not the best of situations, and we don't like it, but they hold the cards right now. Because of this, we are not free as a newspaper to openly trumpet the cause of long-term survival, because Rupert would certainly quickly install new management more amenable to his short-term interests, and that would be a disaster.

As a result, our best defense right now is reporting the news, and doing it well, and stirring public opinion indirectly by showing them what they would miss if the Star-Bulletin closes.

Just a niggle of worry: Has the federal court's injunction protected me along with the Star-Bulletin? If the injunction is lifted, would Rupert be empowered to say, "get rid of that guy so he can't write that damn diary"?

Burl Burlingame reports that the SaveStarbulletin site has been redesigned for faster loading and easier reading. It also has a link to a recent article by Berkeley law professor Stephen Barnett on the antitrust issues posed by our case. A must read.

January 10, Monday

Gannett and Liberty Newspapers filed their answer to the state's lawsuit last week. It's a routine matter, really just a placeholder, a formality. But our paper added a spicy headline, "JOA partners resume push to kill Bulletin." The document did not give away any clues as to the substantive stance of the parties, or the legal strategy they expect to pursue, beyond what has already been laid out. So we're still waiting for some indicators.

Here's another glaring omission. These people are standing in line at a lunch wagon on Mililani Street, between the Post Office/Old Federal Building and the Supreme Court building across the street. Instead of being offered the opportunity to buy a "hot off the press" Star-Bulletin with the day's fresh news, their only choice is the stale news sitting in the Advertiser box. How do you spell "m-o-n-o-p-o-l-y"?

 

 

January 11, Tuesday

More news on the legal front.

I made a call yesterday morning to find out who was scheduled to be deposed as a result of the "Notice of Deposition" served on the Liberty Newspapers Limited Partnership. I learned several things. First, the procedure when a corporation is subject of a deposition is for the corporation to select the appropriate individual to actually appear and answer questions under oath. The corporation is free to make its own selection, but is then bound by the answers that individual provides.

But in this particular case the procedure has hit a short-circuit. Although it has not been reported yet, Liberty Newspapers and Gannett are a bit shy about testifying under oath, at least at this time, and have acted to avoid the deposition. In a deal struck with lawyers representing the group of community leaders that filed suit, Liberty/Gannett have agreed in writing to withdraw their motion to dismiss the suit in exchange for cancellation of the planned deposition. Documents withdrawing the motions have not yet been filed in court, but the deal was confirmed by Newspaper Guild rep Wayne Cahill, who called it "very good news." It puts an end to this latest attempt by Gannett to knock out the Save Our Star-Bulletin suit, and it is another small defeat for the media empire's high-priced legal team.

 

January 12, Wednesday

Fallout continues from the weekend's flap over the SaveStarbulletin.org site. A link to it from the Star-Bulletin's archive of material on the attempted closing has "disappeared", leaving a few folks puzzled. It deserves to be checked, but my guess is that it was dropped after the Guild acknowledged its sponsorship and control of SaveStarbulletin.org.

What does it mean when people say they're proud of the paper's management for just reporting the news? The Star-Bulletin ran a story yesterday that drew just such comments. The story ("Fisher Hawaii pulls ads from two Honolulu dailies") described the move by several large, longtime advertisers that have pulled their ads from our JOA papers and are experimenting with other vehicles, including a combo deal with two weekly papers. The story was held for a few days, and a critical quote by one client was cut, but the story ran despite opposition from the Hawaii Newspaper Agency, the Gannett-controlled operating agency of this JOA. It was just business news, but in the context of our ongoing battle marked another gesture of independence.

For those who might be interested, I did a brief review of Richard McCord's book on Gannett, "The Chain Gang". The review was distributed by online publisher BlueEar.com.

Overheard in the newsroom yesterday: A staffer commented that the threatened demise of the Star-Bulletin had forced him to consider what he would do if the paper closes. He said this experience triggered a self-examination and the realization that there are a number of things he would like to do, including spending time in contemplation and solitude, if he weren't bound to a daily schedule. The way he spoke of it revealed a yearning for that promise of freedom. Perhaps the silver lining on the affair for those bold enough to grasp the opportunity.

There seem to have been quite a few new visitors to these pages over the past few days. If someone would take a few minutes to e-mail and let me know how you learned of this journal, I would certainly appreciate it.

January 13, Thursday

A San Francisco Bay Guardian editorial cited Honolulu's reaction to the proposed closing of the Star-Bulletin as a model for supporters of the endangered two newspaper city. Worth a quick read. Many thanks to folks at the Bay weekly.

Of course, we have not yet struggled with union opposition to efforts aimed at saving S.F. as a two-paper town. In that situation, where a "no layoff" pledge has been made by the employer, our union brothers and sisters are opposing outside intervention out of fear that delays will threaten jobs. We're all essentially beginning with our own self-interest, I suppose, but it would be very interesting to see whether we could agree on a joint response to the tides of consolidation.

I'm consistently amazed by the articulate reactions of Star-Bulletin subscribers. The following letter addressed to Gannett's corporate headquarters was cc'd to me early this week. It states the case so well, that I'm reprinting it in full, along with Gannett's response:

----------

From: M...W...@aol.com
To: gcishare@info.gannett.com
Subject: Honolulu Star-Bulletin

Date: Sunday, January 09, 2000 5:57PM

Why are you trying to kill off our evening paper? I am a Honolulu Star-Bulletin subscriber -- for decades -- and I resent you guys coming in like a steamroller, manipulating our newspaper business for your own gain and our loss. Everyone knows the Advertiser is just fluff with ads, and the S-B is where we find the meat. And we know the people involved, because this is a "small town". We have a sense of community here that you could never understand.

Hawaii has historically been a place where outsiders felt they could come in, get rich, screw the locals, and still sleep at night, satisfied from yet another conquest. Well, we have HAD enough. As you are seeing, we will not succumb ignorantly and quietly to your plans for us.

I urge you to give the Star-Bulletin a fair shake and let the local market decide. For starters, put back the S-B distribution boxes you have systematically removed from our streets. Give our neighbor islanders access to the paper. You insult us by thinking we don't notice such shenanigans.

Don't you have ENOUGH money and power from other cities who have been crushed by the stomp of your boots? Can't you do just ONE nice thing in your corporate life and leave us the hell alone?

Your PR is suffering. Gannett is now synonymous with "imperialism", "greed" and "heartlessness". Who admires that (besides Donald Trump)? Nice image, you guys. And nice way to do business. I don't understand how you can be proud of that.

M.W., Honolulu, Hawaii

 

The reply:

"You have reached Gannett's corporate headquarters in Arlington, Va. I have forwarded your email to the editor at our Honolulu paper for reply."

-- Mary Hardie, Gannett

January 14, Friday

Gannett attorneys indicated yesterday, as predicted, that they will be seeking to have the antitrust lawsuits declared moot now that the agreement to terminate the JOA and close the Star-Bulletin has lapsed. The story barely beat our 2nd edition deadline and was reported in today's paper. That version of the story referred to the Gannett-Liberty Newspaper deal as an agreement to sell the Star-Bulletin, which actually was never offered for sale, an error which was corrected in the later, online version.

The newsroom rumor mill reports that the Advertiser is telling its staff that open positions will not be filled because they want to be free to hire as many Star-Bulletin people as possible. As a result, Advertiser staff are having to work harder, and everyone is reported to be "very tired."

This could indicate an ongoing effort to close the S-B. On the other hand, they may just be trying to recoup some of the money lost over the last three months. As one insightful staffer put it, "Gannett seems to be the kind of outfit to avoid the truth when a lie will suffice."

We're expecting an announcement of the appointment of a new Star-Bulletin city editor, perhaps today. Former city editor Dan Woods resigned to take a position at Pacific Business News just the federal court injunction gave us this grace period of renewed publishing life.

Regular readers please note that I'm going to be fiddling with these pages over the weekend, and it's possible that some bookmarks or regular routes back here won't work. You can always find your way back by taking this link to the opening page of this journal, then choosing "Today".

 

January 15, Saturday

Spotted in business news about Gannett (stock symbol GCI) is the announcement that Gannett is shutting down another publication, the oldest country music magazine, Music City News. The News had a small staff but a long history. Good luck to all of the folks over there.

No announcement yesterday on the city editor decision, but we were told to attend a staff meeting on Monday. It may end up that an editor will not be appointed, and we'll continue with the interim solution of shared power, tangled responsibilities, and newsroom confusion.

I've had mixed reactions to yesterday's "rumor" report about a hold on hiring across the hall at the Advertiser. There have been several new hires in recent months, and hints that there may be others over the next six months. Of course, the current union contracts will expire at the end of June, so none of us have any real idea of what the situation will be at that time. Relations between the unions and Gannett have certainly not been improved by this whole experience, so bargaining could be painful.

Honolulu attorney Peter Donahoe shed some light on the background of the Honolulu JOA during an interview on another subject this week. Donahoe started lawyering in Honolulu back in 1960 when there were only about 300 attorneys in the state, compared to today's 4,000+.

He was a deputy attorney general in the early 1960's when the original agreement was struck between the Star-Bulletin and Advertiser to merge their business operations, and was assigned the task of drafting the first opinion on its legality. Donahoe says he reached the conclusion that it was an illegal combination. The opinion was passed up to the governor's office.

The late Gov. John Burns then called a meeting with the newspapers and the lawyers. Donahoe says the papers had always been represented by Marty Anderson, so when political insider Matsuo Takabuki showed up instead, "I knew the fix was in."

Burns obtained an agreement from the papers that advertisers would not have to pay for both newspapers, but could choose to place ads in one or the other at a lower rate. Apart from that, Burns chose to ignore the opinion on the JOA's illegality.

Donahoe then moved to the Legislature, where he served as Senate attorney. It was several years later that he approached then-Senate President Dave McClung with a proposal for legislation to legalize the JOA. Donahoe's argument was that it wasn't a good idea to leave Burns armed with a legal opinion that he could choose to apply at any time. It provided more leverage over the newspapers than was proper. "Better to just decide whether it should be legal or illegal," Donahoe said.

The rest is history.

 

 Continued....

Since 11/2/99