When I read the Gannett "Information Center" memo and its attached Q and A, I immediately worried that there was so much in it that it would be misinterpreted and lead to unpredictable side effects. Faced with the enormity of it all, people would naturally latch onto the little parts that felt most comfortable (like hard news 24x7, or video).
I don't know whether that's the problem or if it's just a good old fashioned case of playing telephone, but it does seem that what's coming out at the bottom of the funnel is not always what was poured in the top, judging from the whinefest at SportsShooter.com.
I don't recall the memo dictating that everyone would be a generalist and no one a specialist, or that photographers would quit shooting and spend all their time editing "citizen journalism" video uploads, et cetera.
Introducing change at any organization is difficult. Gannett happens to be a top-down, central-control operation, and a top-down, central-control change memo comes naturally. Following it up is another thing entirely, and it looks like that will be a process full of bumps and surprises.
I don't happen to work for such a company (we are, by comparison, decentralized), but in conversations over the last week I was surprised to hear from several editors and publishers that a "call to action" memo would be welcomed.
There is no substitute for leadership at the top. But there's also no substitute for leadership at the other layers, too. Including among photographers.
Howard Owens has some thoughts about all this on his weblog.