A Facebook friend of mine chastised me on Thursday after reading my story about salary reductions at The New York Times and buyouts at The Washington Post. He wanted to know why I hadn’t found anything positive to write about newspapers in a while.

Watch me use the the Newspaper Associations’ fourth-quarter newspaper advertising numbers, released on Thursday, to dash my friend’s expectations.

Here’s the roundup:

• Print ad sales: Down 20.6 percent. That compares to down 11.6 percent in the fourth quarter a year ago. It also is a downhill slide from 19.3 percent in Q3 2008, 16.1 percent in Q2 and 14.4 in Q1.
• Online ad sales: Down 8.1 percent versus up 22.3 percent last year. It’s also worse than the previous three quarters of down 3 percent, down 2.4 percent and up 7.2 percent.
• Total print and online? Down 19.7 percent versus down 10.3 percent last year. Previous three quarters? Down 18.1 percent, 15.1 percent, 12.9 percent.

If there’s a positive story to write, it’s that the bleeding might slow once the economy recovers. But when will that be? I’m sorry,  but the beatings really will continue until morale improves.

(Photo: Reuters)

As we reported earlier on Thursday:

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Two of the most respected U.S. newspaper publishers, The Washington Post Co and The New York Times Co, are embarking on new cost cuts in the face of dramatic declines in advertising revenue.

You can read most of The Washington Post memo on MediaFile, as well as the juicy parts of what Washington Post Chairman Don Graham wrote to shareholders on Wednesday about the state of the company. Here, meanwhile, are the edited memos sent by New York Times executives to employees:

From Times Publisher and Times Co Chairman Arthur Sulzberger Jr, as well as Times Co Chief Executive Janet Robinson:

The salaries of all employees at The New York Times Media Group (with the exception of the IHT, which is working on other cost reduction measures), The Boston Globe, Boston.com and Corporate in New York will be rolled back by 5%, starting this April, and these employees will receive 10 additional days off to use before the end of the year.

At the About Group, Baseline, Globe Direct, International Media Concepts, Regional Media Group, Shared Services Center and Worcester Telegram & Gazette, the approach is similar, with salaries being rolled back by 2.5% with five additional days off. We made the distinction between the two groups by taking into account location and other factors. Next year, we plan to return salaries to their current levels. Of course, such a decision depends on the state of our business. …

This was a very difficult decision to make. The environment we are in is the toughest we have seen in our years in business. Across our Company, you and your colleagues have worked hard to introduce innovative products and services, reduce expenses and improve productivity. We are deeply grateful for your efforts and proud of your achievements. As we take these painful steps together, we remain confident that our great Company will keep moving forward to better times.

And from New York Times Executive Editor Bill Keller and other top news executives:

Clearly, our course is not getting any easier. The recession, especially the deteriorating advertising climate, is exacting a bitter toll, despite all that we have already done to reduce spending.

This morning, we notified about 100 employees on the business side of The Times that their jobs were being eliminated. We thank these dedicated colleagues for all they have contributed to The Times over the years.

The broader announcement today outlines a temporary salary reduction for the remainder of the year for all non-union employees, including the top leadership of the company. It is our hope that these cost-cutting measures will allow us to avoid further layoffs.

The details of the salary reduction will be communicated to you shortly by your senior managers. Although employee pay will be cut by 5% for the remaining three-quarters of the year, you will be entitled to 10 additional personal days off over the nine months. Next year, we plan to return salaries to their current levels. Of course, such a decision depends on the state of our business.

In addition, we will be asking that our Guild-represented colleagues make a similar sacrifice. The Company plans to discuss this with the Guild leadership this afternoon, in a spirit of shared sacrifice and as a way to otherwise avoid layoffs in the newsroom.

The Washington Post and The Sun in nearby Baltimore will share some of their journalism, at least the stuff that they don’t try to kill each other to get first as they compete across the hedgerows and parkways of suburban Maryland. Here are some details from the release, sent out on Tuesday:

The Post and The Sun have agreed to share the newspapers’ day-to-day coverage of certain Maryland news and sports. In addition, The Post and The Sun may draw on each other’s national, international and feature stories that are distributed by the LAT-WP News Service, to which both contribute. The exchanges will allow each paper to take advantage of the other’s strengths and expertise in specific subjects around the region and the world.

As part of this accord, exclusive stories will not usually be shared, nor will coverage of such competitive subjects as Maryland state government and University of Maryland athletics.

I couldn’t find a piece in The Sun, which is owned by Tribune Co (which recently filed for bankruptcy), but figure it will be reasonably similar to the Post story, which includes this paragraph:

The deal comes as both newspapers, like the rest of the industry, struggle to retain readers and cut costs as the economics of the business shift.

Robert McCartney, the Post’s Metro editor, said that the move can help the paper save money, but declined to get into how that will happen. He did say that sharing some stories could help each paper assign reporters to areas in their home turf where they need more coverage, something that in theory could cut costs. He declined to offer other specifics on savings.

One way would be cutting the size of the local news and sports teams as a result of abandoning coverage areas — not that that would make anyone happy, though it is something that more people in our business have come to expect as a reality. Tribune has been doing this at its papers, while the Post earlier this year offered buyouts.

McCartney said the paper is always looking at staffing levels, but again, didn’t offer specifics.

Sun Editor Tim Franklin, who is retiring from the paper, wrote this in an e-mail: “We are not planning staff reductions as a result of this partnership. For The Sun, there will be cost savings in travel expenses, freelance and potentially other news syndicate fees.”

(Imagine the Washington Redskins and Baltimore Ravens cooperating in football and you get an idea of how momentous this Washington Post/Baltimore Sun partnership is. Photo: Reuters)

Good newspaper reporters have a knack for timing. They spot trends and tell readers about them before anyone else does. Their publishers have a knack for timing too — the bad kind.

With stock prices spiraling toward zero, debt looming and their future in doubt, newspapers are looking for ways to keep the money coming in. Some of those ways sound good, but only on paper. Here’s the latest example, as detailed in an Associated Press story:

With revenue plunging as readers and advertisers flee to the Web, many newspaper companies have turned to selling off their buildings to raise money or save on costs. But now that option may be drying up too, as frozen credit markets make commercial real estate deals scarce.

At least half a dozen newspaper companies have said this year they plan to sell their buildings, some with the intention of leasing back space for their news operations. Others are moving to smaller offices to save money as staffs dwindle and the era of commanding downtown newspaper buildings appears near an end.

The newspapers could hardly have picked a worse time to put their buildings on the block, with the value of commercial real estate deals plummeting from just a year ago.

One of my colleagues, a real estate reporter, told me I should check this angle out a long time ago, and I always meant to. Two years ago, when I am ashamed to admit we first discussed the idea, we thought it would be a hot story about how papers could make a lot of money as they struggled with falling advertising revenue and circulation. Like the publishers, I ended up not pursuing the idea. That’s too bad for me, but it’s really bad for the publishers.

The story lists a bunch of buildings for sale, while noting that all sorts of problems could complicate the matter, including historical preservation laws on certain properties. It also names companies that are trying to cook up a little cash with their holdings, from Tribune Co and McClatchy Co to The New York Times Co.

Finally, the story points out that selling the property at a lower price than they bought it for might be tough but necessary:

Newspapers have been through their worst year in 2008, and Mike Simonton, a media analyst with Fitch Ratings, projects an average revenue decline of 15 percent to 20 percent next year.

“The sale price could be lower than the price they paid for the building,” he said. “But if it’s necessary to remain in compliance with debt agreements, it’s certainly more favorable than bankruptcy.”

Keep an eye on

• News Corp is underwriting a fresh money lifeline for German pay-TV broadcaster Premiere AG, but under one condition: It wants to be able to increase its 25 percent take to more than 30 percent ONLY if it doesn’t have to bid to buy the company outright. German law requires this under normal conditions. (Reuters)
• Staff change at washingtonpost.com: Top editor Jim Brady (Disclosure: My former boss) is leaving after four years. It looks to be part of the eventual blending of the Web and print newsrooms, which leaves some of its staffers fretting. (The Washington Post)
• Hey media moguls: Don’t fight over it. Now all of you can be the biggest loser. (New York Observer)

Live Nation said on Tuesday it has signed a global ‘360-degree’ deal with Canadian rock band Nickelback covering the band’s touring, recording and merchandising.

The deal was said to be in the $50 million to $70 million range over the course of the three-album/three-tour deal, according to a source.

The deal could cause some blushes at Warner Music Group. Back in December 2006 Warner paid around $73.5 million for a 73.5 percent stake in Nickelback’s label Road Runner Records — no doubt with hopes to sell many more Nickelback albums for years to come.

But Nickelback, which has sold more 26 million albums to date, still has two more albums to deliver for Road Runner and a greatest hits package,  so there’s every chance that the band’s best album years will be behind it. So this could instead end up being an expensive deal for Live Nation.

Live Nation never confirms how much it agrees to pay for its comprehensive partnerships with major artists. A deal with pop veteran Madonna, another soon-to-be former Warner artist, was reported to be around $120 million spread over ten years. It also has agreements with Jay-Z and more recently Shakira.

Live Nation management’s bet is that its comprehensive 360-degree deals will allow it to make profits in other areas beyond the recording and thereby spread its risk a little wider than a traditional recording and publishing company. The entire music industry is watching closely to see if this gamble works.

 Keep an eye on:

• NFL football team Pittsburgh Steelers is secretly being shopped to potential buyers  (WSJ)
• Washington Post appoints former Wall Street Journal editor Marcus Brauchli as its new editor (New York Times)
• Conde Nast Publications is to shut down Golf for Women (WSJ)

(Photo: Reuters)

I spoke on Wednesday to David Broder, veteran political columnist at The Washington Post and a fixture at the paper for more than 40 years, about deciding to take the buyout that the paper is offering.

As it turned out, “taking the buyout” for Broder, 78, doesn’t mean “leaving” so much as “still writing my column twice a week and coming to work every day.” In other words, he will be a contract employee.

Q: Why leave a place that you joined before a goodly number of us were born:

A: It will allow me to focus entirely on the column while freeing up the Post to use its budget on other newsroom salaries and expenses.

(Tony Kornheiser, the well known Post sports columnist, told me much the same thing: They could probably find someone who would help the paper a lot more than me.)

Q: What do you think about the exit of Posties to The New York Times in the past few years? (Including Sewell Chan, Manny Fernandez and husband-and-wife team Serge Kovaleski and Jo Becker, not to mention Peter Baker who said he left after the paper relieved his wife Susan Glasser of her top editing slot. Oh… and Michael Powell, Ray Rivera, John Schwartz, Mark Leibovich and so on.)

A: I actually worked for 15 minutes at The New York Times, and I was part of the return traffic from the Times to the Post. The notion of moving from The Washington Post to The New York Times is, as far as I’m concerned, not a smart move.

Q: You left the Times in 1966. Why?

A: I fled because of bureaucracy I couldn’t cope with. … I resigned maybe 15 minutes before I would have been fired.

(Photo courtesy of The Washington Post Writers Group)