Monday, November 13, 2006

 
The Payback

What follows is an Asia Sentinel piece I just wrote about what Brit-oriented journalists might call a "kerfuffle" at the paper I used to nominally compete against while at The Standard, The South China Morning Post. Though not anymore. The SCMP editor in question, Mark Clifford, recently fired the two respected SCMP staffers for their very small parts in producing a tribute mock front page for an equally respected editor whom he had also canned. The joke page -- which had no danger of reaching the public in any form and which used the "c" word with astericks, offended his sensibilities. "It's not something you would show to your mother" was his moralistic summation.

No, it's not. But, as an SCMP staffer noted, that's not the point. I should add that Clifford also previously hired -- and fired -- the two editors whom I am now freelancing for, but I think it's fair treatment overall. Clifford's obviously clueless, but, no, you can't put that in a story...


No Joking Please, We’re Journalists
Justin Mitchell
13 November 2006

South China Morning Post Editor Mark Clifford fired staff members for producing an in-house spoof. “It’s not something that you would show to your mother,” he complained. Now newspaper staffers have taken their case against Clifford to the owners.

In an unprecedented action, an estimated 80-plus newsroom staffers – male, female, Chinese and western alike – have signed what amounts to a no-confidence vote in Mark Clifford, the editor-in-chief of Hong Kong’s largest English language newspaper, after he fired two senior editors for their small roles in a mock front page farewell gift for another editor whom Clifford had fired.

The incident, which began as a traditional office ritual for a departing employee, has uncovered a sharp divide in the newsroom of one of Asia’s oldest newspapers, essentially pitting a new chief editor against many of the paper’s long-time employees.

“Leaving pages” as British-oriented journalists call them, are a tradition in western journalism across the globe, typically a gentle satiric poke full of inside jokes delivered at the exiting employee’s expense during a farewell office party.

In the case of former Sunday Morning Post editor Niall Fraser, a Scotsman given to the kind of colorful language common in many newsrooms, it was the headline “You’re a c**t, but you’re a good c**t” (written with the asterisks intact on the mock page) that drew Clifford’s wrath when he happened upon a copy of the fake page in the SCMP newsroom following Fraser’s departure.

“Clifford took great exception to the use of the language,’’ said one of five SCMP employees who agreed to talk anonymously about the incident. “He went on a witch hunt, and looked at the page’s history [on the SCMP computer system] and called in every single person who had touched the page, about 10, and with the head of Human Resources sitting beside him, told them that it was totally offensive to the women in the office and would not be tolerated.

“He actually said: ‘It’s not something that you would show to your mother.’ Of course it’s not. He totally missed the point. And at that point everyone was mostly bemused, thinking ‘what a clown.’”

After sacking the two employees on Friday for their role in the mock page, Clifford sent an email to the editorial staff which provoked “fury”, according to a source and led directly to the petition, which will be sent to the Post’s owners.

“If we at the South China Morning Post are to keep society's trust, to keep our reader's belief in our quality and integrity, we must ensure that what we do meets those expectations. We must strive for excellence in everything we do in our professional lives, both inside and outside of the news room every phone call, every photo, every press conference and, yes, everything we do internally,” Clifford wrote in the email.

Clifford referred questions and comments on the matter to Irene Ho, assistant marketing director for the SCMP. “The Post's position is that [Paul Ruffini and Trevor Willison] violated the work ethic,” Ho said. She called Clifford's sackings and his office-wide e-mail “a careful decision for the benefit of the staff and to reinforce the purpose of the work ethic.”

As of Monday morning Ho had not seen the petition and she said she did not know if Clifford had seen it. “I am not sure if Mark will respond further,” she said.

Clifford, an American, has been at the helm of the Post for seven months after his departure from the Standard, Hong Kong’s second remaining English language daily, where he served as editor and publisher for two years. Prior to that he was Business Week’s Asia editor and also worked for the Far Eastern Economic Review. The Standard was his first job in a newspaper.

The irony in what has become a bitter row over a newsroom joke was that Clifford was powerless to lecture anyone who had written the page, which also contained jibes such as a mock ad for the “Amazing Fraser-Fone: Buy It and Lose It!” and a reference to a non-existent story “Why Alcohol and Scotsmen Don’t Mix,” as the page was written by old friends and co-workers of Fraser who were no longer at the SCMP.

Clifford finally acted on his outrage after a month had passed and most employees had likely forgotten about the incident. Around noon last Friday three employees were summarily dismissed for their part in the page: designer/artist Carl Bell-Jones, and two of Fraser’s top Sunday copy editors, long-time Hong Kong journalists Trevor Willison and Paul Ruffini.

According to two SCMP employees, Bell-Jones’ job was saved after veteran sports editor Noel Prentice stormed into Clifford’s office essentially saying, if you sack him, you sack me. Clifford reportedly backed down and a warning letter was issued to Bell-Jones.

“At the time, no one spoke up for Trevor and Paul,’’ another SCMP staffer said. “We were all in shock. What followed was disbelief. People were saying, ‘Is he mad? Doesn’t he get a joke?’ Then he sent out an e-mail that provoked absolute fury in newsroom’’

“The South China Morning Post name is one of our most valuable assets. Thousands of people have worked to build one of Asia's most prominent and powerful newspapers over the past century. The name symbolizes quality, trust and integrity. We are a good newspaper on our way to becoming a great one,” Clifford wrote.

“Unfortunately, not everyone understands what it takes for us to ratchet up to the next level. Some of this I understand. Change is hard. Newsrooms are conducive to grumbling. And excellence takes effort.

“But some behavior I cannot accept and will not tolerate. There is no room here for people who flout journalistic ethics of fairness and accuracy, no room for people who treat the company's name and property as if it were their own. And there are basic standards of decency that need to be respected in any modern company, standards that are enshrined in our code of ethics.”

One long-time staffer with more than 10 years of experience with the SCMP called Clifford’s e-mail “insulting” and “disgusting.”

The feelings were obviously shared by many newsroom employees and what resulted was blowback in the form of a restrained petition to SCMP chairman Kuok Khoon Ean, with a cc to Clifford, asking for Willison and Ruffini to be reinstated.

It was quickly written and circulated over the weekend with delivery scheduled for Monday. As of Sunday, between 65 and 80 staffers reportedly signed the letter as it took on “a life of its own,’’ the staffer said. “It’s unprecedented. I’ve seen the Post through different eras, many sackings but I’ve not seen anything like this.”

Dated November 10, 2006, it reads: “We, the undersigned, object strongly to the decision to sack Trevor Willison and Paul Ruffini, on the grounds of their involvement in Niall Fraser's leaving page.’’

“We personally and collectively strive for the excellence and professional integrity of the SCMP's products and brands. However, we believe that the sacking of high quality journalists is against the interest of the South China Morning Post and that any involvement in the leaving page does not have anything to do with their work for the paper and is not a sackable offence.

“We believe that more harm has been done to the core values of the SCMP by their dismissal without reference to our established code of verbal or written misconduct warnings.

“We would like the chairman to know that the action today has severely damaged morale of the staff. We call for their immediate reinstatement.”

“For Clifford to take the moral high ground and to treat us like children is really insulting,” said a staffer. “It’s the nature of leaving pages. They are simply a good-humored prank which goes on in any [journalism] office environment and it’s ridiculous to take a moral stand on something like a leaving page.”

Clifford, who resigned from The Standard in February 2006, has been an object of controversy since his arrival. Long-time SCMP staffers said that some “Clifford loyalists” brought into the paper were at odds with the SCMP’s existing newsroom environment and created what another staffer called “a divided culture” at the paper.

“The new people don’t mix with the old people and now there is a very divided culture within the Post between his people and the rest,” another long-time employee said. “It’s become a very unpleasant place to work where real professionalism and journalism isn’t understood and promoted. These people who were sacked are characters. Journalism needs characters and he doesn’t understand the character element of journalism. His words about the need for change and standards are really very empty. I don’t he think he understands what they really mean.”

Asia Sentinel Editor John Berthelsen and Senior Editor A. Lin Neumann, were Managing Editor and Executive Editor of the Standard, respectively, during Clifford’s tenure.
Comments:
"We must strive for excellence in everything we do in our professional lives, both inside and outside of the news room every phone call, every photo, every press conference and, yes, everything we do internally"

What an ass. It's guys like this a-hole that convinced me to stop working for "the man" and start working for myself. Being my own boss, though still far from lucrative at this early stage, is something I should have been doing a long time ago.
 
I do not know how much you have tracked US politics of late, but this a--hole sounds like he is cut from the same cloth as Carl Rowe; who as late as last Monday was claiming that the US electrorate supported GW Bush.

Now of course, we know differently. Pity it takes a public slapping to make these 21st Century Napolean's crawl back into their howels. Let us hope that Mr. Clifford either learns his lesson or takes up a job he aspires to "picking nits" or cleaning streets.

Take care of yourself and thank you for the postings.
 
Thanks Stuart and Don.

Stay tuned. There may be further developments today.
 
This reading makes me remember what a great job I actually have. Paid lunch break, flexible hours and a work week of 37 hours (incl. the lunch breaks). AND I have a great boss and extreme freedom to plan my own day most of the time. I should remember to be more grateful even though I only make average wage.

I feel for you Justin. I hope things lighten up soon. Please keep us informed about your doings. In Denmark we have a saying that may fit your work situation:

"You don't throw gold on the street". I just wish that c… of a boss you had would recognize that too.

In this case I of course refer to a phrase that we also use much, which is the "grey gold" meaning that oldies have invaluable experience (not that you aren’t in the prime of your life, of course *cough*) ;-)
 
during the week Clifford called in small groups of staff in a lame attempt to justify his actions. The upshot was that he had taken in the opnion of a few people and following on that opnion decided this was a firing offence. Specially, as he kept on saying, because it had been done on a page carrying the SCMP masthead, inferring that this had the potential to backfire and bring the company into disrepute.
Well, the irony of it is that Clifford himself is the one who brought SCMP's masthead with the words C***t written in large type... to the world. Once the news of the sacking spread, one of the "pages" got out and has be reproduced in Australia and England. Sure then it should be Clifford who should bear resposibility for flaming what was ostensibly a marshmallow toast into a wildfire. How can the oweners allow him to take actions that drag the paper's name through the mud, not only about the page and the bad language but also sending the message that the man at the helm has no clue as to how to actually proceed when disciplining staff.
In one single stroke of his firing pen he shattered staff moral. Long time employees fear coming to work because they don't know if they might do something to annoy "the boss". I would predict that once the bonuses are paid, staff will be leaving like gazelle from a waterhole when they spy a lion.
Clifford has cost the company dearly with the loss of expertise and moral. It's time he realises he has failed dismally, and needs to walk away.
 
Staff are not waiting for the bonus to leave. Dozens have left and more are leaving in the next few weeks. And with each departure comes the words "congratulations, you have managed to escape". What next for the Post?
 
Management held a meeting with senior staff members without Clifford in the room. There they heard in no uncertain terms that certain conditions had to be met to improve relations with staff. The two journos had to be resinstated, along with a photographer who was summarily fired by Clifford for an error. Also some changes on the business desk had to be undone.
There has been talk of forming a union and union insiders say the support is surprising.
But it seems that for now management have continued to stick with Clifford - hopefully just to give them a chance to find a replacement.
On Friday Clifford played the "contrite" card - not very well, in a meeting with the senior staffers in which he appologised not for what he had done, but for creating the "perception" of what he had done. It seems that he can fire people for one mistake, yet he can make several serious blunders and still be in the saddle. By his own "high standards" he should fall on the sword.
He has ruled for going on eight months now, and not one single decision that has come out of his office has met with any approval from staff who are united now as never before with a common enemy.
It seems management did give way on reinstating the photographer and fixing several other Clifford balls ups, but they are not giving an inch on reinstating Watson and Ruffini, and until they do, the general feeling among the staff is one of overall demoralisation and resistance.
You're right, staff are fleeing for better positions as fast and they can get them, some are even leaving without any prospects, two months before what is expected to be a fat bonus, given that there have been no increases in the company in more than 5 years.
On a lighter note, Clifford had been awarded various nicknames according to how different staff viewed him, McEditor and MC Hammer and The Grinch being the recent popular ones. Now he's just known as Master C**t
 
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?