Staff at the Guardian and its sister Sunday title, the Observer, have dubbed editor-in-chief Katharine Viner “Kath Corleone” over her role in a “mafia”-style deal to quickly sell off the world’s oldest Sunday newspaper paper to a debt-laden start-up.
Workers at one of the world’s pre-eminent liberal newspapers downed tools Wednesday amid a vicious civil war over the proposed sale to Tortoise media. They fear that a sale would spell the end of the 233-year-old paper.
Staffers claim they were not properly consulted on the sale, and one experienced writer told The Daily Beast anonymously that the whole proposed sale is a plan to get rid of the Observer “without getting blood on their hands”.
ADVERTISEMENT
Another source said have “turned against” Katharine Viner, the Guardian’s editor-in-chief.
“There’s blood in the water. There’s no way that Kath can survive this. The entire newsroom and news organization has turned against her. This is her deal,” they said.
Speaking while a picket took place outside Guardian HQ in London, another source added: “There’s just sort of total anger and fury. She did this listening exercise last week with staff, but it was after she voted the deal through at the GMG board. So it’s total hypocrisy. Everybody thinks it’s just such a massive betrayal.”
The Tortoise plan is to modernize the Observer. Guardian Media Group says that when shared costs with the Guardian are taken into account, the paper is loss-making.
The Guardian is owned by Guardian Media Group, which is owned by the Scott Trust (of which Viner is a board member). Critics say there has been no meaningful discussion with staff over the proposed sale.
GMG chief executive Anna Bateson told staff in an email that the group had been “beginning to think about” its long-term future before the bid from Tortoise Media, and said “difficult choices” would have been inevitable.
“It’s very mafia-like, we’re calling her Kath Corleone,” one of the anonymous staffers said of Katharine Viner. “It‘s a way of getting rid of the Observer and having no blood on its hands.”
They also claimed that “intimidation of staff” who dared to speak out has taken place. They said: “It is mob behavior. The thing is there’s been bullying and intimidation of staff, people who’ve spoken out have been sent threatening letters.
“I mean, from an organization which very proudly talks about how they monetize press freedom... they are here trying to silence journalists.”
Ex-Observer editor Paul Webster, who stepped aside just last month after six years at the helm, said he too is critical of the way the deal appears to have been struck in the shadows.
He told the Beast: “I have become increasingly critical of the process, the nature of the negotiations, the fact that it was launched in complete and conducted in complete secrecy.
“No other bids have been considered, and no other possible outcomes have been considered, and no other ways of addressing the problems that the Guardian feels it has with the Observer have been given any opportunity to be considered.”
Webster added that he too feared a merger with Tortoise, whose last set of accounts show an operating loss of £4.5m ($5.7m) on a turnover of £6.2m ($7.8m), could spell the end for the respected title.
“I think if it’s pursued, then it could represent a serious threat to the existence of the Observer, and I think it’s bad for the Guardian,” he said via phone call.
In an open letter, five former editors (including Webster) and one ex-editor in chief of the title urged the Scott Trust to pause the sale.
A Guardian Media Group spokesperson said the company “respects” the right of NUJ (National Union of Journalists) members to strike, and that it had rolled out a plan to minimise the effect on editorial output.
On the prospective sale, which would see 70 people move across, they added: “While we recognise the strength of feeling towards the potential changes proposed, our priority is to ensure the Observer’s journalism continues to have a leading role in the liberal media landscape.”
A Tortoise spokesman referred us to a short Q&A in place of a written statement. The NUJ is yet to reply.
