NEWSROOM 2009 – FAQsThe plan is only a couple of pages long. Where is all the detail?Two things became clear as we worked on the plan: one was that the major changeswe needed to make were around the workflow in the news process, rather than a bigphysical restructuring. We need to build on the changes we made in 2006, not tearthem up and start again. The priority now is to tilt the workflow more towardsenriching our online offering and to streamlining the newspaper productionprocess. The second thing that became clear was that this is not something thatcan simply be prescribed in a detailed document, dropped down on peoples’ desksand they are then expected to get on with it. These changes are going to requireworking steadily and systematically with the different teams and sections oversome time to make sure we really embed the reforms. We have a pretty good idea ofhow we should do that, but there are a lot of complexities involved and we need towork with people to get there. There is a significant amount of training requiredwhich also needs to be rolled out. That’s why the project group will continue towork over the coming months to roll out the plan.Why is all this necessary? We made big changes less than three years ago and theFT has been doing well. Why more upheaval now?The changes we made in 2006 were very important in establishing an integratednewsroom at the FT. But the world has not stood still and there are areas where weclearly need to take the next step, particularly to ensure that we keep step withdevelopments in the digital world. It is especially important as we continue thedevelopment of FT.com that the news operation is fully geared to deliver therichest possible offering to our online users. While the FT is doing well weshould be under no illusions about the broader state of our industry and theenormous challenges we face. Some big names in the US newspaper world have goneunder or are seriously threatened by the digital revolution and the same ishappening in the UK, not least in the provincial press. Add in the brutal cyclicalslump this year, with advertising revenues tumbling across the board, and it isclear we cannot afford to stand still. We are confident that the FT can have aprosperous future as a “digital anchor” – a premium source of quality originalnews and analysis for global business online - and in print. But to achieve thatwe have to work very hard to ensure we are at the leading edge of developments inthe creation and delivery of content across all channels and we have to make surewe are equipping the editorial operation to do that. That is why this plan –including the commitment to training - is so important.Are you saying there will be no compulsory or other redundancies? How many jobswill go? Does this mean there is, after all, a hiring freeze?There are no new redundancies in this plan. Headcount savings will be made byattrition – meaning in most cases we will not be replacing vacancies that arise.Some of these have already occurred as a result of people moving to new jobs, someare pending as a result of the round of voluntary redundancies following the

reorganisation announced in January; some will occur as we roll out the plan. Weanticipate the total will be around 10-12 by mid year, a significant number ofwhich are already in progress. None of them will be through compulsory redundancy.We will monitor the roll-out of the plan and judge as we go if we can continue tomake savings by non-replacement. This does not mean there will be a hiring freeze:as we have said before, it is vital for the FT for us to always keep open thepossibility of bringing in new talent and we will continue to do that when andwhere appropriate.The production teams are already stretched after the cuts in 2006. With a furtherheadcount reduction, how are they expected to cope?There are a number of changes taking place that will affect the workload on theproduction teams. Some of these are significant, some are more incremental – buttogether they support the attrition in numbers which will occur. We are cuttingout the UK 3rd edition, we will be reducing the number of 2nd edition pages and wewill be running a common international 2nd front, which will cut the number ofbouncers on ICN. We will be requiring the features teams – boosted by anadditional staffer – to produce their newspaper pages ready for revise and to takeon more online publishing. In addition, it is a core part of the plan that webuild up to significant levels the amount of copy that is coming through to thecompletion stage ready for revise. We are moving some resource to the news editingteams to help achieve that. As that develops it will take some pressure off theproduction teams and allow them to concentrate harder for the first editions onthe vital quality control role of revise and proofreading, plus making a fullercontribution to managing our online output.Is the FT getting rid of subbing?Editing our content is a core competence for the FT, especially given ourspecialist subject matter. But we do need to move away from treating copy editingas a single, demarcated stage in the traditional newspaper publishing process. Ouraim is to change the process in a way that embeds content preparation for web andprint as a priority from the earliest part of the creation process. This approachmeans important elements of content building and refinement are seeded upstream,starting with reporters and on to news editors, to ensure the maximum enrichmentof that content at the earliest possible stage. Currently much of this –everything from tagging and links to spell checking and headline writing – doesnot occur until the downstream end of the workflow, undermining the depth of ouronline offering, exacerbating bottlenecks in the newspaper editing process andentrenching inefficiency. If we achieve this transformation of the workflowprocess, it will greatly enhance the richness of our digital output, smooth thenewspaper production process and, importantly, make the overall operation moreefficient. This is not an ideological diktat about banishing subs or subbing. Nodoubt, lots of copy will still need “subbing”, especially on busy, fast movingnews pages. But the reality is that our approach to content preparation in thedigital age has already changed in many parts of the operation. We acknowledgedthis development and the wider deployment of skills when we created the role ofproduction journalist in 2006. What we are doing now is building on this.

It sounds like all this means extra work for reporters – and especially newsdesks. How are we expected to cope when we are already so hard-pressed?The new workflow represents a change that will require working closely withreporters and news/production desks to establish the new practice. Staff willinevitably be wary that they are being asked to take on extra work. But while thechanges are significant, and there are a number of practical obstacles we need tosort out on the technology side, most of the extra tasks are not as onerous as mayfirst appear. And if reporters complete the tasks we ask of them, it will help thenews desks to adapt as well. It will require sustained training and support whichwe are planning and which will provide the necessary back-up both for reportersand news editors. There are a number of key issues which need to be worked out inpractice with the different teams as we build up the new web ready workflow andhow we synchronise that with more upstream work on copy for the newspaper. To helpthem, the news desks will have the extra resource of the “news integrators” intheir clusters – who will be multi-skilled and able to perform a range ofnewspaper and web editing tasks. There will also be the support of the layoutstaffers working with the respective teams from the morning huddle onwards – andwho will be able to assist with a range of editing tasks as well as layout. As weroll out the new workflow, desks will also be closely supported by the projectgroup to assist the process, assess progress and adapt as necessary to issues asthey arise. We intend to have a regular review process with each team to make surethere is a proper feedback system.All this assumes a lot about our technology – but we haven’t seen yet the newfeatures that are coming with Falcon and we know we still have some problems withremote filing in Methode. What are we doing about that?There are issues which complicate the process of rolling out the plan. It is thecase that a significant number of correspondents filing remotely are currently notfiling in Methode – and therefore are unable to carry out key “web ready”functions – due to local technical limitations or lack of sufficient training; thetimetable of the Falcon rollout is also going to stretch over an extended period.We are working on making sure we get as many remote reporters and correspondentsas possible fully Methode enabled – and that process will continue. As Falconrolls out, we will also move as quickly as we can to make sure we achieve thebenefits they offer. For example, the introduction of the new page assembler tooland the changes in site design should greatly simplify the process of manualonline page building, with considerable benefits for news desks and productiondesks.Other elements which we are confident will ease the online publishing processinclude a new metadata engine and changes to the automatic feed due to beintroduced later in the year.What is the training plan?We recognise that making the changes envisaged in the plan – and equipping the FTnewsroom fully for the digital future – requires a serious commitment to training.It will include a systematic schedule for training individuals and teams,including classroom sessions but, crucially, also including follow-up on the floorto make sure people are able to carry over the skills they have learnt in theclassroom to everyday application on the job. We will be visiting key bureaux and