I received an e-mail today from a reader who had a story to share about being stifled by corporate and management. The good news for journalism is that this person isn’t down on journalism itself, just some journalism companies. Unfortunately, this is not a unique story in today’s journalism world:

I’m beginning to liken my job to that of working at McDonald’s. It’s your basic fast-food fare that feeds the same stuff everyday, and we’re stifled by corporate and management to do things their way without fail. It’s the same culture with a few people who want to do better.

During a recent natural disaster the site did very with direct traffic, garnering more than 1 million page views. The site normally does about 200,000 a day. 1 million sounds pretty good, but it could have been more (updates on inclement weather are big traffic drivers):

Anyway, my boss (pretty much there for the paycheck and hours) decides not to stream our TV coverage because “he wanted to have our helicopter coverage without our station’s bug). People come to our site during work and they sure don’t have TVs in their offices, so why wouldn’t they expect to have our breaking news coverage streaming, too. We’ve done it for every other event where I’ve been working. That takes me back to my analogy. I feel like my bosses were satisfied because they got an extra Big Mac in their combo when I feel we could have had a steak.

Note: I have edited this post at the request of the original author to protect their identity better.

More and more talented journalists (often young) are leaving journalism for other industries.

Not because they fear being laid off or fired, but because the culture at newspapers (especially newspaper corporations) doesn’t allow for the kind of innovation necessary to save newspapers. Case in point: Braden Nicholson left the Indianapolis Star because corporate knew how to ruin every good idea:

You know what is a bummer about this? When INTake was first launched, the young men and women working there were so stoked that some of them actually slept on the office floor rather than take a break at home. It used to be fashionable for older journalists to bitch about young reporters not having “fire in the belly.” Well, these kids had fire in the belly.

Braden said it best. Corporate doused the fire.

Newspapers need that enthusiasm and fire to save themselves. This is do-or-die time for newspapers. This is not the time for red tape and bureaucracy.

Perhaps even more illuminating than Nicholson leaving journalism for another industry, is the comments left on the Gannett Blog. The first comment — anonymous, of course — has all the hallmarks of a curmudgeon that is shouting down new ideas (the kind of newsroom cancers that are killing newspapers):

Many of us at Indy are pleased to see Braden leave the Star. He was an arrogant kid who believed that he was smarter than the rest of us here.

Yes, at 29, Nicholson is certainly a kid. Another classy comment that wreaks of a curmudgeon:

IndyStar is full of a bunch of punks who think they are all innovators. I left there recently and always believed these little shit-stains were all immature.

On the other hand, we have comments about why people left Gannett because of curmudgeons:

I left the company a number of months ago and for good reason. If I were 20 years older, I would have been just fine, but because I wasn’t, the EE thought it necessary to let me know I wouldn’t be “respected.” (The same guy who no one respects in that newsroom).

Looks like this poison spreads in all Gannett newsrooms. I always thought Greenville was just unique. This attitude toward young people (aka future editors) will be the death knell of Gannett. Eventually the last 50-year-old will leave and there will be no one left to take their place.

I have heard of Gannett having cancerous newsrooms before. My girlfriend left a mid-size daily Gannett newspaper because of the newsroom culture (ageism and sexism abound). And I’ve heard it from other people about other Gannett newspapers.

This isn’t a unique Gannett problem, but corporate has to get its act together. Each newsroom should be a laboratory for innovation. That means corporate has to stop inhibiting innovation.