The New WoMag: Now With Less Faces!

Worcester blogs tend to alternate between two topics: complaining about anything and everything in the Telegram, and asking what the heck is going on at WoMag.  This one, obviously, will be about the latter.

It’s turning out that the one consistent way to keep track of the (all-too-frequent) staffing changes at WoMag is — as Victor found out — to take a periodic review of the Faces page.

The latest casualty in Gareth Charter‘s quest to not “have a reputation for laying-off employees and [not] want[ing] to earn one” is Sam Bonacci.

I don’t know Bonacci, and I don’t know Charter, but we already know that the latter lives in a land of doublespeak, where laying off employees is not “a reduction in the work force”, but “bringing resources to bear from a much larger company.”

Here are some suggestions for Charter:

When asked to explain why WoMag has had three editors in the two years since it was acquired by the Landmark, Charter could just explain that he’s keeping things fresh.  Really, really fresh.

When asked about his inability to keep young writers (O’Keefe, Cross, Bonacci), Charter can simply reply that he’s working on a plan to keep young writers for longer periods of time.  Because if you help interns get college credit, they’ll need to work at least one semester!

When asked whether he’s “suburbanizing Worcester Magazine“, he can say, Of course not!  We’re just trying out an experiment to see how many articles two people can churn out week after week before they pass out from exhaustion!

(Yes, we can have a more serious discussion about community newspapers, alternative newspapers, and what WoMag should be doing soon.)