<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">
<channel>
<title>Techdirt. Stories filed under &quot;layoffs&quot;</title>
<description>Easily digestible tech news...</description>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/</link>
<language>en-us</language>

<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 4 Feb 2013 12:52:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>If You're Laying Off Your Social Media Expert, You Might Want To Get Those Account Passwords FIRST</title>
<dc:creator>Tim Cushing</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130203/17120621868/if-youre-laying-off-your-social-media-expert-you-might-want-to-get-those-account-passwords-first.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130203/17120621868/if-youre-laying-off-your-social-media-expert-you-might-want-to-get-those-account-passwords-first.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ It&#39;s one of those mistakes you only make once. Unfortunately for British entertainment retailer HMV and consulting firm Deloitte, due to the circumstances under which the mistake occurred, once is all they got and once was all it took.
<br /><br />
HMV was in the midst of a 190-person layoff (with assistance from Deloitte) <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2013/02/01/dont-fire-an-employee-and-leave-them-in-charge-of-the-corporate-twitter-account/" target="_blank">when it discovered the company&#39;s official Twitter account was still in the hands of a layoffee</a>.
<blockquote>
<i>Yesterday HMV, the beleaguered British entertainment retailer, laid off 190 employees, in an effort to cut costs and right its balance sheet. The company apparently pulled a large group into human resources and gave them the bad news. While this was going on, one employee, Poppy Rose, who had been an HMV community manager and thus had access to the corporate Twitter account, started live tweeting about the layoffs.</i>
<br /><br />
<i>Over a period of around 20 minutes, she sent out a series of notes expressing her rising sense of alarm to HMV&rsquo;s 61,500 followers (that number has since risen to 73,350).</i>
</blockquote>
<center><img alt="" src="http://i.imgur.com/ZyYkWgV.jpg" style="width: 500px; height: 812px;" /></center>
<br />
Just before the plug was pulled, Poppy Rose gave a shout-out to its HMV&#39;s still-employed marketing director, who had noticed altogether too late that someone was live-Tweeting the layoffs. The question, "How do I shut down Twitter?" appears to have been answered <a href="http://www.theatlanticwire.com/technology/2013/02/china-may-or-may-not-be-behind-twitter-hack/61726/" target="_blank">by Chinese hackers (or maybe <i>non-Chinese</i> hackers -- <i>hedging</i>!)</a>, who made off with info from 250,000 accounts in the midst of some rolling blackouts.
<br /><br />
A better question would have been: "<i>Before</i>&nbsp;we start laying people off, maybe someone should see who is running our social media accounts and whether or not they appear on the Employee Load Balancing Sheet." Employees often take to the modern day airwaves of Twitter, Facebook and presumably even Google+ to vent after layoffs, firings, disciplinary actions and random shitty days. Why anyone thought <i>this</i> mass layoff&nbsp;would be different is beyond me.
<br /><br />
Most likely, the thought never occurred to anyone on the "culling" side of the equation until the Twitter feed began lighting up with disparaging comments about the current goings-on. HMV, in particular, was primed for this sort of embarrassment, seeing as it obviously felt a social media presence was important (hence the Twitter account), but not important enough to hand out to anyone higher than "intern" on the organizational chart. This is something more employers should be aware of, especially considering company Facebook and Twitter accounts are "standard equipment" in this day and age.
<br /><br />
Poppy Rose, whose firing-related tweets added another 12,000 followers to HMV&#39;s Twitter account, clearly knows <i>how</i> to use social media. And although the tweets she fired off were far from complimentary, they clearly could have been much, much worse. Despite holding the company&#39;s online reputation in her newly-jobless hands, she showed restraint while simultaneously demonstrating how effective these tools can be.
<blockquote>
<i>&ldquo;I wanted to show the power of Social Media to those who refused to be educated,&rdquo; she tweeted. &ldquo;Just to set something straight, I did not &lsquo;hijack&rsquo; the hmv twitter account. I actually assumed sole responsibility of Twitter &#038; Facebook over two years ago, as an intern. When asked (this afternoon), I gladly provided the password to head office. I also set another member of staff up as a manager on Facebook, and removed myself from the admin list. I didn&rsquo;t resist any requests to cooperate.&rdquo;</i>
</blockquote>
I&#39;m sure many companies have viewed this story with interest, crossing themselves and saying, "There but for the grace of God go I and several dozen of my former employees, with signed NDAs and less-than-adequate severance packages." As ugly as a mass layoff is, failing to do a bit of due diligence in terms of your social media accounts leaves the door open for something much uglier. Sure, your former employees may take to the internet to vent about their treatment at your hands, but at least it won&#39;t look like it&#39;s coming out of your mouth.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130203/17120621868/if-youre-laying-off-your-social-media-expert-you-might-want-to-get-those-account-passwords-first.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130203/17120621868/if-youre-laying-off-your-social-media-expert-you-might-want-to-get-those-account-passwords-first.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130203/17120621868/if-youre-laying-off-your-social-media-expert-you-might-want-to-get-those-account-passwords-first.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>because-the-situation-hadn't-hit-MAXIMUM-UNCOMFORTIBILITY</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20130203/17120621868</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2009 22:30:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Recession Reporter Laid Off... Denied Chance To Publish Final Piece About Getting Laid Off</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090423/1128354620.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090423/1128354620.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Via <a href="http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=45&#038;aid=162392" target="_new">Romenesko</a> comes the news that the Chicago Tribune's own "recession reporter" wasn't just laid off in the latest round, but was then <a href="http://trueslant.com/loucarlozo/2009/04/23/i-am-the-news-today-o-boy-a-recession-writer-gets-laid-off/" target="_new">stopped from posting a story about the experience</a>.  Well, he actually published it and it was quickly taken down by Trib editors.  Of course, because of the takedown, the text of his blog post is now getting <a href="http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2009/04/update_final_suppressed_recess.html" target="_new">a lot more attention</a>.  Reading it over, it's difficult to see what the Trib was concerned about.  It seems like the type of writing they would <i>want</i> in their publication -- humanizing the situation, while still being respectful of what's happening.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090423/1128354620.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090423/1128354620.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090423/1128354620.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>in-denial</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090423/1128354620</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 13 Mar 2009 06:36:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>MPAA Matches RIAA In Massive Layoffs</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090312/0323464087.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090312/0323464087.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ I missed this one when it initially happened, but it looks like the MPAA is following in the footsteps of the RIAA -- who recently <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090227/1203203925.shtml">laid off</a> a bunch of folks.  Apparently the MPAA quickly followed suit and <a href="http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118000774.html?categoryid=13&#038;cs=1" target="_new">drastically scaled back after the studios cut the MPAA's funding</a> by about 15 to 20%.  Apparently some of the entertainment companies are finally realizing that the strategies employed by the RIAA and MPAA (lobbying for favorable laws and suing the crap out of anyone who dares to innovate) aren't actually helping them build a stronger business.  Of course, it seems likely that they'll keep making the wrong moves, even at a reduced budget -- but maybe, just maybe, they'll finally start to realize that their recent strategy has been a colossal failure.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090312/0323464087.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090312/0323464087.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090312/0323464087.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>couldn't-happen-to-a-nicer-bunch</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090312/0323464087</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 27 Feb 2009 12:44:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>Massive Layoffs Hit The RIAA: Maybe Focus On Building Business Rather Than Suing Customers Next Time?</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090227/1203203925.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090227/1203203925.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Details have been spilling out over the last few days that the RIAA has been making <a href="http://www.hypebot.com/hypebot/2009/02/is-the-.html" target="_new">pretty massive cuts to staff</a>.  We already knew that EMI was <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080310/110443492.shtml">cutting</a> back on its support of the RIAA/IFPI, and it seems that with the rest of the RIAA's major label supporters also having economic troubles, the writing is on the wall that the RIAA is about to go through a major transformation.  I'm sure some will somehow "blame piracy" for this turn of events, but it's hard to see how that's even remotely the issue.  The real issue is that the RIAA has basically managed to run one of the dumbest, most self-defeating strategies over the last decade.  Rather than helping major record labels adjust to the changing market, it continually, repeatedly and publicly destroyed its own reputation and the reputation of the labels -- each time shrinking their potential market by blaming the very people they should have been working to turn into customers.  They may claim that they "had" to take this strategy because it's what the labels wanted (and, indeed, that was Hilary Rosen's <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20030123/0846209.shtml">excuse</a>), but that's ridiculous.  It was evident to pretty much anyone who took the time to understand the issues back in the mid- to late-90s, that the internet represented an opportunity to those who embraced it.  The RIAA's decision to fight progress and its own customers at every turn has been nothing short of a complete disaster.  That the group is now being gutted is the inevitable result of a poor strategy that could have easily been avoided.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090227/1203203925.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090227/1203203925.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090227/1203203925.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>just-a-thought</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090227/1203203925</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2008 08:26:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Man Sues Newspaper For Laying Off Reporters</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080710/1621301644.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080710/1621301644.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ It's no secret that plenty of newspapers have been cutting staff and even the size of their papers in recent months.  It's really a reaction to the fact that newspapers spent way too many years in denial that they were no longer the only news sources in town.  So now they finally have to adjust, and one first step is shedding some overhead.  However, one newspaper subscriber to the News &#038; Observer in North Carolina <a href="http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/1137259.html" target="_new">is suing the paper over its recent cuts</a>.  It sounds like it's mostly just a publicity stunt, but Keith Hempstead, a lawyer (and former reporter), says he renewed his subscription in May, just before the paper announced cuts.  Thus, he claims, he's getting less than what he was promised when he subscribed -- and that's somehow fraud.  It's doubtful this lawsuit will go anywhere and the "point" Hempstead is making actually seems backwards.  Marketplaces change and companies in those marketplaces need to change to keep up with the market.  Suing them for changing is hardly going to encourage newspapers to embrace necessary change.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080710/1621301644.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080710/1621301644.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080710/1621301644.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>everything-must-stay-the-same,-always</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080710/1621301644</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 7 Jul 2008 01:48:42 PDT</pubDate>
<title>LA Times Just Realized That Print And Online Newsrooms Should Be The Same?</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080703/1720271594.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080703/1720271594.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Nearly three years ago, we were surprised to hear the NY Times proudly announce that it was going to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20050802/1547205.shtml">merge</a> its online and offline newsrooms.  What we couldn't believe was that in 2005 a newspaper actually still had thought it made sense to treat the two separately.  However, apparently the Times was way ahead of some other newspapers.  Buried in the ho-hum news about massive LA Times layoffs is the news that, as part of this reorganization, <a href="http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=31&#038;aid=146261" target="_new">it's finally going to merge its web and print operations as well</a>.  When you're sitting around wondering where newspapers went wrong, the fact that they wanted to keep web and print operations separate is probably a good place to start.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080703/1720271594.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080703/1720271594.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080703/1720271594.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>a-bit-slow-on-the-uptake,-huh?</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080703/1720271594</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2008 20:34:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Zango Tries To Reinvent Itself (Again); Lays Off A Bunch Of Employees</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080618/0038431442.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080618/0038431442.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ If you've heard of the company Zango, it's probably for bad reasons.  Zango is a company that was created when some separate adware firms <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060607/181228.shtml">merged</a> and took a new name.  The company kept insisting that it had reformed and wasn't using surreptitious installs any more -- but every time it said that, it didn't take long to find <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060727/0247242.shtml">evidence</a> proving that wrong.  This happened <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060731/1618220.shtml">time</a> after <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20061105/215020.shtml">time</a> after <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20061108/131342.shtml">time</a> after <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20061120/105216.shtml">time</a> after <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20061203/231317.shtml">time</a>.  Many of these happened <i>after</i> the FTC got the company to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20061103/112343.shtml">agree</a> to stop these practices.
<br /><br />
Well, now the company is trying to reinvent itself yet again -- claiming that it's going to focus on the "casual gaming" market -- and due to this, it's <a href="http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/367388_zango18.html?source=rss" target="_new">laying off 68 people</a>.  One would hope that these layoffs are for the folks responsible for building the malware part of their business.  Of course, it was just a few weeks ago that security researcher Ben Edelman was demonstrating <a href="http://www.benedelman.org/news/052808-1.html">more problems</a> with Zango's new business model.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080618/0038431442.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080618/0038431442.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080618/0038431442.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>like-anyone-trusts-them</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080618/0038431442</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>