I'm sure some of my friends at other local stations running on teams of less than 5 people would be thrilled at hearing they need to put more effort in.
I think it was just sloppy wording. I know what they're trying to say. The employees on the ground always do their best, but there has been the minimum effort from the execs at the top. This has been a challenge at STV as well. The only difference is that the staff were able to tap in to an STV archive and more professional graphics teams, studio sets, camera crew, etc.
True - but conversely they integrated their newsgathering operation with their ITV franchise news operation didn't they? Sharing this original journalism with the BBC would have been a big step for them - as they would have had to have supplied a large number of stories (the money is multiplied by 5, but so is the story count), as well as pictures to the BBC in return. (They are fierce rivals in Scotland - and all those stories would have been handed to Rep Scot on a plate)
Whilst I believe the closure of STV 2 was inevitable, I do understand where they’re coming from. It appears that this is happening with very little communication and support. Does there also not need to be a 90 day consultation? This was only announced a couple of weeks ago, with many of the jobs ending at the end of June.
News provision is also going back the way. They have a great studio in STV News Tonight, with competent, hardworking staff. This SHOULD have moved to STV. Hopefully, this will be reconsidered.
STV have handled this in a very slash and burn way which I'd associate with the macho management you sometimes see at big local newspaper groups. That's made balloting for industrial action almost inevitable. Whenever bad stuff happens at a media group you've got people who would strike at the drop of a hat and other people who are a little more pragmatic and will try to talk the former down. It becomes very difficult to do that when a job loss situation isn't handled correctly.
At the same time, STV has spent bizarre amounts of money expanding into areas that were never going to bring cash in. The staff at STV2 have done an incredible job with the resources they had but the entire idea was a dud. People weren't going to abandon very well resourced main channels to watch worthy couch shows or Channel 4 News on a 50p budget. Random online people who duplicate what's already available elsewhere (entertainment and UK-wide news stories, including one time I saw a story about the London Underground?)
In terms of STV News Tonight, I remain bemused as to what STV was trying to do. I had assumed they would be test running a show that could easily transfer over to the main channel should it prove to be popular in focus groups or research. I had assumed they wouldn't set up an expensive to run national and international show on a station where the number of viewers would remain in four figures for the sake of it. I was wrong.
Had STV announced that STV2 was a goner and the Edinburgh opt was ending, and kept the job cuts to a minimum, then I suspect few people would be discussing this now. STV would still be superserving the area it covers (it doesn't need to provide Scotland Tonight on a nightly basis and the 10 minutes of Edinburgh news in the main show, which I assume will be like the Dundee opt during STV North's programme, is still more than they have to do).
Taking their comments at face value, I have some sympathy with the current STV management and what they're trying to do. It is, to be honest, what all media outlets in small markets should be doing. They're looking to produce more shows which will be picked up by national broadcasters under pressure to diversify their commissioning beyond the capital, and will hopefully have some international interest as well. That's where the money is these days, in scale. Audiences are fragmented everywhere so you can't just broadcast to your own backyard any more as your competing with hundreds of other channels and outlets, none of which have the same PSB commitments.
STV chief executive Simon Pitts has said plans which could see more than 50 staff lose their jobs are "necessary" to guarantee the broadcaster's future.
He also dismissed speculation that the station is being readied to be sold off to ITV.
STV announced plans last month to close its loss-making STV2 channel and restructure its news operation.
The move puts a total of 59 jobs at risk and sparked a ballot for industrial action.
Mr Pitts told Holyrood's culture committee that "hardly anyone" watched STV2, with its flagship 19:00 news programme attracting 1,800 viewers.
Douglas Fraser: Commerce trumps creativity at STV
And he said plans to create quality shows in Scotland which could be sold worldwide "if we get it right" could create many more jobs that would "dwarf" those currently under threat.
Mr Pitts was challenged by MSPs to justify his remuneration package in light of the planned job cuts.
The executive received an £853,000 "golden hello" on taking up his job in January, which included a £187,000 payment along with deferred shares worth £666,000, in addition to his basic salary of £400,000.
Image copyrightSTV
Green MSP Ross Greer said: "You, this year, will receive £1.2m in total earnings. There are people in your newsroom on £18,000 a year, journalists who are facing redundancy.
"Now, the harsh decision for them is that that's their livelihood and it must be incredibly hard for them to stomach that when they see people at the other end of the organisation receiving the kind of remuneration that you are.
"Do you understand how harsh that is for them and did you consider forfeiting any of your total potential earnings for this year?"
'Difficult decisions'
Mr Pitts did not clarify if he had considered forfeiting any of his remuneration but said the package had been approved by the STV board and shareholders.
He said: "I understand how difficult the situation is for the people who facing redundancy. It's horrible.
"We have made a series of difficult decisions that have a real impact on people's lives.
"We have done that in order to be able to grow this business to use the savings we are making in order to re-invest for the future."
In a letter to the committee, STV chairwoman Baroness Ford said the "one off payment" was to compensate Mr Pitts for his shareholding at ITV, which she insisted was "usual practice in public companies when very senior executives transfer from one company to another".
STV made a profit of £18m last year and the changes are expected to save £2m a year, with a further £5m a year being invested in new programmes.
"This is not a strategy to prepare STV for sale to ITV or anyone else. If that were the case, then we simply wouldn't be investing," Mr Pitts said.
I'd have been tempted to avoid that sort of wording if I ran a media group with a huge number of employees who are very sore about their current prospects. It does strike me as a continuing mishandling of the fallout from the redundancies.
Having said that, while it's politically not wise to say it, 1,800 viewers is hardly anyone.