A freelance journalist who was briefly taken on to run the newsdesk of a doomed weekly has questioned why his editor was allowed to employ him.
Cambridge First, launched by Archant as a “21st century newspaper” in May 2010, was axed in March with the loss of 12 jobs.
Among those put out of work was Tim Gillett, who had been taken on as the newspaper’s head of content just three weeks before the closure announcement.
Now he has recounted his experiences in a first person piece for HTFP, questioning why his editor Rose Taylor had not been prevented from recruiting him.
Says Tim: “While I cannot blame the editor who took me on, as the decision was clearly as much as a shock for her as it was for me, I find it completely inconceivable that nobody in the company knew of the plans.
“I cannot believe that directors were not even considering closing the paper less than three weeks before the announcement was made – in which case, how could they have allowed the editor to take on new staff?”
Archant has been made aware of Tim’s comments but has so far not made any response to them.
Here is his piece in full.
I’ve been a journalist for about 15 years – I had about three years in local newspapers (Bucks Free Press and Cambridge News) before deciding to take a desk at a local publishing company and work as a freelancer.
In February I contacted Cambridge First with a proposal for a feature. The editor agreed to commission the feature, and also asked if I was interested in a few freelance shifts at the paper. I went along to have a chat about it.
It was then that I was told about the head of content job – I hadn’t been thinking of a full-time job, but the prospect of working for a new paper, providing competition to the established Cambridge News, was tempting. It was on my home patch (three minutes from home on a bike), where I had a lot of contacts, and there was a real appeal for getting out there and digging for news in my home city. So I expressed my interest, worked a few shifts at the paper, and was offered the job a week later.
I’d had some reservations about how strong the newspaper was, and asked for – and was given – assurances. I was told that Archant was totally committed to having a newspaper in Cambridge, that it would remain in the city, that the circulation was about to increase dramatically, and that it was a position with excellent prospects. So I gave notice on my rented desk, informed my clients that I was off to the world of steady work, and prepared myself for my new job.
At the end of my third week at Cambridge First, we were all called into a meeting and informed that the newspaper was going to be closed a week later and that most of us were at risk of redundancy. It was explained that the advertising revenues had never really been high enough to make a profit, and while it was admitted by the directors that the newspaper had been a great success editorially, it was not a success commercially.
While I cannot blame the editor who took me on, as the decision was clearly as much as a shock for her as it was for me, I find it completely inconceivable that nobody in the company knew of the plans. I cannot believe that directors were not even considering closing the paper less than three weeks before the announcement was made – in which case, how could they have allowed the editor to take on new staff?
I’ve been able to pick up a few bits of freelance work since – though nowhere near enough – and the one week’s redundancy pay offered by Archant isn’t going to go very far.
The really ironic thing is that all the sales people on the newspaper were found jobs elsewhere within Archant.
Sign up for our free daily email bulletin
Follow HTFP on Twitter
Got a story? Email the Editor at
I have no doubt that somebody will say: ‘Tough. Should have known better,’ but I think this merely underlines the atrocious behaviour of managements towards people committed to what is still a noble profession.
My sympathies, and I sincerely hope that it all works out for you.
Report this comment
As someone who lives in Cambridge, I can confirm that Cambridge First was a well-received newspaper and played a role in the community. The decision to close it down shows the management’s remoteness from the community – the editorial was fine and the advertising would have worked if the distribution had been up to standard.
What a shame for the committed team of journalists who seemed to really care and be knowledgeable about their community
Report this comment
So you worked for 12 years as a freelance and after a three-week “break” working full time, you could only then pick up scraps of work???? Why so?
Report this comment
It’s a bit more than scraps Peter, but I thought I was going to be unavailable for any day-time work so effectively handed my notice in with several clients and understandably they looked elsewhere.
I don’t think that’s really the point, though.
Report this comment
Sorry to hear about your experience Tim. I’ve been a freelancer for about 3 years and I’m treated just as shoddily – all the time. Regrettably, I think that being unappreciated, disrespected and ignored come with the territory, regardless of ability or work ethic.
Report this comment
content editors? all the rubbish and none of the authority that proper local editors had. I wish them all luck.
Report this comment
This is quite common – the poor chap who was brought in to replace me on a Newsquest-owned Yorkshire title was made redundant literally on the spot after about three weeks in the job.
No reason other than the management suddenly decided they couldn’t afford him on a whim. He’d spent a lot of money relocating and it was his first job in the business.
The editor of the same title was also deliberately pushed out of his job (made to commute a long way to the regional head office three or four times a week for no apparent reason) as part of what appeared to be a plan to get rid of the weekly editors and replace them with one group editor. However, there was a sudden U-turn with that and now there’s someone back in place.
You wouldn’t mind so much if those culling the jobs were doing it as part of a clever and well-planned survival strategy, but with them hiring one week and firing the next, you do get the impression they’re literally making it up as they go along.
Report this comment