Were they "fired" or were they laid off or let go. The way this is written makes it sound like there was incompetence or misconduct. While technically, "let go" may still be "fired," the latter clearly has a negative connotation which suggests there was cause. These are not interchangeable terms, in such a context.

Was it really necessary for Mr. Khanna to say that "effectively all the positions will be replaced"? These were talented and committed employees and perhaps a sincere thank you for their contribution and support over the years would have been a more gracious and classy way of handling what surely must be a devasting experience for departed and current staff members of Rogers.

Not to mention the additional stigma of attaching the word "fired" to their departures, when it was more a restructuring, downsizing or change in direction. This, from a site "for the Canadian Magazine Industry"??? Why does Masthead insist on crapping all over its own? Obviously, the writer doesn't know the difference, and has never been so unfortunate to have been downsized himself, through no fault of his own.

Surprising to me that people are "crapping" on Masthead for reporting on the crappy actions of Rogers. Rogers didn't lay them off--lay offs imply the elimination of positions. Rogers, as their own spokesman said, isn't eliminating the positions, it's eliminatng the emloyees--firing them because for whatever reasons, the company figured they'd like new bodies in those positions, past loyalty, contributions etc notwithstanding. That's how Rogers rolls. And that's not Masthead's fault. I'd rather have Masthead call it like it is than succumb to the spin corporations would rather see.

I agree with Anon 2 - It's how Rogers rolls and seeing how small the pub. industry is in Publishing - sooner or later we will all be victims of Rogers in one way or another.

What just happened was so uncalled for. Ken - karma will bite you in the ass!

Uncalled for, indeed. It is how Rogers rolls, but is it fair to say these people were "fired" versus "let go"? It's just semantics, perhaps, but just ask the dearly departed which term they prefer. I'm guessing the news was upsetting enough for them, without seeing it reported like that.

Semantics? Hardly. 'Let go,' is a soft and gentle approach. In today's world, most people are sophisticated enough to recognise that 'fired' does not necessarily imply the employee is at fault. Since this seems to be Ken's serial approach to staffing issues, 'fired' is just the right tone.

I used "fired" to make it clear these were not economy-related layoffs. Masthead has used the term for stories of this nature in the past and will continue to do so in the future.

The question is, were all the people who were fired involved in some conspiracy? Or were they part of the "old guard" and had to be eliminated?

If Canadian Business is "strategically shifting focus" why do they have to replace the writers and editors? Could they not tell the writers and editors about the new focus? Or, are the new people in charge planning to bring in their cronies?

What is Ken Whyte's track record of turning around publications? Hmmm. National Post, nope. Saturday Night, nope. Maclean's, nope.

Umm, wasn't the Post at its most successful when Whyte was the boss? And if you think the current Maclean's isn't an improvement over the pre-Whyte Mac then you obviously haven't read the magazine. (And if you really don't think it's better, I'd like to know why.) Yes, he likes to clean house when he comes in, which really sucks for the people let go, but I have no doubt the new CB will be much better than the current one.

The National Post was at it's best when Whyte was there because Conrad Black (now a guest of the Florida taxpayers) poured multi millions into it. Canwest was foolish enough to buy it and well...we know where that got them.And let's face it Macleans had nowhere to go but up or be shuttered so Whyte was, once again, right place, right time.

The firings are a predictable neoconservative move; a pillar of that fundamentalist ideology is "Creative Destruction," and it's becoming as much the Canadian way as it was the American way under Reagan/Bush and the UK way since Thatcher.

Wow, who's driving this thread? That sudden left turn hurt my neck.

C'mon everyone. You've written enough catchy two-word bugs - use that savvy here for your screen name. Enough "anons."

What is anon10 trying to say with that statement??? Way to keep it on target!

CB dismissed five people in print editorial last week; today, job postings went up for three positions. So perhaps two positions were eliminated. Time will tell.

IF you look at LNA survey figures from 2008, CB was actually making money - ad revenue was up 6% through 2008, whereas ROB was down 11% and FPB down 15%. CB was also nominated for magazine of the year. Whatever's driving these decisions, it's not results.