★★★★★ 0/5

Australian staff to be impacted by Paramount job cuts

Staff at Network 10 / Paramount will learn by end of business today if they are part of global redundancies.

21
Leave a comment

Australian staff for Network 10 / Paramount will learn redundancies by the end of today, following decisions made internationally by Paramount Global under President Bob Bakish.

Around 800 staff globally, about 3% of workforce, are expected to be impacted.

A Paramount spokesperson said, “Paramount is focused on driving earnings growth in 2024. As we continue to deliver our strategy in Australia – which is a critical and priority market for Paramount – we have had to make some tough but necessary decisions to ensure we continue to grow our revenue while streamlining operations and reducing costs. As Bob Bakish said in his memo, some employees will leave the business, and to those colleagues we would like to express our sincere thanks for their hard work, dedication and professionalism. We will be supporting all colleagues impacted during this period.”

The following is a memo from Pam Kaufman, Chief Executive Officer and President International Markets.

Team,

As Bob shared earlier this week, in order to drive earnings growth in 2024, we have had to make some tough but necessary decisions to ensure we continue growing our revenue while streamlining operations and reducing costs.

Unfortunately, this includes parting ways with some of our respected colleagues across the Australian business, who will be notified by close of business today.

I would like to take a moment to thank all those who will be impacted. Your important contributions to our organization have strengthened our business, and we are grateful for your dedication. These decisions are never easy. I know the changes will be felt across the region, and I encourage you to support one another as we navigate this next phase of our evolution.

While this is a difficult moment, I want to emphasize that I believe in our global strategy, and I am confident that the Paramount Australia team will continue to drive the business forward to meet our goals across this critical and priority market.

Pam Kaufman

21 Responses

  2. I don’t want to see channels fail. I’m eager to see how this lands. What sort of jobs and shows are impacted or not. Will it be wise decisions that help the network in the future?

    The perception from me is that programs like The Project are prioritised for political influence, rather than ratings. Corporate responsibility does have a cost. It’s imperative that they do reflect the actual demographics in the end. The communities they broadcast in expect that. It’s got to not alienate or segment, and cast the net wide for the best possible ratings. Why? Because you lose potential audiences.

    The Project is a show I’d probably tune into again after years, if it wasn’t for the potential pitfalls and politics. Same goes for The Last Leg.

      1. Yes I don’t deny that. Paramount still owns Ten and Beverley McGarvey, head of Paramount+ in Australia is responsible for all content and creative activities related to the company’s networks and digital properties in Australia and New Zealand including 10. Beverley has been an outspoken supporter of The Project and the need for the program to remain, despite the criticisms of the program.

        1. most of the criticism of the show tends to come from people who’ve never watched it but are just drawn in to the debate by clickbait articles by sites like news dot com or the daily mail.

          1. No I’ll always make an attempt to gain context. The context is the issue. It’s like that dodgy edit on The Project where the lady said ScoMo is not my Prime Minister, but then with full context, it was because the lady was a UK citizen. The culture of the program enabled that.

      2. I suppose the question is, is The Project exempt from the cuts, like they were when Ten journalistic staff were cut some years ago, due to that The Project didn’t fit into Ten’s own definitions or standards of news and current affairs.

        1. The Project was just more popular. It reuses new footage, costs little and is 10’s 2nd highest rating show and has younger viewers. CBS was late to see that streaming was going to be more important, botched All Access then had to scramble to launch Paramount+ after they had already sold a lot of their premium content to others, which also hasn’t been very successful. The Redstone heiress who owns a lot of the shares wants to sell their holdings meaning Paramount+ is on the market so they need to fix their balance sheet. Someone could buy it or buy it and strip it selling of bits.

        2. Questioning whether staff cuts by Paramount will impact The Project is about as relevant and questioning whether the cuts will impact Survivor or MasterChef… that is, utterly irrelevant! These programmes aren’t made with Paramount staff…
          As said by others, The Project hits 10’s target, advertiser friendly under 50’s demo. It’s one of the networks highest rated and most talked about shows.
          Does it somewhat “niche” itself with its content?, most certainly… that is by design. Just as 7:30 does the same for ABC and ACA does for Nine.

  3. “As we continue to deliver our strategy in Australia – which is a critical and priority market for Paramount” – if their strategy was to cement 10 as the #4 network then they have succeeded. The last part sounds like 10 will be on the market as soon as they can find a buyer. I hope it’s not News Corp.

    2. …let’s face it, 10’s problems started in 1987 when News Limited sold the Sydney and Melbourne stations … it’s been a rotating basket case of owners and catastrophes ever since …

  4. It will be a very sad day if there are job losses at 10. It makes me upset when I hear the announcement of job losses at the network. I want to see Channel 10 succeed and to perform much better this year, but suddenly they couldn’t even be competitive against its other rivals – 7 & 9. I watch 10 for Matildas matches, HYBPA, TCS and TGYH. I have seen a lot of media outlets (e.g. DM, News Corp and sometimes Nine) bagging Network 10. As a TV fan, I don’t want to see Ch10 fail.

  5. Terribly sad for people who will lose their jobs. 10 had already been cut to the bone. The network has an ever stinking hold on audiences, apart from a few middling and rapidly aging tent poles. I fear it’s beyond saving at this point and will be toast in next 5 – 10 years. Hope I’m wrong.

    1. Unfortunately they very rarely start from the top, bad decisions are made there, so why shouldn’t the cuts start there. No one on the studio floor made the decisions, yet the cuts start there.

Leave a Reply