Advertisement

More Griffin: Insiders Spin Firing

Advertisement

The media world is still a ways away from getting to the bottom of what was really behind the abrupt firing of Time Inc. chairman and CEO Jack Griffin, but considering how short Griffin’s tenure was, and the way his exit leaves Time Warner CEO Jeff Bewkes exposed, this much must be true: There’s probably more to the story than the official company line that Griffin was fired after a mere six months on the job because his leadership style didn’t “mesh” with Time Inc.
 
After a night and morning in which the anti-Griffin forces dominated the narrative, those loyal to the fired executive have started telling their side of the story. One bit of chatter that’s coming from the pro-Griffin side fingers Time Inc. editor in chief John Huey as a factor in Griffin’s firing. One executive said that the trouble really started with Griffin wanting to push for change too fast (Griffin relied on outside consultants, reorganized the magazine groups, moved around several key executives and eliminated others).
 
“This is a cabal that started a whisper campaign, and it got to [Time Warner CEO Jeff] Bewkes,” the source said. “It was a small number of people who felt extremely threatened because Jack wanted to change things.”

Griffin himself added to the conversation with a statement he released today, the day after his firing. In it, he defended his tenure, saying he was hired to transform the business and that he was consistently praised by senior management before he left. “My exit was clearly not about management style or results,” Griffin said.
 
One change Griffin made that would have affected Huey was his decision that all of Time Inc.’s magazines run mastheads, which would seem to undermine Huey’s authority. (Huey is now part of an interim committee that was appointed to run the company until Griffin’s successor is named. We asked Huey for comment; he hasn’t responded yet.)
 
Other insiders dispute that theory. “He didn’t give a shit about that,” one person said. The masthead edict was said to have been widely unpopular, and, the source said, “Most of our advertisers won’t want to run opposite a masthead.”
 

Continue to next page →