Quebecor did the same thing in Quebec City during the 14 months' lock-out at the Journal de Québec in 2007-2008. They we're throwing tons of free copies on the streets, to mainting its circulation numbers.

How about Zie Gazette*, which is also distributed for free. Almost everytime I go to my girlfriend’s and get in/out of the métro at Lionel-Groulx, there is a guy who hands out free copies to people (getting on/off the 211)?
If I were subscribed, I’d be a bit miffed about that…
 
* Daß Monträlrhödesische Zeitung

that the market and short-sighted greed will drive the quality of journalism down in an effort to save money.

Wakeup-check: the same market & greed has also driven down the quality of pretty much everything else, too…

What determines what salaries are paid is not the amount of training it takes, but simply the value the job has for the employer.

If your assertion is correct, you should be able to provide at least an example or two of a job that requires lots of training, but isn't valuable to the employer and, hence, is paid very low. Or, an example of a job that requires very little training but is very valuable to the employer and, hence, is paid very high. (This second one is somewhat easier, as I describe later.)

Despite your best efforts to portray it that way, this isn't an either-or. It is axiomatic that if a job requires more training (vocational, post-secondary, post-graduate, whatever), then it's almost always going to be more valuable for the employer.

That's why nuclear engineers are paid better than, say, workers who cut hair in a beauty salon.

There are certain notable exceptions for really unpleasant jobs, such as people who clean up crime scenes or apartments where the resident died 3 months ago and no one noticed - not a ton of preparatory job training, but it does require a strong stomach and it pays pretty well, all things considered. Sanitation workers tend to be paid pretty well, also. There are also exceptions for certain dangerous jobs, but those can require a lot of on-the-job training. One immediate example that springs to mind is the sandhogs in New York City who dig underground tunnels for their waterworks system.

If you want to see what kind of journalism that comes out of the "efficient functioning of the market", go look at Examiner.com, Suite101.com or those community weeklies from Transcontinental. They pay nothing or close to it, and it shows.

However, if there exists concern among people already working in the field that people are crowding into the "profession" and driving salaries lower as a result, I'm going to say that is an efficient functioning of the market, and a reflection that the job is perceived as relatively low-skill (in relation to some of the professions I mentioned in earlier posts) and, as a result, should be low(er)-paying.

Now I’m disappointed. I thought the english had a firm grasp of elementary economics (after all, they told us for 250 years that we are too stupid and don’t know anything about money to run our own country).
What determines what salaries are paid is not the amount of training it takes, but simply the value the job has for the employer.
That’s why snake-oil salesmen can rake oodles of money just for bullshitting and selling their crap…

However, if there exists concern among people already working in the field that people are crowding into the "profession" and driving salaries lower as a result, I'm going to say that is an efficient functioning of the market, and a reflection that the job is perceived as relatively low-skill (in relation to some of the professions I mentioned in earlier posts) and, as a result, should be low(er)-paying.

Not to belabor the point, but what specific skill set and training do journalists have that you feel should result in a higher starting salary?

None, which is why journalists don't have a higher starting salary. Most starting journalists are paid peanuts - $25,000 a year maybe - working at some small-town paper or radio station. If they're really lucky, they'll end up at a big, professional news outlet and get an average, middle-class salary.

I'm not saying people at the Gazette or Journal are living in cardboard boxes, but they're not taking helicopters to work either.

Entry-level salaries begin at around $40 000

Not to belabor the point, but what specific skill set and training do journalists have that you feel should result in a higher starting salary?

Not to mention, what investment have you made? Have you spent several post-graduate years in medical school? Or law school? Or maybe dentistry?

Did you opt for post-secondary education in a specialized, professional field, such as nursing or engineering or archictecture or information management?

What about specialized vocational training, such as, say, welding or carpentry? A pretty competent plumber, I imagine, makes more starting salary than a journalists, especially after their apprenticeship phase.

I'm still interested in the unanswered question: what is it, precisely, that journalists think makes them special? To my mind, it's the refuge for people who got a B.A. in English literature or sociology.

I mean, you went into this field, knowing full well (or, if you didn't know, then that points to shoddy research skills right off the bat) that the barriers to entry to this so-called "profession" are pretty damned low, and now you're complaining that others are crowding into the field and undercutting salaries? And for these newcomers that are making your life so hard, are they - on the whole - any less qualified than you were when you first started in this field? I'm going to imagine not.

Truckers at Molson actually earn more than that.

¿Duh? Well, yes, of course. Molçon truckers perform a much more valuable service to the bourgeois than journalists: they scoot about the Molçon beer that has so much to do with the dulling of the population so it will not get interested by politics and start electing politicians that would pursue the people’s interests (journalists would tend to, by unearthing scandals, make people get interested in politics)!!!

Advertizing revenues dropped by about $20 million dollars. Journalisticaly, the Journal failed to break a single major story over the last year. Its scab reporters are shunned and boycotted everywhere. Sports fans, their bread-and-butter, have abandoned the Journal in favor of La Presse.

It's a war of nerves, NOT a new business model.

And the payscale may sound yummy when you see that the top echelon is $90 000. But it's worth noting that this high-end salary is reserved for very senior section editors or producers. Entry-level salaries begin at around $40 000 (and you're unlikely to get a decent media job these days without at least a Masters), and it can take up to 15 years to reach an average of $75 000.

Truckers at Molson actually earn more than that.

Of course, that last point is moot now.

I can read Le Devoir now but I get headaches from trying too hard. La Presse is cool though.

Must be because Le Devoir is “separatist” and La Praïsse (le quotidien français le plus épais d’Amérique) is federalist…(Duck — runs)

JdM readers aren't exactly the type to really care now are they...So yeah I'm gonna say it, I just don't think the average JdM reader is sophisticated enough to give a shit.

Well, now that you've uncovered the elephant in the room for all to see, I'll have to chime in and agree with this. Admittedly, I'm not a frequent (or even occasional) JdM reader, but my intuition is that JdM is basically the Toronto Sun, in French. Populist, soft nationalist, written for people who didn't get beyond Secondary V. Not exactly the types who are going to devote a lot of deep and critical thinking to management-labor relations.

To put it another way, when Allo Police folded in what, 2004?, those readers didn't exactly migrate over to Le Devoir now, did they?

At the same time, it may be possible that reader demographic is exactly the same people who belong to a union - most likely, a blue-collar union - but they may be more focused on their own jobs, rather than what's going on over at a so-called "professional" union.

That said...

Wow I might be opening up a nasty cat fight here, but let's face it, JdM readers aren't exactly the type to really care now are they? JdM was handed out to my class in French immersion for immigrants because it was a beginner level simple read. No, really. I remember fuming and wanting to grow up and read Le Devoir just like my smart French friends. Reading JdM was something you did in private. (Why yes, I was hanging out and married to vastly over educated Francosnobs!). To this day, I wince when my current husband picks up the JdM to read when we go to Harvey's. So yeah I'm gonna say it, I just don't think the average JdM reader is sophisticated enough to give a shit.

PS
I can read Le Devoir now but I get headaches from trying too hard. La Presse is cool though.

I imagine that a journalism union is no different.

Don't make assumptions. Unions aren't all alike. A blue collar union, for example, is very different from a professional trade union.

makes it difficult for anyone to get promoted other than by the 'seniority' route, which is, to be blunt, bullshit.

I don't know of a single union that requires promotion by seniority alone. Pay scale raises yes (to meet cost of living increases), but not promotion to a different job.

How about that I'd like to have a permanent job

"Permanent job" sounds like you want job security. The only way to enforce that is through a union. And if you don't want job security, then you don't want a permanent job.

And as for rewards, nothing stops employers from handing out bonuses, raises or other rewards to any employee of their choosing. The problem is that most employers don't do that, preferring to stick to the minimums set forth by the collective agreement. It's as much a fault of management as it is the union.