WaPo: Money Talks, But Not for Froomkin

Via Romenesko comes this little nugget regarding the the controversial firing of Washington Post columnist Dan Froomkin, pulled from an “Ask the Post” online chat with Washington Post editors Liz Spayd and Raju Narisetti.

Hackensack, N.J.: I can’t understand how the Post can find no room to keep so valuable a contributor as Dan Froomkin. Surely, if you feel that Mr. Froomkin represented too strong a viewpoint for some reason, the proper response was to hire someone with a different viewpoint, not to sack Mr. Froomkin and by extension sack his readership.

Liz Spayd and Raju Narisetti: Much has been written about the end of Mr Froomkin’s contract with WP.com. All we want to note is that the decision has nothing to do with his viewpoints. Even on the Post website, let alone on the web, there are dozens of voices across the political spectrum and we are constantly evaluating the best use of our shrinking dollars.

So! Froomkin wasn’t fired for his views — as a number of people initially speculated — instead they seem to be suggesting he was fired because he wasn’t providing enough bang for WaPo‘s shrinking buck. Translation? It looks the theory he wasn’t generating enough hits on his blog may be more accurate than he would let on.

New: The Mediaite One-Sheet "Newsletter of Newsletters"
Your daily summary and analysis of what the many, many media newsletters are saying and reporting. Subscribe now!