I hadn't thought much about this, but you're absolutely right. Bottom line--subscriptions are down.
It's not making money. A new owner has a right to do whatever he or she wants, and Rojas is well within her rights to make changes to a failing business model. That absolutely includes a change in personnel, and that should actually START with Jimmy. He doesn't have to quit in a huff because he doesn't like a new direction. He should be fired because he failed at his job.
As for the other employees, same thing. They don't own the paper. They work for it. They should do what their boss asks. She's not unreasonable. Jimmy's business model doesn't work in 2019.
Now I do agree that a news source should actually report the news, and not ignore facts or skew things toward whatever direction they want, because if they do that, it ceases to be media, but modernizing is a good thing.
The only issue I have is the ridiculous non-compete clause, which would not work on our Earth.
For my part, right the moment the DA Office decided to pursue James Olsen for his activities as the Guardian, in particular about his eventual complicity in the operations carried out by a terrorist group, I wondered how he could have been left at the head of Catco (I remind you the charges against Olsen were serious enough for the DA to get his arrest and a prison sentence, btw => only Lena's intervention on the DA saved him). I mean, the Board could have ask him to stand on the margins the time that things settle down. At least, for the company image.
Moreover, I recall that the magazine's sales had already begun to decline under James leadership to the point that even Lena Luthor, before she starts her relationship with him, noted the situation and adviced him to lower the price of the magazine... what James had refused under the pretext that he didn't want to sell off the price of the work of his employees...
-> In fact, upon her arrival at the head of Catco, Rojas had 2 legitimate reasons to fire James Olsen. His result as CEO and his questionable reputation. By resigning, he has just proved once again that he was unable to assume his responsibilities.
About the news on a clic, this is already done since the 90s and almost all big press titles through the world, developped the e-media but that does not prevent the good reporters from doing their jobs seriously. It's a question of journalistic ethics, so a
a question of person and not of means used as such.
About the non-compte clause, this already exists in some areas and that for awhile. It's a way for companies applying this policy to ensure a form of protection against data leakage and people. For ex, a company which would work with the Army,
must sign an exclusive contract. When the contract will end of right, it couldn't
prospect with an another Army and/or companies working in this domain for a certain time.