$\"Chicago$ <\/a>

<\/a> Chicago Sun-Times<\/p><\/div>\n

Pick up a copy of the Sun-Times<\/a> these days and you\u2019ll no longer find any reference to Wrapports LLC,<\/a> the media holding company that\u2019s owned the paper since 2011.<\/p>\n

Gone from the front page, the masthead and everywhere else is the corporate name once meant to signify the \"rapport\" of new technology and the \"wrapping\" of a traditional print newspaper. A \u201cWrapports\u201d sign recently was removed from the entrance to the Sun-Times. New security badges issued to employees now say \u201cSun-Times\u201d instead of \u201cWrapports.\u201d<\/p>\n

If you didn\u2019t know better, you might think Wrapports was getting ready to jettison the Sun-Times from its portfolio.<\/p>\n

Not true, says Dennis Culloton, president of Culloton Strategies <\/a>and corporate spokesman for Wrapports. The decision to drop the Chicago-based parent company\u2019s name was made to keep the focus on the Sun-Times and Sun-Times Network<\/a> brands.<\/p>\n

$\"Michael$ <\/a>

Michael Ferro<\/p><\/div>\n

\u201cDespite all the extremely bright people in the Wrapports family, they\u2019ve got way too many brand names floating around,\u201d Culloton said Wednesday. \u201cEventually it just confuses the customers. I think the Sun-Times should be the Sun-Times. It does make sense to have one less name on that masthead. Is it Wrapports or is it Sun-Times? I think that from a brand perspective that\u2019s cleaner and makes more sense.\u201d<\/p>\n

Wrapports chairman Michael Ferro and his investment group remain committed to the Sun-Times, Culloton said. Pointing to the paper\u2019s recent partnership with USA Today<\/a> and improved single-copy sales, he said: \u201cThey\u2019ve made a commitment to keeping the Sun-Times newspaper viable and strong for as long as there is a demand for a newspaper. If they can make this current strategy successful, I think it will be a pretty long run.\u201d<\/p>\n

Following the renegotiation of its printing and distribution deals and the influx of capital from the $23.5 million sale<\/a> of 38 suburban newspapers to Tribune Publishing, the Sun-Times could become profitable, according to Culloton.<\/p>\n

\u201cNow that the restructuring is largely done, it's time to charge ahead with the new brand and the new logo and the network and the newspaper, which they tell me is going to be in the black, thanks to the transaction with the Tribune. With the work that [Wrapports CEO] Tim Knight and [Sun-Times publisher] Jim Kirk have done, they feel like they\u2019re in better shape than they\u2019ve been in a while to really make a go of it.\u201d<\/p>\n

If Ferro remains so confident of his investment, why did he recently have his name removed from the editorial masthead of the Sun-Times?<\/p>\n

Said Culloton: \u201cMichael doesn\u2019t participate in the daily editorial decision-making, and he thought that those journalists who do ought to be the ones on the masthead.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"