Threat to Globe triggers flood of feelings
News that The New York Times Co. might shut down the Boston Globe if its unions don’t swiftly agree to $20 million in cuts sparked an outcry of voices ranging from Senator John Kerry to rocker Peter Wolf. (Boston Globe)
Excerpt from the Herald story (not the lead, though yesterday it was):
Details of threat to close Globe emerge
Storm over Morrissey Boulevard
There’s a mutinous mood on Morrissey Boulevard, as Boston Globe staffers lash out over a stunning ultimatum from parent company The New York Times [NYT] Co.
“They’re nickel-and-diming people,” said a Globe union official who spoke on condition of anonymity, adding that top executives at The New York Times Co., which owns the Globe, “have ruined” the sagging broadsheet.
A few points:
The Times Co. threat makes no sense. If you shut down the leading newspaper in New England, then you no longer own the leading newspaper in New England. Are we to assume the paper intends to backslide to covering just New York?
If it’s real and Boston becomes a one-newspaper town, it will be the greatest double envelopment maneuver in newspaper history. The Herald has been dying for at least 15 years (been sold twice in the last 20 or so), so the thought of it emerging as the biggest paper is a real stunner.
I’m not sure about now, because I haven’t read the paper in a long time, but when I had state jobs, if you polled Beacon Hill and asked which paper they feared more, it was definitely the Herald. When Frank Phillips was the Herald State House reporter and Peter Lucas was the columnist who kept his office there, they beat the Globe on every important political story. Now I think that’s less true, because the Herald’s “gotcha” approach is not as serious as Phillips was (is).
This is a done deal. They’re not going to shut down the paper next month, but this is the warning shot that they will shut it down. I think they just don’t know how to replace it yet.
Cross-posted on Blue News Tribune and Blue Hampshire.)