bestnom1000x50

New in Boston magazine: fearmongering media criticism!

The May '07 issue of "BoMag" features a somewhat baffling article (at least, that's how it struck me) by Sasha Issenberg. Here's the title: "The Globe's Campaign Crunch: Shorter on resources and manpower, the paper will have trouble covering the '08 race with its usual swagger." And here's the crux of the argument, which follows a Knight Ridder reporter's glowing description of the paper's '04 presidential coverage:
Since then, a lot has changed on Morrissey Boulevard. The paper is streamlining its newsroom, wrapping up its second buyout since the '04 campaign. It just shuttered all its foreign bureaus, and dozens of other jobs are being outsourced to India.

And yet editors insist that even though the Globe can no longer afford a man in Berlin, Germany, it will still have boots on the ground in Berlin, New Hampshire, come primary time....
Listen, I'm as happy to chronicle internal Globe woes as the next guy/gal. But Issenberg seems to be missing a few big points:

1. The Globe's Washington bureau hasn't been downsized yet.

2. Said bureau may have lost Rick Klein, but they've still got Pulitzer winner Charlie Savage.

3. The paper's coverage of Mitt Romney has been ultrafantastic.

4. "And yet" suggests that an implausible statement is about to follow. E.g.: "And yet editors insist that the Globe's coverage of the presidential race will be far superior to that of any other newspaper, including the Times and the Wall Street Journal." In fact, the statement in question is utterly reasonable. Heck, that shuttered foreign bureau might even help the paper cover the N.H. primary better!

In short, let's not start fretting about the Globe's presidential reportage just yet. My hunch is that the paper will do just fine.

| More


ADVERTISEMENT
 Friends' Activity   Popular 
All Blogs
Follow the Phoenix
  • newsletter
  • twitter
  • facebook
  • youtube
  • rss
ADVERTISEMENT
Latest Comments
ADVERTISEMENT
Search Blogs
 
Media Log Archives