You can stop racking your brain over why Philip Markoff--an MD-to-be with a hot fiancee--would commit the heinous crimes Markoff allegedly did. As the Herald reports today, deep down, Markoff is really just a big dork. (The Globe explores his nerdiness, too, but not with the Herald's laser-like focus or lip-smacking relish.
Editor & Publisher reports that Boston.com is a quintuple finalist in the 2009 EPpy awards, the new-media contest sponsored jointly by E&P and Newsweek. The honorees include the Your Town sites, Things to do; Boston Arts and Entertainment, Tony Massarotti's Mazz sports blog, and The Big Picture.
Advertising revenue for the NYT Co.'s New England Media Group--which includes the Globe and the Worcester T&G--dropped nearly 32 percent in the first quarter of 2009 compared to the same period in 2008.
By way of comparison, the New York Times Media Group's ad revenue fell about 27 percent. Which is pretty bad too, and will only increase the Times Co.
Here's the latest statement from the Boston Newspaper guild, the Globe's largest union, on what it is and isn't prepared to offer in negotiations with the NYT Co.
The requests that jumped out at me are flagged in the title of this post: the Guild wants to negotiate publicly, enter into a revenue-sharing agreement with the Times Co.
Congrats to Doug Most, formerly the editor of the Globe Magazine, who's been named the paper's deputy managing editor/features.
Structurally, Most's appointment seems eminently sensible. (It also raises the question of why the Globe didn't have a features czar until now--better late than never, perhaps?) It can also be taken as an indication that Globe editor Marty Baron thinks the Globe will survive its current crisis--or at least, is determined to act as if it will.
DQM was just forwarded a copy of a survey the Boston Newspaper Guild sent to its membership, apparently today, seeking employee thoughts on how to proceed in negotiations.
I've pasted the survey below; apologies in advance for any formatting funkiness. Note that respondents are given the possibility of linking wage concessions to similar concessions by management, which strikes me as eminently reasonable, given the fat, non-outcome-driven compensation that top execs at the Times Co.
Today's Globe story on the concessions the NYT Co. is seeking from the Globe's mailers mentions a letter sent by Boston Newspaper Guild head Dan Totten to his membership (which doesn't include the mailers), noting that Totten urged his members to speak with one voice and not be bullied by the Times Co.
I've been forwarded the letter in question.
A question: If Boston Globe publisher Steve Ainsley can talk about the paper's crisis to its advertisers (as the Herald's Jay Fitzgerald reports today) and its employees, why can't he comment for the Globe and Times reporters covering the story--and thus for the general public?
I'll be joining Emily Rooney, Joe Sciacca, Callie Crossley, and my close personal friend Dan Kennedy tonight on Greater Boston's Beat the Press. Our topic? The Globe crisis, natch. Please tune in if you can.
The Boston Newspaper Guild is the biggest union at the Globe, and the union that's currently being asked by the NYT Co. to make the biggest sacrifices to prevent the paper from closing. As such, it's poised to help shape the future of Boston journalism, for better or worse. But only one member of the Guild's seven-member executive committee--Kathy McCabe, the union's recording secretary, who's a correspondent for the Globe North section--actually works as a journalist.
In my latest Phoenix column, I argue (among other things) that it's not fair to accuse the Globe of liberal bias--and cite the Globe breaking and driving the Marian Walsh story as one bit of evidence.
The driving part holds: see this devastating piece on the email trail connected to Walsh's hiring, which I think demonstrates that the Globe is not, in fact, out to aid Democrats or facilitate patronage on Beacon Hill.
In which I discuss the deafening silence from the Times Co.; the Globe's solicitation of character references from the MA political establishment; and the bogus claim that the Globe's in trouble because it's a liberal rag. Please take a look.
We interrupt today's stream of whither-the-Globe commentary to ask:
Can you imagine being a 12-year-old kid, and having your dad size up your psyche (and, in passing, your body) for an audience of a few hundred thousand?
In a column that'll be online this afternoon, I take vigorous issue with the notion--advanced by George Snell and others--that the Globe's (alleged) liberal bias is one of the reasons it's failing.
But Snell's point about the excessively boutique-y nature of much Globe content strikes me as worth pondering (even though I think the paper's problems are, for the most part, those of the newspaper industry as a whole).
Whatever transpires with the Times Co.'s concede-or-close ultimatum to the Globe and its unions, the relationship between New York and Boston looks irreparable right now.
From the Times Co.'s point of view, the paper they spent $1.1 billion on is now a money-loser on pace to hemmorhage $85 million in 2008 and 2009, at a moment when the Times itself is in jeopardy and needs to be protected.