The New York Times is threatening to shutter the Boston Globe unless the newspapers unions agree to concessions totalling $20 million dollars. From the Globe:
Executives from the Times Co. and Globe made the demands Thursday morning in an approximately 90-minute meeting with leaders of the newspaper’s 13 unions, union officials said. The possible concessions include pay cuts, the end of pension contributions by the company, and the elimination of lifetime job guarantees now enjoyed by some veteran employees, said Daniel Totten, president of the Boston Newspaper Guild, the Globe’s biggest union, which represents more than 700 editorial, advertising, and business office employees.
The Globe has been rumored to be suffering steep losses, and its parent company is also in financial trouble, having just taken a cash infusion from a Mexican billionaire that allowed it to make its last debt payment.
The loss of the Globe, regardless of your ideology, would be a real blow to Massachusetts. The private sector unions will need to make concessions, and even with those the Globe’s current business model may not be sustainable. I do not know what the Globe balance sheet looks like but I suspect that the heavy use of leverage is a contributing factor in this disaster. I hope that there is a way out for the Globe, but those prospects, in my view, are dim without bankruptcy.
Bill Manzi.com 
Your Honor,
With the super Democratic/Liberal/Progressive majority in this state, why don’t they come to the the aid of this sinking ship? Save a Kennedy house organ.
Irony: Globe puts it to the Labor Unions. Take a pay cut or you’re outa hear. How cool.
All candor aside, I am saddened that there will be only one Boston Daily even if the dying one no longer practices journalism.
Jules
LikeLike
Heh, and the Herald DOES practice journalism?
LikeLike
Jim,
Maybe you can’t recognize journalism if you have been reading the Globe.
Jules
LikeLike
Hardly fair Jules…I do know a good rag when I see one and have on occasion read the NY Post….well Page Six anyway. 😉
That’s journalism right? Or should I have phrased that as ‘that’s ‘right’ journalism?!
LikeLike
Jim,
I read local papers. To me a paper does two basic things;
1. Reports, in a neutral way, events without either prejudice or partisanship.
2. Provide a variety of opinion. This can be pointed and partisan.
The Globe and its parent the NY Times has violated the basic rules.
Jules
LikeLike
Jules:
When in your life did you ever read a newspaper that didn’t have an editorial point of view?
Who defines what is neutral, and when in history did this ever happen? Isn’t it a newspaper’s role to be objective, sift through facts, and present truths? In fact, be the direct opposite of neutral?
I think you’re redefining newspapers as you (or your party) have wished them (or, demonized them) to be, instead of how they are and have always been.
Just my opinion …
-FM
LikeLike
Fred,
From California;
Re-read my comment above that says opinion (editorial) is the place for that point of view.
Jules
LikeLike
Jules:
Then show me where the NY Times has violated that rule, and how, say, the Boston Herald has performed in a better way. If you can find the same story to draw the contrast, so much the better. I won’t prejudge what you’ll find.
-FM
LikeLike