Hey, there! Log in / Register
Time Magazine puts Globe on deathwatch/digital list
By david_yamada on Mon, 03/09/2009 - 1:36pm
Time Magazine lists 10 major newspapers likely to fold or go digital:
http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1...
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Awww how am I going to line
Awww how am I going to line my birds cage now?
Yes. It's all fodder for the
Yes. It's all fodder for the moronic chorus' comment-humor. There are no people with families and professional pride at stake in this matter. Let's kick The Globe around some more, because it's easy to deride the things in which you cannot participate. When it's gone, the region is poorer for that, regardless of whether you like or hated some one feature on a Sunday, or whenever the newspaper last offended your lofty tastes and sensibilities.
Lofty tastes, nice I like
Lofty tastes, nice I like that. How do you know Im not a Herald reader? Would my tastes be as lofty then?
Its not MY fault they are failing, its not MY fault they fell behind the times, its not MY fault that its owned by the NTY company, its not MY fault they are no longer a nationally recognized newspaper with state of the art reporting.
The Globe has not managed to adapt with the times. It may be because they have the NYT and decision makers in NY holding them down. Maybe its the editors, I dont know but its not working. I knew people who would buy the NYT and not the Globe and then buy the Herald for local stuff. I dont know where the Globe went wrong but it did, and it disenfranchised the working class people who are now Herald readers, but failed to keep up with the pace of the young urban and middle aged suburban white collar readers it depended on to survive.
Ah... professional pride.
Ah... professional pride. What could be more important?
Out of all the businesses I've worked for in the last 35 years, thee only one still open is Kentucky Fried Chicken. The rest are gone, without a tear on your part.
Have you been reading Universal Hub?
We have been following, with much chagrin, the Globe's slow decline in the past year or so. There are plenty of people on here who are truly saddened to see a Boston institution wither away in the face of impending irrelevancy.
But you can only watch for so long with a Concerned And Sad look. After the Sidekick, "g", the consolidation of beloved sections and the decimation of the Sunday Globe, online snafus and layoffs, there's just no further Sad that can be had from this decay. The disappointment continues, but gallows humor comes about for a reason, y'know.
But you appear to be a fresh voice in the I AM OFFENDED AND LET ME LECTURE YOU ALL ABOUT IT camp. I think you got two, maybe three more of these in you before the novelty fades.
The bottom of my bird's cage
The bottom of my bird's cage is exactly the same size as the notices that the Globe keeps sending me asking me to resubscribe.
Leaving the Herald as Boston's only printed daily newspaper?
I shudder to think of that.
Perhaps the NYTimes Co. should reconsider its earlier refusal to sell the paper to Jack Welch & company?
I share your shudder
What we need is a reconfigured, reimagined Globe.
This just in...
Some time when you have a chance, buy both newspapers
on a weekday. Then scan the pages, and estimate what
percentage of a given page is advertising. As in, paid
advertising.
Looks to me that the Herald is running about 30-40%.
The Globe is about 10-15%.
I think that I agree with Time Magazine on this one.
What makes you think Welch would want to buy it now?
In any case, I see Time relied on that completely whacked out Barclay Capital report that said the Globe was worth no more than the Metro and less than the "Worchester papers," as opposed to the (possibly) more realistic Barclays Capital report that said it was worth closer to $200 million.
So Time sucks and is making crap up to come up with a top-10 list (dirty little online secret: News Web sites have become as addicted to top-10 lists as Cosmo - they work and drive up the page views).
That having been said, is it necessarily a bad thing if the Globe stopped printing on paper? Who doesn't read at least some Globe stories online now? And I say this as somebody who still gets the paper delivered and whose daughter once stood up to Deval Patrick over something she read in the Globe. Yes, there would be some awful economics involved - a fullpage ad in print still brings down a lot more money than the nearest online equivalent - but there would also be some savings (no more printing presses or delivery trucks and, yes, unfortunately, no more jobs for a lot of pressmen and truck drivers).
I like to read newspapers on paper
Maybe I'm just old-fashioned, but I enjoy sitting down with a newspaper, especially on a train or bus where I don't have Internet access. Even if I had a cellphone, who really likes to read long news articles on a cellphone?
I prefer to get my news as
I prefer to get my news as its happening, or on tv. I like to sit back on the weekends in a nice easy chair and read magazines that I get delivered to my apartment. The Globe should give me daily news on its website, and then have a twice a month magazine that it sends out for a price to my home with in depth local reporting, longer news stories, and bios. Thats how they can get me to be a customer.
value of the Globe
Adam, is the dollar value of the Globe the key question here, or is it the huge $ losses the paper is sustaining each week?
As a news consumer, I confess I no longer buy the Globe each day. At the same time, a few months ago I arranged for home delivery of the Times. So it's not as if I've given up on print newspapers. Rather, I find that the Globe no longer has the content that makes a daily purchase worthwhile. And now, its shrinking Sunday edition is no longer the treat it once was.
That said, I would happily purchase a Globe that is both slimmed down in size and redirected in content: (1) tabloid sized; (2) does a really great job on local/regional news; and (3) invites and includes a much greater diversity of opinion and contributors in its op-ed pages.
Not Time magazine
This is not Time magazine - it's the blog 24/7 Wall Street. Here's the original item. Time just happens to pick it up.
The blogger, Douglas McIntyre, is no dummy, but he enjoys being a provocateur. I wouldn't take this too seriously. I don't know anyone who takes the $20 million figure seriously. Can't seem to find the link, but didn't the Boston Business Journal recently report that the Globe is worth $120 million?
Closer to $200M
www.bizjournals.com/boston/stories/2009/02/16/dail...
Time or not Time? It's confusing...
Dan, I just saw that Yahoo carried the story too, but with the Time logo as well. I don't quite understand all the connections here.
Its all the mergers and
Its all the mergers and people trying to modernize for the future. Problem is all they are doing is slapping logos on stuff, and farming out work to others. The big brands are being watered down because you have no clue what is and what is not their stuff. Look at www.slate.com they are up to almost 7 different sites connected to the site, but are not the site, and they list the Onion, Newsweek, something called the Root, and Foreign Policy all on the right hand side of their stories as if they were all equal. The different blogs all have names, and some are not blogs, and stories that link to these other sites that they are associated with under the same big umbrella. It is very confusing to say the least.
Time should be more careful, then
about what externally-originated content they allow their logo to be attached to. The brand name implies a certain level of journalistic fact-checking.
Not just Time -- WBUR made the same mistake UH made
I heard it this morning before leaving for work -- WBUR reported that the Globe was on an endangered newspaper list put together by Time magazine. Compounding this initial sourcing error, the station then reported some rumors regarding future lay-offs.
And how strong is Time magazine?
One of its competitors, US News & World Report, basically dropped out of the newsweekly market and changed to monthly publication. Newsweek is said to be not in the best of health either. Both Time and Newsweek look pretty anemic compared to what they were a decade or two ago. They've both lost market share to The Economist.
absolutely right
The weekly newsmagazines are in big trouble as well. Heh, several articles in newspaper have reported as much.
In recent years, I've rediscovered the weeklies and subscribe to Newsweek and Time (and Economist as well -- heck, I'm an academic geek). I don't always get to read them closely, but subscription costs are very, very affordable. We've forgotten the value of old-fashioned middlebrow journalism -- the American newsweeklies represent that quality.
I'm too stupid
to read a newspaper. I like my news either on tv or in twitter-sized one or two line newsbites that don't make me have to think that much. If I read the Globe online, I like to ba able to click onto only the stories that interest me, like things about Paris Hilton and other newsmakers.
I also like my newscasters on tv to be, like, really young and good looking. When they are too old, they should be fired. I also like it when a newscaster says stuff like "her and her friends" in a news report. I can relate to them better that way.
But seriously, Boston is supposed to be some sort of intellectual hub with just one newspaper (and even worse, the Herald?).
I feel sorry for the numerous employees, not to mention the delivery truck drivers, who will be left unemployed. Also, the small business economy will not be well-served when small businesses, who cannot afford to advertise in online publications (and who really looks at those ads anyways?), lose customers that they would have otherwise had due to a print advertisement.