Can the Globe really lay off "hundreds"?
This item in Metro Boston looks pretty alarming. But if the Boston Globe lays off "hundreds," as Metro claims, wouldn't that pretty much empty out the building? And wasn't it just yesterday that Joe Keohane reported at Boston Daily that the Globe had messed up a story about downsizing at Metro? And aren't the Globe and Metro corporate cousins? And isn't it a full moon tonight? (Close.)
The Newspaper Guild is taking the Metro report seriously. This one obviously bears watching. But I'm skeptical about the prospect of "hundreds of layoffs" — and I hope I'm proven right, given what it would mean for journalism (and journalists) in Boston.
Labels: Boston Globe, media business, Metro
posted by Dan Kennedy @ 6:22 PM
3 comments
3 Comments:
Let's cut the nonsense.
Without the Globe, this city has no reliable source of record and no effective watchdog.
The Herald? WBUR? The Metro? BostonNOW? Don't be silly. They take all of their important stories directly from the Globe, and rarely attribute.
This city needs this paper.
anonymous..
Come on now.
You said: "The Herald? WBUR? The Metro? BostonNOW? Don't be silly. They take all of their important stories directly from the Globe, and rarely attribute."
Examples please! Cite some instances please.
How much of the Globe is actually unique local enterprise reporting and not lifestyle fluff or glorified rewriting of press releases and police blotters into house style, or just ganked straight off the wire services?
Not saying the Herald is better, but you could shoot a lot of buffalo on Morrissey Street without killing off consequential journalism.
Post a Comment
<< Home