The Phoenix foreshadows the Globe's inner woes

While the situation between the Boston Globe and its remaining union, Boston's Newspaper Guild, continues to drag on and be increasingly frustrating, I have pulled a column run by the Boston Phoenix on April 30, the day before the feverish murmurings began (both by the Globe and the parasitic Boston Herald).

This column provides insight that few in the business were having on the fateful day but that, after the climatic weekend, more people are beginning to realize. The column foretold union leadership problems and also had a juicy paragraph about how the Guild handed out surveys to its members to get suggestions about how the members would suggest cutting costs — but the Guild went ahead with its own cost-cutting measures before the surveys could even be tabulated.

The most interesting part of the column, however, was its details on the "Save the Globe" rally. On the surface, such a rally seems like a great idea, but examples of how the Globe and its employees went about calling to save the newspaper are suspect and ultimately saddening for journalists, for they show that many within the industry are clueless about what is really at stake, and thus they will probably miss the boat and kill what's left of journalism.

At the rally, there were insinuations that the Globe's suffering was a First Amendment issue, which is dead wrong; the Globe is going out of business because the common man has stopped paying advertising dollars, not because the government has done anything. Another employee talked about not liking the Internet; one testimonial was about how a guy didn't think he could find another job.

Basically, the presentation given by the Globe showed it was out of touch with the real issue at hand — preserving real journalism and finding a way to make it viable for generations. Journalism needs to survive on the Internet and with new business models, and that's what Globe supporters are not realizing through all this. They are fretting over details to try to save the paper today, but they're still clueless as to how to keep the paper running for years to come. Hint: it's not by employing a lot of people to make a great product people are loath to buy. And it's not about mislabeling the problem or playing the victim, whether the oppressor is the Web, the job market or the New York Times.

One last note: It's easy to hate the New York Times for giving this ultimatum, but kudos to the Times for thinking ahead. They know serious changes need to be made, and they're making bold moves, even if it's not easy. Let's hope they cut some of their own fat in the next round of progress, but until then, all journalists are in this together. Save the ship for the future, not just for today.

Boston Globe coverage
Boston Herald coverage