JK on NYT threats to shut down the Boston Globe

[MBS]

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/04/05/threat_to_globe_triggers_flood_of_feelings/

Yesterday, government officials and community leaders -- from the arts to government agencies -- called on the Globe and The New York Times Co. to save the newspaper.
"The thought of losing this newspaper is deeply disturbing,'' blogged Paul Levy, CEO of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. "It is the major source for investigative journalism that keeps the government, corporations, and, yes, nonprofits, honest and accountable. We simply cannot afford not to have it.''

"It's difficult to imagine Massachusetts without the Globe and I'm not going to even try,'' Kerry said in a statement. "The history of the Globe is punctuated by courageous investigative journalism and a soul and conscience that helped propel and sustain the causes of civil rights and peace during tumultuous years in our city.''

James Taylor, the Grammy-winning singer-songwriter from Massachusetts who subscribes to the Globe, said he is a major supporter of unions but hoped that all sides would find a way to save the newspaper.
"They must find a way to negotiate some way to continue,'' Taylor said. "The New England point of view, a seriously intellectual point of view, is something I can't imagine going away.''

News of the Globe's possible closure hit hard in the arts community, where the paper's coverage has been credited with helping fill theaters and concert halls and turning new institutions such as the Institute of Contemporary Art into a major attraction on the waterfront.

[ladym55]

1. This is so upsetting

As goofy as the Globe can get, I still read it everyday. (Well, I read it on-line most of the time because I live in Ohio!)

I can't imagine Boston with only the Herald.

But what got to me was reading the comments following the stories like this one posted ... I'm convinced that right-wingers live in their mothers' basements and wait for on-line stories so that can post nasty and irrelevant comments. I guess the Globe is bad because JK and Ted Kennedy are the Senators from Massachusetts. hmmm. And the Globe supports them. hmmm. And George Soros has something to do with the Globe. hmmm. Oh, and unions are evil. These come from a few stories I've read relative to the Globe and its threatened closure.

[MBS]

2. The Globe comments are almost always weird

and I think you're absolutely right about their basement origins. ;-)In a way, it's kind of nice to know that it's just not JK stories that elicit these wacko reactions. . it's EVERYthing in the Globe that has anything to do with politics or the so-called "liberal media".

[karynnj]

3. I had heard that the NYT was looking very very hard at how they could survive,

but I never thought it would extend to dropping the Boston Globe. (In fact, one would think that having both and maybe sharing Business, world and national news - while each keeping other parts that were local or made them who they were would help costs.)

These are very tough times for newspapers. If the paper can't be saved, the question is whether they might follow some papers in becoming web only - probably with just the Boston related material. The really scary thing is that if the business models don't work, that leads to only papers remaining being those like Richard Mellon Shaife's or Murdoch's - where political agenda, not journalism are the purpose. (Having left equivalents would not be any better.)

[TayTay]

4. Newspapers give away their content for free

That business model does not work. There is no way that any business can survive if they give away their product for free. The New York Times bought the Boston Globe, and a few other NE papers, for $1.1 billion. They are now hoping to get $150 - 200 million for the paper. (The Boston Globe, even with the reduction in ad rates, still brings in over $500 million in revenue each year.)

The http://www.businessinsider.com/2008/12/new-york-times-nyt-heres-how-much-cash-we-need">following article contains some info on just how dire the circumstances are for the NYTimes right now:

The New York Times Company (NYT) has taken positive steps to address its cash needs, but it still has more work to do. Unless/until it sells assets or cuts enough costs to become cash-flow positive, it will be dependent on the kindness of strangers for the next few years (and beyond). If the economy and NYTCo business continue to deteriorate, these strangers will likely become less and less willing to extend kindness on terms the company finds reasonable.

With the patient help of the folks at the NYT, we've put together a schedule of how much cash the NYTCo needs to come up with and when. Barring asset sales or further deterioration of the business, here's the bottom line for the next three years.

* 2009: $214 million of cash needed
* 2010: $546 million of cash needed
* 2011: $500 million of cash needed

(For the purposes of this analysis, we are assuming that the company uses the $400 million line of credit due in 2011 to fully pay down the $400 million line due five months from now, in May 2009. The company has already drawn down a portion of the second line. The company has not proofed these numbers, which contain some of our own estimates. Also, the company's liabilities extend well beyond 2011, so it will need additional cash in later years).