Here’s something I hadn’t seen before. The Boston Globe’s lead story today, on the backlog of cases at the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination, is from WBUR, one of the city’s two major public media outlets. It strikes me as semi-smart.
On the one hand, I’m all in favor of collaboration. On the other, I assume that the overlap between the Globe’s and WBUR’s audiences is extensive. Some Globe readers might not appreciate paying for something they already heard on the radio or read at WBUR.org.
Next time I might think twice about leading the paper with it. Maybe run it below the fold, as we used to say back when print mattered. Overall, though, it’s a good, important story that deserves the wider distribution the Globe can give it.
Discover more from Media Nation
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
bobsprague1943
I did a double-take on that, too. Perhaps an editor working a holiday forgot that Todd Wallach had mved from The Globe to ‘BUR.
NahantJim Walsh
We support both BUR and GBH in our household (modestly) and we also subscribe to both the New York Times and the Post. But, it is the Globe that I read most closely every day. Therefore, there’s nothing remarkable about reading something in the Globe that also has been featured in one of the others. I remember “the old days” when the Globe has a slew of foreign correspondents and a big DC presence. Those days won’t be back. The current combination of sources gives one more depth all around than any one of them. I do wish the Phoenix and the bevy of local papers nurtured by folks like Bill Wasserman were still around. Was 1980 the high point of all that, Dan?
Dan Kennedy
Ah, 1980, when we were young and everything was wonderful.