Globe to close foreign bureaus

The Boston Globe announced some sad news today: The paper is closing its foreign bureaus. Media Nation received word a little while ago, but Romenesko has already posted both this Globe item and a memo to the staff by editor Marty Baron, the text of which appears below:

To the staff:

As you know, this is a period of hard choices for us. Today I am advising you of one of them: We will no longer maintain a network of foreign bureaus.

We currently have four superb, supremely dedicated colleagues in three bureaus overseas. They will be given the opportunity to return here for other positions, and the bureaus will be closed.

Continuing to bear the expense of our foreign bureaus would have required us to reduce staffing by a dozen or so positions beyond those already announced. We concluded that it would be unwise to meet the newsroom’s financial targets by making additional staff reductions.

We will continue to send reporters and photographers abroad on special projects and selected major events. Our budget for this year sets aside money for that purpose.

Foreign coverage has been a point of special pride in our newsroom, ever since the Globe established its first overseas bureau in the mid-1970s. Since then, the Globe has asked its foreign correspondents to provide stories of distinction, and they have always delivered. Often, our colleagues have put their own lives at risk in the important, noble task of bringing the world closer to our readers. They are fiercely committed to their work, and they have been brave beyond measure.

Many other regional newspapers, some larger than ours, have taken similar steps in recent years. Our decision came only after a careful review by the publisher of various options that would allow us to stay within budget. All along, a guiding principle was to secure the resources required for local coverage and for journalism that has the most direct impact on our readers.

We remain positioned for another year of outstanding journalism, with robust local coverage, ambitious plans for the presidential campaign, and continued strength in sports, arts, business, features, Washington coverage, and many other areas. You can also expect even more aggressive initiatives online.

In coming weeks, I will be talking with you more about all of this.

Marty

Affected are Thannasis Cambanis and Anne Bernard, who cover the Middle East from the Jerusalem bureau; Indira Lakshmanan, based in Bogotá, Colombia; and Colin Nickerson, based in Berlin.

That this was inevitable makes it no less depressing. As many media observers, including me, have been writing for some time, it no longer makes sense for regional papers like the Globe to cover international news in any sort of comprehensive way — not when the New York Times, the BBC et al. are just a click away.

The Globe’s foreign coverage has been distinguished. Retired editor Matt Storin once told me that his philosophy was for the Globe to be like the New Yorker — to cover the news, but also to seek out the offbeat stories that the Times and the Washington Post weren’t covering. In recent years you could see that in John Donnelly’s outstanding reportage from Africa (Donnelly moved to back to Washington last year). And only yesterday, the Globe fronted a fine Lakshmanan piece on Panama City’s old quarter.

The Globe’s Elizabeth Neuffer — best known for her work in the former Yugoslavia — was one of the first reporters to die covering the war in Iraq. In 2002, Baron flew to Israel after Anthony Shadid — then with the Globe, now with the Post — was shot in Ramallah.

Not too many years ago, folks at regional papers like the Globe wanted to compete with the national media by having their own people in Washington, across the country and overseas. Unfortunately, the new media landscape puts a premium on local, local, local.

But that doesn’t mean something hasn’t been lost. Take a look at these special reports on the Globe’s Web site. Baron says the Globe’s foreign coverage won’t disappear entirely. But it’s not going to be the same. Not even close.

Update: Michael Gee disagrees with my assessment, and backs it up with some sharp observations about his years at the Herald. Unfortunately, he lumps Media Nation in with … Jack Welch!

Jack Welch’s local vision

Retired GE chairman Jack Welch has glimpsed the future of metropolitan newspapers like the Globe, even if he’s not the guy I want to see implementing that vision.

“You’ve got to make the newsroom not control the world,” Welch said on CNBC, according to this account in the Herald by Jesse Noyes. “I’m not sure local papers need to cover Iraq, need to cover local events. They can be real local papers. And franchise, purchase from people very willing to sell to you their wire services that will give you coverage.”

That still sounds horrifying to my aging, nostalgia-attuned ears. But he’s right. Now that the New York Times, the Washington Post, the BBC and the like are just a click away, the Boston Globe, the Philadelphia Inquirer, the Miami Herald et al. have little stake in covering national and international news except when there’s a local angle.

The Star Trib and the Globe

The Minneapolis Star Tribune‘s value meltdown would seem to auger well for the Jack Welch/Jack Connors group’s hopes of buying the Boston Globe from the New York Times Co. The McClatchy chain is selling the Star Trib to a private equity firm for $530 million, which is about half what it paid eight years ago.

Jaws dropped when Welch and Connors proposed paying the Times Co. about half the $1.1 billion it laid out when it purchased the Globe in 1993. Now, as Adam Reilly of the Phoenix observes in considering the Star Trib situation, “Sounds a lot like the Globe to me.”

But I think the Star Trib sale means the Times Co. is less likely to unload the Globe right now, not more. Why?

Consider this story in the St. Paul Pioneer Press (via Romenesko). According to media and financial analysts, the private equity firm that bought the Star Trib is likely to engage in some serious cost-cutting and then sell out in three to five years. Obviously, the new owners think they’ll be able to get a lot more than $530 million when the time comes to sell.

The Times Co. has repeatedly said that the Globe is not for sale. My guess is that the Sulzbergers have a similar strategy. As much as we may lament the cost-cutting that’s already taken place at the Globe, it could get a lot smaller in the years to come. Indeed, with increasing numbers of readers getting their news online, the major value that the Globe brings to the table is its local coverage; everything else is going to be looked at very closely.

A more-local strategy; a better idea of how to make money online; and hopes for an improved advertising climate thanks to such developments as the arrival of Nordstrom to offset the loss of those Jordan Marsh and Filene’s ads, and Times Co. executives may well believe they’ll find themselves dealing from a position of strength a few years from now.

If they were to sell right now, they’d be selling out of weakness. Which is why I think they won’t do it.