Tag: media business

Accountability in the post-newspaper age

Here is the video of Princeton University professor Paul Starr at last night’s program on “Public Accountability After the Age of Newspapers,” featuring Starr, Boston Globe editor Marty Baron and me. Update: Video of the entire program has been posted here.

The event was sponsored by the Rappaport Center for Law and Public Service and the Ford Hall Forum, and was held at Suffolk Law School. The moderator was law school professor Alasdair Roberts.

As you will see, one of Starr’s main themes was that, with the Internet having hollowed out the economic model for the newspaper business, government needs to step up with some type of subsidy — preferably an indirect subsidy created by tweaking the tax code, for instance. (Here is Starr’s recent congressional testimony on that subject.)

Before you start spluttering, Starr would not favor newspapers over other forms of media. And he pointed out that he’s not talking about anything new: Newspapers as we have come to know them got a huge assist in the earliest days of the republic through massive postal subsidies.

“Newspapers … have helped to create a self-aware urban public,” Starr said.

Baron disdained subsidies, saying, “I feel very strongly about our independence, and we have to maintain that.”

Instead, Baron suggested two governmental changes — a shift in the copyright law aimed at extracting money out of Google News and other aggregators, and an end to what he called the “antiquated” cross-ownership ban, which prevents media companies from owning a daily newspapers and a television or radio station in the same market.

Starr disagreed with Baron on copyright, noting that if linking without permission were made illegal (an extreme remedy that Baron did not actually suggest), the Web as we know it would soon cease to exist.

(Personally, I think the fair-use provision of copyright provides all the protection that newspapers need. If Globe executives want to opt out of Google, all they have to do is insert some code. They don’t for the simple reason that Google provides the Globe and other newspapers with a considerable amount of Web traffic.)

I talked about emerging alternative models at the local level, such as the New Haven Independent, CT News Junkie, Baristanet.com and the Batavian — projects that are too small to replicate the newspaper’s traditional mission in its entirety, but that have established themselves as vital news sources in a time of cutbacks.

A possible breakthrough for GlobalPost

David Carr’s report in the New York Times that Boston-based GlobalPost will partner with CBS News strikes me as a potentially significant development.

It’s unclear from Carr’s story exactly how much use CBS intends to make of GlobalPost’s journalism. But this could be just the boost that Phil Balboni, Charlie Sennott and company need to keep GlobalPost moving forward.

Particularly eye-catching were a couple of numbers. GlobalPost is reportedly attracting 400,000 unique visitors per month, which appears to impress Carr, but which strikes me as dangerously low — even if it’s as good as could be expected for a new project. (For purposes of comparison, the Boston Globe’s Web site, Boston.com, attracts between 4 million and 5 million unique visitors each month.)

Even worse, only a few hundred people have signed up for premium (paid) membership.

Anyone who’s perused the site, though, knows that GlobalPost’s journalism is both engaging and substantive. With network news divisions cutting their international reporting to the bone, GlobalPost has a real opportunity.

Guild treasurer addresses Totten charges

The following e-mail has been sent to the members of the Boston Newspaper Guild, the largest union at the Boston Globe. A copy was obtained by Media Nation earlier today.

September 25, 2009

Dear Colleague,

I understand that many questions have arisen from yesterday’s e-mail from the Executive Committee regarding alleged financial impropriety by BNG President Daniel Totten.

As treasurer, I have a fiduciary responsibility, which I take very seriously. I intend to fulfill that responsibility to the fullest extent.  I assure you that the Executive Committee is asserting due diligence on this matter. Once made aware of the situation, the appropriate steps were taken to ensure the safety of your union funds.

The second order of business was to notify you. It would have been preferable to notify you, and file the charges simultaneously. But time constraints did not allow that to happen. We took the position that notification was our next priority.

We are guided in this process by the constitution of the CWA [the Communications Workers of America], our parent union. The by-laws require that charges be filed within 60 days from the time an offense becomes known.  I intend to draft the charges and file them early next week with our Recording Secretary Kathy McCabe, as required by the by-laws. We are well within the 60 day time frame. After they are filed, members will be notified of the details of the charges.

I know that there may be more questions as this process moves forward. We are working with the guidance of legal counsel from both the CWA and the BNG. We will keep you updated as more information becomes available.

In closing, I ask for your patience.

In Unity,

Patrice Sneyd,
Treasurer BNG

What we still don’t know about Dan Totten

The Globe and the Herald today report that Boston Newspaper Guild president Dan Totten is suspected of signing someone else’s name as a countersignature on his paycheck. So here are a few follow-up questions:

  • Is this something he did regularly?
  • Did other union officials know it?
  • Have other union officials done the same?
  • Was this money to which he wasn’t entitled? (Surely he was entitled to his paycheck.)

To be sure, Totten, whose union is the Globe’s largest, shouldn’t have signed someone else’s name on a check, and it kind of sounds like he’s admitted that, according to the reports. But we still don’t know whether we’re talking about ill intent or just a seat-of-the-pants management style.

Meltdown at the Boston Newspaper Guild? (II)

More on the charges against Boston Newspaper Guild president Dan Totten, whose union is the Boston Globe’s largest, from the Boston Herald and the Globe.

I would be very cautious about drawing any conclusions based on the sketchy information that’s come out so far. This could be serious. Or it could be factional warfare.

Much more to come, I’m sure.

Meltdown at the Boston Newspaper Guild?

I will confess that I have been following contretemps within the Boston Newspaper Guild from afar, at best. But from the looks of an e-mail sent to Guild members this afternoon and obtained by the Phoenix’s Adam Reilly, it appears that a total meltdown is under way.

Dan Totten, the controversial president who led the union in talks with the Boston Globe’s corporate owner, the New York Times Co., during the spring and summer, has had his financial authority suspended, and an audit is being conducted, according to the e-mail from the Guild’s executive board.

This comes on top of a recall effort led by some Globe staffers who have accused Totten of inadequate communication — which another way of saying that the $10 million in concessions approved during the summer cut health benefits by considerably more than union members say they’d been led to believe.

Dropping the paper in order to save it

Maybe I’m part of the solution after all.

Media Nation has learned that the Sunday-versus-weekday revenue split at the Boston Globe may be more dramatic than I had previously heard. In 2008, the Monday-through-Friday editions brought in $113 million. The Saturday and Sunday papers’ take was $259 million — just a shade under 70 percent of the total.

I don’t have separate numbers for the Sunday paper alone. But, traditionally, Saturday papers are the smallest and least lucrative of the week, which means that the Sunday Globe accounts for the overwhelming majority of those weekend revenues. Several days ago, I wrote that the Sunday Globe was thought to account for 60 percent of revenues; it now appears that figure might have been low.

Given that, it makes sense for the Globe to push electronic distribution for its weekday papers as long as it’s done with an eye toward preserving the Sunday print edition. If the Globe could save on printing and distribution costs and entice weekday advertisers into the Sunday edition, its revenues might drop, but its profit margin could rise. (Or, since this is a newspaper we’re talking about, rematerialize.)

Also this morning, a couple of tidbits on the New York Times Co.’s efforts to sell the Globe:

• A bid by former Globe executive Stephen Taylor, a member of the family who sold the paper to the Times Co. in 1993, may be facing some obstacles. Word is that the group is still trying to line up investors. Not that those investors won’t be found, but it doesn’t sound like Taylor is ready to write a check just yet.

I also hear that the San Diego-based Platinum Equity group may be losing its ardor for the deal — which puts Taylor in a strong position if he can come up with the money. People are buzzing about the addition of former Globe publisher Ben Taylor (a cousin of Stephen’s) and longtime Boston journalist Mary McGrath to the Taylor group. But they’ve got to find the dough.

Given that the Taylors sold the Globe for $1.1 billion, and that they are now trying to buy it back (along with the Worcester Telegram & Gazette) for a mere fraction of that, you’d think money wouldn’t be a problem.

But the $1.1 billion was split among many, many members of the Taylor family. And investors these days aren’t exactly clamoring to get into the newspaper business.

• On the other hand, Poynter Institute media-business analyst Rick Edmonds writes that recent statements from the Times Co. suggesting it might hold onto the Globe are, in all likelihood, so much malarkey (via Ralph Ranalli at BeatthePress.org).

The reason: the Times Co. needs to take a loss by the end of 2009 in order to offset capital gains it’s realized by selling off other properties. In addition, Edmonds says:

I don’t think taxes alone would impel a sale. The Times Co. may also fear getting stuck with another round of operating losses (or find itself forced to lay off more employees, with renewed labor upheaval). Also, the company may have worn out its welcome both inside the paper and with Bostonians, who would welcome a Taylor family restoration.

As Ranalli notes, Edmonds is the guy who cracked the code earlier this year in explaining the Times Co.’s claim that the Globe was on track to lose $85 million. According to Edmonds’ analysis, though that number was real, the paper’s actual cash operating loss for 2009 would probably be around $20 million. All of a sudden, the Times Co.’s demand for $20 million in union concessions made sense.

When Times Co. chairman Arthur Sulzberger Jr. told Globe employees in August that the paper’s finances had improved and the company was in no hurry to sell, it struck me mainly as a ploy to drive up the price. Edmonds’ latest fits right in with that.

Photo (cc) by Tony the Misfit and republished here under a Creative Commons license. Some rights reserved.

Thinking about the post-newspaper era

Paul Starr
Paul Starr

Princeton University scholar Paul Starr, author of “The Creation of the Media” (2004) as well as a provocative essay in The New Republic earlier this year titled “Goodbye to the Age of Newspapers (Hello to a New Era of Corruption),” will speak at Suffolk Law School next Thursday, Oct. 1.

Delivering responses to Starr’s remarks will be Boston Globe editor Marty Baron and me.

Sponsored by the Rappaport Center for Law and Public Service and the Ford Hall Forum, the event will take place from 6:30 to 8 p.m. in Suffolk University’s Moot Court Room, at 120 Tremont St.

Admission is free, but you do need to sign up in advance. You can simply e-mail an RSVP to Senka Huskic at shuskic {at} suffolk {dot} edu. (Change {at} and {dot} to create a normal-looking e-mail address.)

Hope to see you there.