February 28, 2008
A memo from Globe publisher Steve Ainsley was posted at Romenesko earlier this afternoon. As DQM reported yesterday, the NY Times Co. will be cutting 80 jobs at the New England Media Group, with 60 of these coming at the Globe. 45 of these will be union jobs; no word on how many of them will come from the newsroom.
After Ainsley's memo was sent via email, editor Marty Baron sent out his own email detailing his plans to meet with employees over the next few days. The Boston Newspaper Guild sent one, too, discussing the terms of the buyout program in greater detail. Both emails follow.
Baron's email:
All,
I will be scheduling meetings over the next week to discuss the buyout program announced today by Steve Ainsley. I hope to have the first one late tomorrow afternoon. We'll set them for different times to accommodate varied work schedules.
Marty
The Boston Newspaper Guild's email:
TO: Boston Newspaper Guild Members
FROM: Daniel B. Totten & BNG Executive Committee
The Boston Globe has informed the Boston Newspaper Guild that there will be a 2008 Voluntary Resignation Program (buyout) to be mailed to members’ homes next week.
The Globe cites continued economic/revenue declines as the reason for “reducing labor costs” through the buyout.
Below are the Globe’s parameters for this buyout. Please review carefully along with the documents you will receive next week from the Globe.
If there are any data/personal information errors within your package, upon receipt please contact Steve Behenna in Human Resources at the Boston Globe at 617-929-3286.
The Globe has stated the employee reductions being sought total 80 across NE Media Group between Guild and Globe management, with 45 from the BNG at the Boston Globe.
III. Benefits:
§ Non-Job Guaranteed Employees:
Lump Sum based on 2 weeks’ pay per year of pension service
Health Insurance – 2 weeks per year of pension service
Option Payment – 10% of Lump Sum or extend company paid health insurance for the remainder of one year from resignation date
§ Job Guaranteed Employees:
Lump Sum based on 3 weeks’ pay per year of pension service
Health Insurance – <15 years = 8 months; 15 – <20 years = 10 months; 20+ years = 12 months (same as last year)
IV. Other Terms and Conditions
§ Financial planning assistance
§ Outplacement services
§ Retain right to reject based on need to replace position or special skills
§ Retain right to require employees to remain for up to 6 months
§ General release (Globe and union)
§ In general, employees will not be notified of acceptance/status until 3 days following end of program
§ No specific caps set in any department/position but will be limitations based on no-replacement guideline
V. Timeline
§ Plan begins March 7, 2008 (mail on or about March 4) and ends April 21, 2008
§ Revocation period ends no later than April 28th
§ Data sheets included
If there are any questions or concerns, please contact the BNG office at 617-773-3232.
February 28, 2008
In which I
argue A) that the paper's fight for a videotape that could explain the murder of Revere police officer Daniel Talbot is just, and B) that Suffolk DA Dan Conley will likely win the battle.
Also: who benefited from the NY Times's wannabe-John McCain-sexpose?
February 28, 2008
DQM
hears from several sources that the latest round of Boston
Globe buyouts will likely be announced tomorrow. Here are the numbers, based on
multiple conversations and with the caveat that nothing's official yet:
--80 jobs total will be cut at the New England Media Group, which includes the
Globe and the Worcester Telegram & Gazette;
--60 jobs will be cut at the Globe, with 40 to 45 union jobs going and the rest
coming from targeted management buyouts;
--Three
weeks severance pay per year of service will be offered to members of the union's “protected
list,” which guarantees lifetime employment to those hired during a certain period; two weeks severance pay per year of service will be offered to everyone else.
During
previous cutbacks under the New York Times Co., newsroom attrition at the Globe
has represented about 20 percent of total attrition at New England Newspaper
Group. (See, for example, 2007
and 2005.)
If this pattern holds--and there's no guarantee it will--the Globe can expect
to lose about 16 newsroom jobs this time around.
Compared to the Times's impending 100
newsroom cuts, that might not seem like much. But here’s the catch: coupled
with the two aforementioned reductions, 16 newsroom cuts would leave the Globe 75
newsroom jobs short of its total in the fall of 2005. And while the Times had
1332 newsroom jobs before the latest round of cuts was announced, the Globe is already
down to about 375.
More to come, obviously.
February 27, 2008
The National Review founder was 82.
Here's the AP's obituary,
here's the Times's, and
here's the National Review's.
Conservatives will remember Buckley as one of the prime movers behind the conservatism that dominated American politics for the last half-century. As a liberal, I wish Buckley's movement hadn't been quite so successful. But I also respect his willingness to critically assess Republican and conservative failures--a willingness that's
dangerously absent in too many of his ideological compatriots.
Here, for example, is Buckley
sizing up the Iraq War in 2006, in a column titled "It Didn't Work":
Our mission has failed because Iraqi animosities have proved
uncontainable by an invading army of 130,000 Americans. The great human
reserves that call for civil life haven't proved strong enough. No
doubt they are latently there, but they have not been able to contend
against the ice men who move about in the shadows with bombs and
grenades and pistols.
The Iraqis we hear about are first indignant, and then infuriated, that
Americans aren't on the scene to protect them and to punish the
aggressors. And so they join the clothing merchant who says that
everything is the fault of the Americans....
Mr. Bush has a very difficult internal problem here because to make the
kind of concession that is strategically appropriate requires a
mitigation of policies he has several times affirmed in high-flown
pronouncements. His challenge is to persuade himself that he can submit
to a historical reality without forswearing basic commitments in
foreign policy.
He will certainly face the current development as military leaders are
expected to do: They are called upon to acknowledge a tactical setback,
but to insist on the survival of strategic policies.
Yes, but within their own counsels, different plans have to be made. And the kernel here is the acknowledgment of defeat.
My condolences to Buckley's family and friends.
February 26, 2008
From today's Globe:
"Because of a reporting error, the obituary Sunday of author Robert L. 'Robin' Moore, who wrote 'The Green Berets' and 'The French Connection,' misspelled the first name of writer Ernest Hemingway."
I'd put that one on the editor, myself.
February 26, 2008
Hey, where did that photo of Barack Obama looking all Somali come from?
Matt Drudge, who helpfully disseminated the photo in question, cited "stressed Clinton staffers." Obama campaign manager David Plouffe blamed Hillary Clinton's campaign. Clinton campaign manager Maggie Williams didn't deny Plouffe's charge; instead, she issued a statement claiming that the Obama camp's ire evinced A) anti-Somali bias and B) a desire to avoid serious issues and sew discord. Later, Clinton communications czar Howard Wolfson did offer a denial, kind of, saying: "I'm not aware that anyone has sent any such e-mail."
Let's suppose, for the sake of the argument, that this photo was sent to Drudge by an overzealous Clinton staffer who received absolutely no permission or encouragement from campaign higher-ups. Even if this is the case, Williams' statement was preposterous. Of course the Obama campaign is going to be pissed about this photo making the rounds, what with that whole Muslim-secret-agent rumor (which, incidentally, a couple Clinton volunteers in Iowa helped promulgate).
To suggest this indicates a lack of cultural sensitivity, or a lack of substance, or a cynical attempt to foment conflict is just absurd. In fact, by responding the way she did, Williams pretty much guaranteed that, wherever the photo came from, the whole flap is going to end up hurting Hillary's campaign. (It might hurt Obama down the road, if he's the nominee, but that's another story.)
Which brings us to the New York Times. Bizzarely, the paper actually seems to see Somali-photo-gate as a win for Hillary.
After describing the photo in question, and quoting Plouffle's claim that the Clinton camp was engaging in "shameful, offensive fear-mongering," reporters Patrick Healy and Julie Bosman close their treatment of the subject as follows:
It has not been independently verified that the photograph came from the Clinton campaign.
Mrs. Clinton’s new campaign manager, Maggie Williams, recently appointed to bring a tougher hand to the operation, issued a withering reply, not taking responsibility for the photograph but attacking the Obama campaign for suggesting that the photograph amounted to fear-mongering imagery [emph. added].
"Enough,” Ms. Williams’s statement began. "If Barack Obama’s campaign wants to suggest that a photo of him wearing traditional Somali clothing is divisive, they should be ashamed. Hillary Clinton has worn the traditional clothing of countries she has visited and had those photos published widely."
"This is nothing more than an obvious and transparent attempt to distract from the serious issues confronting our country today and to attempt to create the very divisions they claim to decry," she added. "We will not be distracted."
The Times: all the tendentious political analysis that's fit to print!
February 25, 2008
...With Jim Braude, that is. At 8 pm tonight on
NECN, I'll be discussing a whole mess of stuff with Braude and Michael Goldfarb of the Weekly Standard, including Obama-mailing-gate, Somali-dress-gate, and Times-on-McCain-gate. Not otherwise occupied? Tune in!
February 25, 2008
"Deval Patrick said today he is also ruling out serving as Barack Obama's running mate should Obama win the Democratic nomination."That's from a
new AP story in which Patrick says he wouldn't leave the governorship to join an Obama cabinet.
The second point is interesting. The first is utterly absurd.
Still no word on whether Patrick would play for the Red Sox if offered a contract.
February 25, 2008
A couple weeks ago, I
argued that the press should pipe down about fears for Barack Obama's safety unless there was something new and significant to report.
So much for that. Instead, coverage of said fears actually seems to have
increased. The AP wrote about
black voters' worries. The Star-Telegram
reported, in a piece that got prominent play on the Drudge Report, that the Secret Service had ordered Dallas police to stop screening for weapons an hour before Obama's recent appearance at Reunion Arena. And today, the New York Times
discusses at length fears that what happened to Bobby Kennedy and Martin Luther King might happen to Obama as well.
Of the three, only the Star-Telegram story strikes me as worth writing, since what happened in Dallas raises real concerns about just how effective Obama's Secret Service protection is. In contrast, the AP and Times stories don't do much more than rehash stuff we already know (although the Times does tell us that Obama's Secret Service nickname is "Renegade," and that he and his Secret Service handlers regularly play basketball together).
In one significant respect, though, the AP and Times stories differ from previous coverage: they actually focus specificially on this issue rather than treating it as a subtopic. If we're lucky, major news outlets will allow themselves one big story on the topic and then leave it alone.
One more thing: I'm fully aware that, in writing about the subject when and how I did, I may actually have helped pave the way for subsequent flurry of stories.
February 22, 2008
Since I routinely gripe about things the Boston Globe is or isn't doing, I also try to acknowledge the paper's finer moments when appropriate.
Now is one such time. The biggest political story at the start of the week was the resemblance between Barack Obama's rhetoric and Deval Patrick's. The biggest political story at the end of the week was John McCain's relationships with lobbyist Vicki Iseman and Paxson Communications, one of her clients--and, of course, the New York Times's controversial
examination of those relationships.
In both cases, the Globe beat everybody else to the punch. Globe reporter Scott Helman wrote a weirdly prescient
piece focused on similarities between Obama and Patrick in April. And former Globe reporter and editor Walter Robinson explored McCain's ties to Paxson in detail--
here,
here and
here--way back in 2000. (The latter story was written with Anne Kornblut, now of the Washington Post.)
Impressive stuff. And, taken in tandem, another strong
argument for the Globe maintaining its national ambitions.
P.S.--This Boston.com
chat, in which Robinson discusses his coverage and the Times's, is a pretty interesting read.
February 21, 2008
Not surprisingly, the Republican National Committee has seized on the
McCain Story Flap as A) proof of the media's liberal bias and B) a handy fundraising tool.
The full text of RNC chairman Mike Duncan's email (titled "Shameless Liberal Media") follows. But before you read, ask yourself: does Duncan's argument square with
this? Or
this? Or
this?
Dear Adam,
The New York Times has proven once again that the liberal mainstream media will do whatever it takes to put Senator Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama in the White House.
From the beginning of Campaign 2008, liberal media pundits have fawned over the Democrat presidential candidates while ignoring their lack of substance on the issues. You can be certain that as the campaign heats up they will continue to mislead voters with their anti-Republican agenda.
Adam, Republicans must fight back against the mainstream media's clear liberal bias -- and we need your help to do it.
Please make an urgent secure online contribution of $1,000, $500, $100, $50, or $25 to help the RNC get our responsible message of lower taxes, a strong national defense, and limited government past the liberal media filter and directly to the voters.
Thank you in advance for your support.
Best Wishes,
Robert M. "Mike" Duncan
Chairman, Republican National Committee
February 21, 2008
This is very interesting: the Boston Globe--which, as you may have heard, is owned by the New York Times Company--took a pass on running today's controversial Times piece on John McCain. Instead, the Globe printed a similar story that ran in the Washington Post.
NOTE: I'd originally written that the Globe not only A) chose the Post's story over the Times's, but B) edited out the Post's own reference to an alleged romantic liaison between McCain and lobbyist Vicki Iseman (see below). However, Foon Rhee, the Globe's deputy national political editor, has informed me that the Post story that hit the wires last night
didn't include such a reference; instead, it was added today to the
version currently on the Post's Web site.
So let me correct myself. It's the
Post's original story that's a confusing read--not the Globe's rendition of the Post's story--because you can't tell why the McCain camp is so upset about the Times story.
That said, I'd still call the Globe's decision to print the Post's story rather than the Times's a tacit rebuke of its big corporate sibling. And I'd still say the decision was a smart one.
But the Globe's tacit rebuke of its big corporate sibling didn't stop there. The suggestion of a romantic relationship between McCain and lobbyist Vicki Iseman appears in the second paragraph of the Times's story. The Post puts it in paragraph four and downplays it considerably (in part by citing the Times's piece, which was posted first). The Globe, however, eliminates it entirely.
As a result, the Globe's version can be a bit confusing if read in isolation. (It's not clear, for example, why McCain advisor Charles R. Black is so worked up about the the Times "smear[ing]" McCain and spreading "false gossip.") Still, given the avalanche of criticism triggered by the Times's report, I'd say the Globe made a smart call.
February 21, 2008
Many smart things have already been written about that
weird John McCain story the New York Times posted yesterday--see
Romenesko for a rundown--but the key point, to my mind, is the one raised by
Sam Stein of the Huffington Post. Namely: if the Times had run this story before McCain locked up the GOP nomination, how might the race have changed?
Stein closes his piece with this quote from Ray Buchanan, a former advisor to Mitt Romney--who ran as, among other things, a squeaky-clean family man. (Buchanan was speaking to CNN.)
Oh, there's no question it would have impacted [the race[. I think John McCain would not have won this primary if there's
any evidence whatsoever that surfaces that these stories are true...
McCain's lawyers went into the New York Times and said do not touch
this story. Do not move on this story. And there's no question this was
beneficial to McCain to hold the story. No question. His nomination was
very much threatened by this story if it broke too early. So what they
did was hurt the Republican Party by not allowing this to be aired
properly at the time they received this information.
Whether the Times hurt the GOP is debatable. Whether it hurt Romney isn't.
February 21, 2008
You can find it
here.
Also:
looming cutbacks at the Globe.
February 19, 2008
What's really remarkable about the ongoing Barack Obama "plagiarism"
scandal is this: Obama's campaign had ample reason to think his channeling of Deval Patrick would be an issue--and they kept doing it anyway.
Let's recap. The New York Times Magazine
discussed the rhetorical resemblance between Obama and Patrick in April 2007. The Boston Globe picked up the subject a
couple weeks later--starting with an example that anticipates, to an eerie degree, what just got Obama into trouble. (Prescient stuff, Scott Helman!)
Then, last month, the Globe
broached the subject again. So did the Associated Press (I'm still looking for the link.) And after
itemizing seven specific Obama-Patrick parallels, I warned that this striking resemblance could erode the electorate's faith in Obama's authenticity.
But Obama kept right on going--either because he didn't think this issue would blow up, or because he literally couldn't stop.
Which brings us to the question of just how important political consultant David Axelrod is. Because both Patrick and Obama are Axelrod clients, the Clinton camp's plagiarism charge rings false. The real question, I think, is where Axelrod's thoughts and convictions end and Obama's and Patrick's begin.
Or, to put it differently: could Obama
not sound like Patrick if he wanted to?