I like reading the Boston Globe. I actually have it delivered to my house (and have done so for about 15 years), and I read it every day during breakfast and lunch. I talk about the articles with my friends and my husband, and I clip comics and recipes and reviews for later reference. Boston.com is my go-to site for updates on sports and local news during the afternoon and evening.
Come Friday, May 1, the Globe may stop publishing. Its owner, the New York Times Corporation, says the Globe is losing too much money, and they will shut it down on 5/1/09 unless they get tens of millions of dollars in concessions from the unions to cut costs. It won't put them in the black, it will simply reduce the hemorrhaging to a slow but steady leak.
In an odd but fortunate coincidence, my subscription, normally paid a year in advance, expires on May 3rd. I was actually called at the end of March to renew it, but decided to postpone it because I had just made a few large charges and I wanted to let the dust settle. About 3 days after that call, the news about the possible shutdown was announced.
DSR and I immediately started talking about options, and about whether or not the age of the printed newspaper has passed. Part of this equation is really out of my control - the NYTC will shut down the Globe, or they won't. Or they could do it later if they don't do it now. Shutting it down would be a real shame - the reporting isn't what it used to be, and yes, there's a very blatant liberal bias, but there are still glimmers of its glory and it's HEAPS better than the other Boston paper, the Herald. But as I've thought about this over the last couple of weeks, I've discovered that while I'd miss the printed page, I could survive without it. What I *would* miss is the local reporting of events and sports.
One of the Globe columnists asked readers to weigh in on the subject about two weeks ago. Many said they'd be willing to pay a small subscription fee for access to Boston.com, and I agree with that. The price factor seemed to be about $5/month for everything, vs micro-payments. I hate the micro-payments idea. I like to browse, and I will frequently skim the pages and zero in on something, scan the article until I feel I understand the content, and move on. I read about 1/4 of the articles in-depth.
The downside of being an information addict is that I sometimes fall behind on reading if I'm away or if I'm very busy, and the papers stack up. I'm reluctant to toss them until I've at least skimmed them, even as they get older and older. It's actually been a positive thing that my stack only covers a small table - it's been much worse.
Even when I'm keeping up, newspapers make up a fair portion of my recycling. I can't imaging not recycling or reusing them.
But - what if I didn't take possession of the dead trees to begin with? Hmm.
I also like the news sources some of my other friends look at, but I don't make the time for those sources because I'm trying not to fall behind on the Globe.
DSR's immediate suggestion was to switch to me getting all of my news electronically. But I like reading the paper while I have breakfast, and I can't eat in the computer room. The answer we've hit upon is a NetBook that will be set up on the sunroom table for me. I can browse through Boston.com or the other news sites quite easily that way, and it actually looks like it's going to be a win in many ways: no newspapers to need recycling, more news sources available at my fingertips, updated stories, etc. Amazingly, it's going to be cheaper than 1 year of a subscription to the printed version of the Globe, *and* I'll still have the NetBook after that year as well as having the use of it for other things during that period.
So I will be paying for one more month of the Globe. I feel a bit melancholy about it, but I'm also excited about the new way I'm going to be getting my information. I know I'm contributing to the demise of newsprint, but maybe it's time. I do hope Boston.com will live on, though - it's very much needed.
Come Friday, May 1, the Globe may stop publishing. Its owner, the New York Times Corporation, says the Globe is losing too much money, and they will shut it down on 5/1/09 unless they get tens of millions of dollars in concessions from the unions to cut costs. It won't put them in the black, it will simply reduce the hemorrhaging to a slow but steady leak.
In an odd but fortunate coincidence, my subscription, normally paid a year in advance, expires on May 3rd. I was actually called at the end of March to renew it, but decided to postpone it because I had just made a few large charges and I wanted to let the dust settle. About 3 days after that call, the news about the possible shutdown was announced.
DSR and I immediately started talking about options, and about whether or not the age of the printed newspaper has passed. Part of this equation is really out of my control - the NYTC will shut down the Globe, or they won't. Or they could do it later if they don't do it now. Shutting it down would be a real shame - the reporting isn't what it used to be, and yes, there's a very blatant liberal bias, but there are still glimmers of its glory and it's HEAPS better than the other Boston paper, the Herald. But as I've thought about this over the last couple of weeks, I've discovered that while I'd miss the printed page, I could survive without it. What I *would* miss is the local reporting of events and sports.
One of the Globe columnists asked readers to weigh in on the subject about two weeks ago. Many said they'd be willing to pay a small subscription fee for access to Boston.com, and I agree with that. The price factor seemed to be about $5/month for everything, vs micro-payments. I hate the micro-payments idea. I like to browse, and I will frequently skim the pages and zero in on something, scan the article until I feel I understand the content, and move on. I read about 1/4 of the articles in-depth.
The downside of being an information addict is that I sometimes fall behind on reading if I'm away or if I'm very busy, and the papers stack up. I'm reluctant to toss them until I've at least skimmed them, even as they get older and older. It's actually been a positive thing that my stack only covers a small table - it's been much worse.
Even when I'm keeping up, newspapers make up a fair portion of my recycling. I can't imaging not recycling or reusing them.
But - what if I didn't take possession of the dead trees to begin with? Hmm.
I also like the news sources some of my other friends look at, but I don't make the time for those sources because I'm trying not to fall behind on the Globe.
DSR's immediate suggestion was to switch to me getting all of my news electronically. But I like reading the paper while I have breakfast, and I can't eat in the computer room. The answer we've hit upon is a NetBook that will be set up on the sunroom table for me. I can browse through Boston.com or the other news sites quite easily that way, and it actually looks like it's going to be a win in many ways: no newspapers to need recycling, more news sources available at my fingertips, updated stories, etc. Amazingly, it's going to be cheaper than 1 year of a subscription to the printed version of the Globe, *and* I'll still have the NetBook after that year as well as having the use of it for other things during that period.
So I will be paying for one more month of the Globe. I feel a bit melancholy about it, but I'm also excited about the new way I'm going to be getting my information. I know I'm contributing to the demise of newsprint, but maybe it's time. I do hope Boston.com will live on, though - it's very much needed.