The Boston Globe is having quite a financial fling with the University of Massachusetts these days. First it was this “Special Supplement to the Boston Globe” that ran this past Sunday.
As the hardreading staff noted, that’s “Special” as in “Advertising,” which the Globe would have stated explicitly if it cared to be honest with its readers.
Now comes this doozie in today’s edition of the $tately local broadsheet (photos courtesy of the Missus).
That was followed by this:
Along with this:
And this:
At least they labeled the wraparound “Advertisement,” eh? But it’s the leasing out of the Globe banner that’s the problem here. Funny thing is, ten years ago the Globe rejected that kind of sellout. From the January 19, 2004 Boston Business Journal:
Globe rejected a front-page advertisement for JetBlue
The Boston Globe apparently rejected a proposal by JetBlue Airways Corp. to run the same full front-page advertisement touting the airline’s arrival at Logan International Airport that the Boston Herald published last week amid voluble criticism.
The Boston Herald ended up running the ad on Jan. 7, catching considerable flak for accepting an ad that one source valued at least at $25,000. But a JetBlue official told the Boston Business Journal that the Globe also was approached with the same opportunity.
And turned it down, sort of.
Globe spokesman B. Maynard Scarborough said he believed the newspaper’s advertising department discussed selling a “wrap” to JetBlue, but no deal was reached. Such a wrap would not have contained mock editorial content, he said, adding the Globe does not sell Page 1 advertising and has no plans to do so.
Well, that’s now “inoperative,” as they say.
Here’s what the Herald did run (via WBUR’s Bob Oakes).
That’s the actual front page on the left, the ad front page on the right.
And while we’re tripping down Memory Lane with local journos, here’s what the redoubtable Dan Kennedy wrote in the Boston Phoenix Media Log back then:
[A]t the very least, the front should have been prominently labeled as an ad. This isn’t just a violation of the traditional wall separating business and editorial – this is an out-and-out demolition.
Today at Media Nation, Dan wrote this: “If the Globe hasn’t crossed a line, perhaps it has moved the line past where we always thought it was.”
The flirty local tabloid also ran this big wet kiss alongside the endorsement.
As of today, that goes double for the stately local broadsheet. (The redoubtable Dan Kennedy helpfully compiles the Globe’s previous GOP gubernatorial flings here.)
Coakley’s response? The oldest (and lamest) dodge in the books (via USA Today):
Coakley’s campaign released a statement Sunday touting the endorsements she has received from labor groups and other organizations, while making reference to her bid for history. She is seeking to become the first woman elected governor of Massachusetts. “We know that the only endorsement that matters is the endorsement of the people of Massachusetts on Nov. 4,” said the Coakley statement in the Lowell Sun.
The editorial cartoon rumpus at the Boston Herald has arrived at its inevitable destination: A sitdown between Herald editors and the local chapter of the NAACP.
The Boston Herald will work with the Boston chapter of the NAACP to address the issues raised by the publication of an editorial page cartoon last week.
The cartoon, focusing on security breaches at the White House, depicted President Obama brushing his teeth as an intruder suggested he try watermelon-flavored toothpaste. Cartoonist Jerry Holbert said he intended no racial overtones and apologized as did the newspaper.
The NAACP yesterday called the Herald apologies “inadequate” and said the publication of the cartoon on the paper’s opinion page “reopened the wounds of race” in Boston. It requested a series of remedies including a community meeting to discuss the editorial page cartoon.
That would be Boston NAACP president Michael Curry in the subhead, who got this response from a Herald statement:
”The Herald has made it clear that this editorial page cartoon was unacceptable in its insensitivity and racial overtones . . . We look forward to continuing our partnership with the NAACP and meeting with them to address the concerns that arose as a result.”
But crosstown at the Boston Globe, the Herald seemed to have a very different message for the NAACP.
Curry said that Herald executives told him they were ready to hear from the black community but had not yet committed to pursuing any action beyond a meeting.
“They said to me that they’re willing to do whatever and they’re expecting to hear from the community at this forum,” he said. “I think what’s important here is they’ve said no to nothing at this point.”
Then again, they’ve also said yes to nothing, yes?
On Wednesday Boston Herald editorial cartoonist Jerry Holbert sparked a watermelon-flavored rumpus with this ill-advised (and ill-supervised) drawing in the clueless local tabloid.
Much mishegoss ensued.
(The redoubtable Dan Kennedy has a smart recap of the fiasco here.)
Whoopi Goldberg Defends Boston Herald Cartoonist on ‘The View’
In response to a controversial cartoon that appeared in yesterday’s Boston Herald, ”The View” co-host Whoopi Goldberg defended the cartoonist on today’s show.
Following information that the Sept. 19 White House fence-jumper made it to the East Room of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue rather than just past the North Portico doors as earlier reported, Jerry Holbert‘s cartoon contribution in yesterday’s print edition portrayed President Barack Obama brushing his teeth with a man behind him asking, “Have you tried the watermelon toothpaste?” and the caption “White House Invader Got Farther Than Previously Thought.”
[Thursday] morning, Goldberg addressed the controversy on “The View,” saying “I don’t believe he did it on purpose. I don’t think he was thinking about it.”
Here’s the clip:
Just for the record: Rosie Perez was having none of it.
So, to recap for the umpteenth- hell, just see here.
The question is this: How did Marty’s Mash Note to the Boston Public Schools wind up as a full-page ad in last Wednesday’s Boston Globe?
On Friday, CommonWealth Magazine (which came late – but smart – to the party) reported the issue thusly:
THE BOSTON GLOBE FOUNDATION donated a full-page ad in Wednesday’s newspaper to Boston Mayor Marty Walsh so he could thank the staff of the Boston Public Schools at the close of the school year.
Ellen Clegg, who heads the foundation, said the mayor personally asked Globe CEO Mike Sheehan for the ad space and the foundation provided it because the message was in keeping with the organization’s focus on education and literacy.
But Ms. Clegg had previously told the hardreading staff this:
The Globe Foundation donated the ad to the Boston Public Schools pro bono, as a public service. When we get a request for support from organizations that fit the Foundation’s mission, we work with the Globe’s advertising department to donate pro bono print ads in space that would normally go to unpaid “house ads.” It’s a great way to engage with the community. Other recent examples of pro bono ads include the One Fund and the MLK Summer Scholars Program, which the Foundation co-sponsors with John Hancock.
C’mon – “[donating] an ad to the Boston Public Schools pro bono” and kowtowing to the mayor of Boston aren’t even in the same zip code.
Regardless, Ms. Clegg perpetuated the split decision yesterday in these post-CommonWealth answers to our pre-CommonWealth questions, which took her initial explanation at face value:
• When you donated the ad to the Boston Public Schools, did you know it would take the form of a letter from Mayor Walsh?
Yes.
• Who did the creative/production of the ad?
The Globe’s advertising department.
• Given the ad’s content, did you have any concerns that it would appear you donated the ad to Mayor Walsh, raising questions about the appearance of compromising the Globe’s arm’s-length relationship with him?
The Globe’s newsroom is independent from the business side of the organization, and from the Globe Foundation, and had no involvement here.
I’m sure you’ve seen the newsroom’s recent scrub of Mayor Walsh’s hiring record (link below). I have confidence that our journalists will continue to scrutinize public officials and powerful institutions, including City Hall.
Frankly, we’re more interested in scrubbing Ms. Clegg’s record of telling the hardreading staff one thing and CommonWealth another.
From the start of John Henry’s dual ownership of the Boston GlobeSox, the paper pretty consistently ignored conflicts of interest in his business dealings with the Menino administration (see here and here). If Henry is now dancing to Marty Walsh’s tune, he should own up to that, too.
Last Wednesday, this full-page ad appeared in the Boston Globe:
That got the headscratching staff to wondering who paid for Marty’s Mash Note to the Boston Public Schools. So we sent a note to the Boston Globe Foundation (see lower left in the ad) asking just that: Did Mayor Walsh (read: Boston taxpayers) foot the bill? Did the Globe Foundation? Did no one?
And here’s what Globe lifer Ellen Clegg replied:
The Globe Foundation donated the ad to the Boston Public Schools pro bono, as a public service. When we get a request for support from organizations that fit the Foundation’s mission, we work with the Globe’s advertising department to donate pro bono print ads in space that would normally go to unpaid “house ads.” It’s a great way to engage with the community. Other recent examples of pro bono ads include the One Fund and the MLK Summer Scholars Program, which the Foundation co-sponsors with John Hancock.
(The hardquizzing staff followed up with an email that asked Ms. Clegg these questions: 1) When you donated the ad to the Boston Public Schools, did you know it would take the form of a letter from Mayor Walsh? 2) Who did the creative/production of the ad? 3) Given the ad’s content, did you have any concerns that it would look like you donated the ad not to the BPS but to Mayor Walsh, appearing to compromise the Globe’s arm’s-length relationship with him?
(We have yet to hear back.)
Meanwhile, as the redoubtable Dan Kennedy pointed out to us, the redoubtable Dan Kennedy pointed us to this piece in Commonwealth Magazine, where it seems to us Ms. Clegg told a very different story to CommonWealth Magazine (which, frankly, came late to the party):
Globe Foundation gives full-page ad to Walsh
Mayor approached CEO Sheehan for space
THE BOSTON GLOBE FOUNDATION donated a full-page ad in Wednesday’s newspaper to Boston Mayor Marty Walsh so he could thank the staff of the Boston Public Schools at the close of the school year.
Ellen Clegg, who heads the foundation, said the mayor personally asked Globe CEO Mike Sheehan for the ad space and the foundation provided it because the message was in keeping with the organization’s focus on education and literacy.
Yes, well, Ms. Clegg might want to focus on her own message(s). Clearly, she gave us a mere bag of shells.
The hardreading staff will call Ms. Clegg tomorrow and try to clarify all this, because turning your newspaper into a mayoral Make a Wish fund is a lot different from “donating an ad to the Boston Public Schools.”
As most of you know, it’s a rare thing indeed to see a correction in the feisty local tabloid. Think of it as a sort of Halley’s Comment when one does turn up, as actually happened in today’s edition.
From the Herald’s op-ed page:
Looks like a pretty harmless mistake, right? So why the correction in this case? Hell, the Heraldniks unapologetically manufacture news out of whole cloth all the time, like yesterday’s ludicrous front page:
As old friend Dan Kennedy noted at Media Nation, “the Washington Redskins trademark ruling will have little effect.” But that had no effect on the Herald.
So back to the question: Why the correction to the Astrue column, which carried the headline “Connector mes$ demands probe.” Perhaps because of this:
[U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz] should look at the grant HHS awarded to Massachusetts to “help” other New England states build their exchanges. As silly as it looks now, HHS believed that Massachusetts would excel among the states because it built the first exchange during the Romney administration. Ironically, Connecticut is now providing Massachusetts with indispensable software and technical assistance. Ortiz needs to find out how [Massachusetts Health Connector Executive Director Jean] Yang spent the HHS grant and whether she illegally redirected funds to pay for the state’s staggering cost overruns.
Maybe the Herald’s finally lost enough libel lawsuits to make it a little less, well, Heraldish.
Jared Remy’s certainly hurting after the Boston Globe blowtorched him on Page One Sunday. (In that piece, it should be noted, the stately local broadsheet yet again failed to disclose that Red Sox principal owner John Henry also owns the paper. Or is the hardreading staff the only one who still cares about that kind of stuff?)
When exactly do you throw up your hands, turn your back and walk away from your own child?
Jerry and Phoebe Remy are the parents of a 35-year-old monster with a long history of hurting women — particularly pregnant ones — but they haven’t reached that point yet. Their son Jared is evil to the core, but they still visit him in jail. They presumably pay for his lawyers. They probably hope and pray he will once again come before a pliable Massachusetts judge and avoid the harshest penalties allowed by law.
Somehow this doesn’t sit well with many Red Sox fans who think Jerry Remy should no longer be allowed to sit in the NESN booth with Don Orsillo and talk about baseball.
But it sits okay with Callahan, who ends his piece this way: “Jerry Remy admits he made mistakes and he knows things will never be the same for Remdawg Inc. But he shouldn’t be stripped of his livelihood and sent home to stare at the walls. Jared should go to prison for the rest of his life. Jerry should go back to work, and, finally and at last, give up on his rotten, hopeless kid.”
Crosstown at the Globe, not everyone is so forgiving. Alan Wirzbicki in a point-counterpoint with Alex Beam:
[I]f Jerry Remy sold used cars, then maybe none of it would matter. The questionable decisions an employee makes with his own paycheck are usually his own business.
But Jerry Remy doesn’t sell used cars. His job is to be a particular TV persona — the gentle, chuckling color commentator on Sox games. Playing that role has made him popular. But now that’s not an image that he can project without turning New England’s collective stomach.
Now it’s Beam’s turn:
I understand that when most people read the story of Jerry and Jared, they see an entitled, well-off sports celebrity gaming the legal system on behalf of his wild and dangerous son. I see something different: a complicated, confusing morass, of biblical pain inflicted on a family that wants to balance its love for a disturbed child against society’s legitimate expectations of personal safety.
Jared is in jail, where he belongs. I’m sure his father and his family are living in a special kind of hell. If the sins of the son are visited on the father, well, that’s not what I call justice.
CONCERNING THE return of sportscaster Jerry Remy to the booth as his son, Jared, awaits trial in the murder of his girlfriend: Perhaps charity demands that NESN be given the benefit of the doubt about what the network knew of the elder Remy’s role in the repeated enabling of his son. However, the Globe’s expose of the monumentally sordid circumstances of Jared Remy’s record removes all doubt (“For Jared Remy, leniency was the rule until one lethal night,” Page A1, March 23).
Who will be able to watch Remy without being reminded of the unimaginable havoc wrought by his son? Even for crass economic reasons alone, let alone the basic duty of social responsibility that NESN owes the community — and yes, there is such a thing — how can NESN possibly allow Remy to stay on the air?
If you’re looking for a tiebreaker, try the redoubtable Dan Kennedy at Media Nation. He has an interesting conversation going on in the comments thread.
As the splendid readers of Two-Daily Town might remember, the hardreading staff is one of 17 home subscribers (a.k.a. The Few. The Proud. The Idiots) the Boston Herald boasts.
Consequently, here’s the front page of the fusty local tabloid that hit our porch this morning (tip o’ the pixel to the Missus).
Right: All sports, all the time.
By contrast, here’s the front page of today’s Boston Globe.
Exactly.
A later edition of the Herald did feature this front page, but the corn was off the cob by then.
We can’t wait until the Globe starts printing its papers – and the Herald’s – in Millbury (see Dan Kennedy’s piece here). At that point the Sunday Herald will likely roll off the presses sometime Friday afternoon.
Saturday’s local dailies present a nifty case study for those who worry that John Henry’s purchase of the Boston Globe will crimp the paper’s coverage of their kissing’ cousin Red Sox.
Sox seek OK to sell food during non-ballpark hours
It appears Red Sox Nation can’t get enough of Fenway franks.
The team is seeking city approval for a takeout concession on Lansdowne Street, near Gate C, that would be open during non-ballpark hours . . .
The team’s takeout concept is the latest in a string of non-baseball game money-makers designed to make the most of America’s oldest ballpark, which Red Sox owner John Henry this week said has a shelf life of another 30 years.
Far longer (we think) than the shelf life of a Fenway Frank. Not to get technical about it.
But the hardreading staff will wait to pass judgment until the Boston Sunday Globe is published, because of this (via the redoubtable Dan Kennedy’s Media Nation):
Boston Globe: Weekdays, 245,572 . . . Sundays, 382,452
Boston Herald: Weekdays, 95,929 . . . Sundays, 73,043
A piece in the Sunday Globe would get 50% more exposure than a Saturday piece, and roughly four times the circulation of Saturday’s Herald.
So . . . [snooze graf goes here]
At 11:45 Sunday morning we check out the Globe and . . . nothing.
Not good, Globeniks.
The concern people have about Henry’s Globe ownership is not so much whether Dan Shaughnessy will keep poking him with a stick, but whether the stately local broadsheet will be as vigilant about off-field matters such as these (also from the Herald):
[I]n December, the team won city approval to extend alcohol sales during baseball games and other events and to sell liquor on Yawkey Way.
The request to increase Fenway alcohol sales came less than three months after the Red Sox reached a controversial $7.3 million deal with the Boston Redevelopment Authority for an easement to shut down part of Yawkey Way for concessions during games and other events.
John Henry isn’t just a ballclub owner. He’s a real estate/media/financial mogul. The Globe needs to treat him as such.
Posted by Campaign Outsider 
It's Good to Live in a Two-Daily Town 
Stop the Presses! Boston Herald Runs Correction!!
June 20, 2014As most of you know, it’s a rare thing indeed to see a correction in the feisty local tabloid. Think of it as a sort of Halley’s Comment when one does turn up, as actually happened in today’s edition.
From the Herald’s op-ed page:
Looks like a pretty harmless mistake, right? So why the correction in this case? Hell, the Heraldniks unapologetically manufacture news out of whole cloth all the time, like yesterday’s ludicrous front page:
As old friend Dan Kennedy noted at Media Nation, “the Washington Redskins trademark ruling will have little effect.” But that had no effect on the Herald.
So back to the question: Why the correction to the Astrue column, which carried the headline “Connector mes$ demands probe.” Perhaps because of this:
Maybe the Herald’s finally lost enough libel lawsuits to make it a little less, well, Heraldish.
Or maybe not.