As the hardreading staff has previously noted, we’re one of roughly 17 home subscribers to the Boston Herald, which means that virtually all of the feisty local tabloid’s dwindling print circulation comes from newsstand sales.
So it’s no surprise that this Notice appeared on page 2 of today’s edition. (Note the reverse typeface, which is harder to read, especially for us elderly folk.)
Close-up (sort of):
The sneaky local tabloid does say that the price increase “will not affect home-delivered copies of the Boston Herald,” which has up to tens of subscribers issuing a sigh of relief.
Still, that’s a one-third newsstand hike from Saturday . . .
. . . to today.
Which means the pricey local tabloid now costs the same as the Boston Globe.
The Herald’s newsstand price is also now double that of the New York tabloids, which, to be fair, are constantly waging price wars. Rising above the fray, the New York Times newsstand price is $2.50.
Two and a half times more for the broadsheet? That seems closer to the natural order of things, no?
Posted by Campaign Outsider 
