The largest, leading daily newspaper in Massachusetts and region Boston Globe needs to provide answers to questions being avoided in order to dispel the obvious on two issues affecting the paper’s credibility.
Globe Issue #1-Why has the position of ombudsperson not been filled, languished, or discarded for so long? This position for credibility purposes is needed now more than ever with the increasing newsroom downsizing going on. A criticism in the past has been a reporter on a tight rope usually assigned to be ombudsperson that reports to and is evaluated by management. The person serves a term either goes back to some news beat or leaves. That person becomes isolated from other reporters who fear criticism or oversight in reporting. Thus, the advocacy and correct path for Boston Globe management is to appoint a truly independent person paid or unpaid to the position.
#Globe Issue#2-This issue is a perceived double standard by the New York Times Massachusetts owned Boston Globe and Worcester Telegram. The Telegram allows readers to blog all news, editorial, and business articles while the Boston Globe does not. The Telegram even allows bloggers to the extreme to criticize the news articles, reporters, or even the newspaper itself without censorship. What the Boston Globe does allow is a not posted open published comment to the reporter’s writing that neither the readers nor even the bloggers can read, openly reply, or blog.
Even the other most struggling Boston daily, The Herald, allows uncensored open posted blogging as well as so many other Massachusetts dailies, weeklies, and monthly publications.
Unless the Boston Globe takes immediate action, [I would list] the publication . . . with those partners who advocate against Open Meeting, public records, shield and whistleblower laws.
The Boston Globe should be leader for Massachusetts 21st-century journalism to safeguard our press freedoms and reporting enjoyed and expected by readers and citizens.