N.Y. Times to File Notice It Will Close Boston Globe
By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, May 4, 2009

The New York Times Co. said last night that it is notifying federal authorities of its plans to shut down the Boston Globe, raising the possibility that New England's most storied newspaper could cease to exist within weeks.
After down-to-the-wire negotiations did not produce millions of dollars in union concessions, the Times Co. said that it will file today a required 60-day notice of the planned shutdown under the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification law.
The move could amount to a negotiating ploy to extract further concessions from the Globe's unions, since the notice does not require the Times Co. to close the paper after 60 days. The deadline, however, would put the unions under fierce pressure to produce additional savings, and the Boston Newspaper Guild promptly called the step a "bullying" tactic by the company.
Some industry observers have expressed skepticism that Times Co. Chairman Arthur Sulzberger Jr. would want his legacy to include the shuttering of the Globe, which his company bought in 1993.
But the Times Co. itself is under strong financial pressure. It recently mortgaged its new Manhattan headquarters, borrowed $250 million from a Mexican billionaire at 14 percent interest, laid off 100 newsroom staffers and cut salaries by 5 percent.

For the full Washington Post report link here.

And here is the reaction to the potential closure on the always entertaining Australian-based Crikey blog:

Why should this concern us? Because -- and despite what some local protagonists might insist -- the problems that beset newspapers in the United States (and for that matter Britain, Europe and wherever else) are by and large the problems that confront papers in Australia, especially our reputable, embattled broadsheets: falling circulation, declining revenue, abundant and increasingly competitive information alternatives.

If The Boston Globe can die -- The Boston Globe! -- then what other titles might succumb? The loss of quality papers is one thing, but there is another side to this. We have to ask ourselves what papers are now likely to survive, and why? We may not be watching the death of the newspaper, but what looks increasingly possible is that we are witness to the slow snuffing of quality reporting, investigation in the public interest and the air of calm, reasoned discussion that is the great, civilising gift of a quality newspaper.

What will replace them? Which are the cockroach titles that will survive this nuclear media apocalypse, which will thrive after prestige titles surrender the field?

Presumably it will be the sort of populist drivel represented in this market by the Herald Sun and The Daily Telegraph.