Why we need the Boston Globe
Last week, the Globe reported on the trail of ruin left by Dorchester real-estate investor Michael David Scott. The story wasn't a surprise to the folks at the Dorchester Reporter; in fact, they first started covering the guy in 2008. But Reporter Managing Editor (and retired Globie) Tom Mulvoy explains how the Reporter had to hand off the story to the Globe when Scott's lawyers threatened a suit - and why we still need large metro news organizations:
... The thrust of a newspaper report that is presenting something that is a scoop or the product of lengthy enterprise work comes early in the morning, at roughly the same time every day for everyone who subscribes to the paper. If it is especially newsworthy, it then explodes into the web world for all to read in their electronic warrens. Absent the larger-circulation paper, its staff work and its reputation, who sets off the explosion? ...
Comments
Suspiciously absent
Suspiciously absent from Mr Mulvoy's column is mention of the Boston Globe's April 24, 2005 article where the newspaper's reporter blew wet kisses at Michael David Scott. She raised none of the issues that, in retrospect, seem hard to have missed.
http://www.cyburbia.org/forums/showthread.php?t=12050
The Globe article can be found about two-thirds of the way down the page. (I haven't been able to find it on boston.com.)
So, the Boston Globe missed the original story, entirely, and only picked it up after the Dorchester Reporter's reporters had done all the heavy lifting.
This isn't a criticism. I love the Globe!