The end of an underwhelming era

But enough of the belles-lettres, you say: bring on the snark! Well, today's paper [ed. note -- and for once I really do mean 'today', Saturday] confirms what I've long inferred from the Globe combination of generally good reporting with dodgy editorial judgement. Namely that the No. 1 problem with the paper is the No. 1 editor, one Edward Greenspon. Today he has an ex cathedra piece in the front section which includes the following near-gibberish:

Authoritative coverage of authors and their renderings has always been a hallmark of The Globe and Mail. Today, we rededicate ourselves to the subject with a new package that traverses the print-digital divide and opens up a world of new possibilities while securing the old world order.

Coverage of their renderings? Traversing the divide with a package to secure the old world order? Is he Doctor Who? To me this reads like a stoned intern's spoof, which nobody caught because the preceding paras. were already so pompous and opaque. If this is what Slow Eddie's own prose is like, it's astounding the paper is as strong as it is.

But wait, you say, what is this divide-traveling package? What does it all mean? It means that the Globe, which used to boast endlessly about having Canada's only free-standing Books section, no longer has a free-standing Books section. Books are now a subsection at the back of the Focus section. A pretty big subsection, this week at least; but the point is surely to cut back coverage significantly in the long run (the sad trajectory of the once-great National Post book section, where by 'once-great' I mean that in its heyday it used to commission, and pay handsomely for, free-form stuff from me.) Meanwhile they are bumping up coverage of books on the website: they are also adding this amazing new thing called a 'comments' feature to the reviews there, and including some web-only content, in the hope that poor Slow Eddie can spin the killing of the Books section (vivi-section?) as a fabulous new-media breakthrough. Well, good luck to them. Personally I think I'm a lot more likely to read about books in print, over my breakfast coffee, rather than during a bout of web-surfing later in the day: but my guess would be that they don't have much choice here. (Dr. B's grasp of these matters is hazy, but it seems that newspapers expect their on-line ventures to lose money, though how long that can last is anybody's guess).

Of course, given my usual whingeing about the quality of the Books section, any complaints about the quantity are going to sound like that joke about the two old ladies in the Catskills.*

Oh, and in totally unrelated and coincidental news, the Globe is planning to lay off 10% of its workforce.


*Who moan about the resort food, endlessly and in great detail, with the punch line: 'And the portions are so small!'