Results matching “times co go private”

The Intelligencer Journal-Lancaster New Era intends to start using Journalism Online's payment system in the next few months, reported the New York Times. The software system will be called Press+ and GlobalPost and the Fayetteville Observer are also interested, said the NYT.

Journalism Online has also sent a memo to its affiliated publishers (reproduced by paidContent) in which it informs them that the company is "just weeks away" from having the technology ready for use, and that multiple publishers are currently integrating the software. 

Three leading British phone companies have confirmed that over 100 customer accounts were illegally accessed by a private investigator and journalist at the News of the World, claims Nick Davies of the Guardian in the latest development in the phone-hacking scandal that let to a parliamentary committee enquiry.

Scotland Yard supplied 02, Vodafone, and Orange with phone numbers used by News of the World's royal correspondent, Clive Goodman, and private investigator, Glenn Mulcaire, to access the private voicemails of customers like Prince William and Boris Johnson. Working backwards to trace customers whose voicemail had been dialed from those numbers, Vodafone and 02 each found that "about 40" voicemails had been compromised, while Orange found that 45 customer accounts had been hacked.

Much of the transformation in the newspaper industry is led by the big western players: The New York Times has announced it will charge for content, The Guardian has launched a paid news app for the iPhone, and the Apple tablet is eagerly anticipated.

But these changes affect other parts of the world, as the Egyptian newspaper Al-Ahram reminds us. "In Egypt, we are also experiencing a seismic media evolution," Tarek Atia writes, in a considered op-ed on the state of the newspaper industry in Egypt and the future of media.

The Los Angeles Times is the latest newspaper to release a set of guidelines about its journalists' use of social media. The Times' Standards and Practices Committee sent a memo advising all employees to 'watch what they post on Facebook, Twitter, MySpace or any online social space', reports Biz Journal.

"Integrity is our most important commodity: Avoid writing or posting anything that would embarrass The Times or compromise your ability to do your job," the memo read.

It has been a rough couple of years for the newspaper industry with the recession taking its toll on the financial stability of many organisations. In the past year alone at least ten publications have filed for bankruptcy and many have been forced to close their doors. With newspapers treading fast to try to keep their heads above water many have cut back funding for more costly types of news. One of the first things to go has been investigative journalism, considered by many publications to be a luxury. The time and investment of multiple resources in a single issue is something that many publications simply can no longer afford.

These cuts have raised alarm bells. The potential loss of 'the fourth estate' and 'government watchdog' have united many in the cause to protect the practice of journalism, even if the business and profitability of it is doomed to fail.

One method suggested to preserve this type of journalism is to run as a non-profit organisation. Seeking the status under the claim that journalism is a 'public good' publications are free from commerical pressures and the disappointment of dwindling circulation figures, relying only on donations from those who feel the cause worthy enough.

It is at this point that the Texas Tribune enters the scene. The online-only news site launched early last week as a non-profit venture in an attempt to fill a gap in quality local journalism in Texas. The Editors Weblog spoke with editor-in-chief, Evan Smith to look at Tribune's website and non-profit ambitions in closer detail.


The inspiration:
The big name in non-profit news is ProPublica. Led by former Wall Street Journal managing editor Paul Steiger, the organisation began publishing in June 2008 and has consistently drawn in large sums of donations, with key sponsor the Sandler Foundation contributing annually. ProPublica, which will write an article then offer it to a newspaper to publish, has carried out some impressive investigative feats to date, most notably its collaboration with the New York Times, published in August. The 13,000 word article which cost an estimated $400,000 to produce examined the events that took place at the Memorial Medical Centre following Hurricane Katrina. The piece highlighted the importance of such investigative journalism and made the need to save it even more apparent.
 
The Texas Tribune aims to achieve something similar on a smaller and more political scale, offering Texans a news source designed to compliment local newspapers that already exist: "We've made a point of not presenting this as a binary choice: A or B. We believe it's additive: A and B. Read your local paper and read us. In fact read as much stuff as there is out there" says Smith.

"We're simply presenting ourselves as one in a series of things that you need to read and listen to and view and access if you want to be a thoughtful and engaged Texan." 

In his first posting on the website Smith talked about what the Tribune was attempting to achieve: "What we mean to do on an ongoing basis is right there in our stated mission: to promote civic engagement and discourse on public policy, politics, government, and other matters of statewide concern."

In ProPublica fashion, the Tribune has said that all the information published on its website is up for grabs for other media organisations as part of a content-sharing plan designed to aide other reporters who might not have the time to look into an issue in depth.  Matt Stiles, one of the Tribune's staff reporters writers told Poynter Online in an interview: "Ultimately, we'd like to tell every paper in the state, 'If you like this data set, just take it'."

"I hope reporters will come see the information, download it, remix it and be creative with it."

The build up:
In July this year Smith announced he was leaving his position as editor-in-chief of established Texas Monthly magazine to take up the post as CEO and editor of the Tribune. A few months later, the Tribune added Elise Hu, Emily Ramshaw and Matt Stiles to its list of experienced journalists.

In an interview with Poynter in September, Ramshaw talked of her decision to join the project: "I feel, and still feel, that the newspaper business is in serious crisis. I'm not content to cling to a deck chair and go down with a sinking ship."

Ramshaw worked for The Dallas Morning News for six years, the last three of which she was state investigative reporter.  "We're trying to prepare for the next incarnation of journalism. If this venture is going to work, it's going to work because serious, talented journalists were brave enough to take the risk," she said.

The Tribune has built up a selection of notable reporters willing to do this and Chairman and co-founder John Thorton had been quoted as saying: "We didn't hire journalists out of work. We hired reporters who their editors were pissed off that they lost them."

Smith and Thornton worked hard on securing donations, with Thornton himself donating $1 million to the Tribune. In early October the founders confirmed they had received a further $750, 000 in grants from the Houston Endowment and the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation. The Tribune is now only slighty short of the $4 million target it needs to continue running for two years, with a current total of $3.7 million.

The sum is considerable for a start up website, as paidContent's Staci Kramer has noted: "Unlike some of the new crop of local and regional news startups, the Tribune is launching with enough money for a well-paid staff of 16, including 11 reporters," referring to salaries of $315K for the editor in chief, and up to $90K for seasoned reporters.

As for promotion of the site itself, Smith told the Editors Weblog just how useful social networking sites have been. Regular updates for the public on the status of the site via Facebook, Twitter and the site's own newsletter built up a sense of curiosity over what exactly they had in store for last Tuesday's launch.
 
"We've been very aggressive on Facebook and Twitter both to promote the content and also to connect with our community of followers" said Smith. "We've also used both to aggressively push for funding. We've generated quite a lot of memberships in the Tribune which are much like memberships in public radio by pushing over Facebook and over Twitter messages that relate to our fundraising campaign, and they've been very successful," he says, citing the 1400 founding members who have given between $50 and $5000 to the Tribune out of their own pockets.

What does the site look like?
The website debuted with top stories on the mistreatment of disabled children in public schools, the Democratic lean of El Paso in an otherwise Republican state, and the results of a poll carried out by the Tribune and the University of Texas.

The site itself is divided into ten pages, the organisation of which differ from your average news website. Offering 11 databases under a section titled 'Library' for further reading, the databases contain information ranging from federal campaign donations, gubernatorial appointees and lawmaker spending. In addition to this there is a complete electoral directory of every Texan senator and governor- the site essentially offers a single space for complete personal and political data on the '242 occupants of the state's highest offices'.

It is clear that a lot of time has gone into collaborating this research, and according to the Nieman Journalism Lab, the Waco Tribune-Herald has already taken advantage of the new resource and published some Tribune content. 

Aside from the databases, the site boasts eight of its own blogs and links to some 25 others; has a 'topics' section where stories can be found based on theme; a calender, where information about local events can be found or submitted; and a 'Tweetwire', a Twitter feed from all Texan politicians on the website's front page.

Compared to the recent launch of another local non-profit news website, Oakland Local, the Tribune's website is much more sophisticated. The Texan team have embraced the capacities of the internet and technology to their full, utilizing social media, widgets, videos, blogs and mobile applications- something Smith believes to be key to the way in which the use of media is changing.

"In consumption of media people are paying more attention to online media today then ever before," say Smith. "I look at my almost 13 year old daughter and how she consumes media and it's not at all in print it's almost entirely online and I think that's the trend line."

Smith suggests that publishers need to adapt to measure up to this changed method of consuming news: "You cannot simply go out and record the news, present that to people and believe that that's going to be enough. You need to give them the tools to better understand their world, to better know their state, to better know the people they elected, to better hold them accountable and that often is all not simply conventional reporting but the amassing and presenting of data that allows people to access the world in which they live from a more detailed level."

Why will the Tribune succeed where others have failed?
Whilst successful local non-profit news publications do exists, the Voice of San Diego and the MinnPost to name a few- there are also notable failures such as the Rocky Mountain Independent and InDenver Times, two online start-ups founded by Steve Foster earlier this year. How will the Tribune ensure that it doesn't suffer the same fate?

Smith says that the Tribune essentially has a better business plan, arguing that the RMI and InDenver Times failed because they were run by journalists, not business people and "didn't really have a plan for how to make the model sustainable."

Part of the reason the Tribune is choosing to remain online-only is because "the cost of printing a print publication for postage and paper and print facilities is so expensive that you reduce your overhead dramatically and therefore make it much more likely that your business model will sustain."

Of course the Tribune's has also managed to raise a healthy budget, further insulating itself against some of the problems faced by other publications. "Money is, as in all things, the mother's milk of your operation," Smith says, continuing on to mention that the having the financial capacity to buy the latest technology and hire top journalists will "go a very long way to allowing us to do our best work."

Smith's views bear resemblance to industry commentator Alan Mutter, who recently critized many online non-profit publications for not being business-minded enough. Mutter accuses these publications of "a suicidally stubborn determination on the part of the organizers to be in the business they want to be in, instead of attending to the business they need to attend to," and he argued early last month that, "A business, especially a start-up, requires far more than passion for the work. It requires close attention to the nuts and bolts of raising money, making sales and controlling expenses."

How will the Tribune navigate ethical issues?
A nagging question over the non-profit model is how publications will be able to resist influence from major donors. Smith argues that the seperation between donors and the editorial team is no different to the situation between advertisers and editorial: "I edited a magazine for nine years in which we had big advertisers who also happened to often be the subject of stories and the transactional economy that supports the operations of a for profit publication has no relationship what-so-ever to the journalism inside, or it shouldn't anyway, not at a good magazine and not at a good newspaper."

"Just because someone advertises doesn't mean you go easy on them or you go hard on their competitors."

Nevetherless, the non-profit news model is still in early stages and very dependent on the income from donors. Even for-profit news publications have not been immune to advertsing clients flexing their muscles in tough financial times, with a Detroit paper recently being accused of reporting on private health care following a request from client Humana (who subsequently purchased an ad next to the story).

What would Smith do if he was approached by a donor to cover a particular story? 

"Donors don't expect that were going to write about their issues or about their enemy's issues in a negative way, they're not looking for us to take sides- they're supporting the principle that hovers above all this activity: that journalism in the public interest has value."

"Any donor who is unhappy with the coverage we provide because of such an expectation is welcome to his or her money back," he says, adding: "I'd rather lose my funding then lose my integrity."

So are non-profits the next incarnation of journalism?
The wider debate on whether or not non-profits are the future of journalism has been raging for a while. Online magazine, Slate's Jack Shafer has weighed in for the negative: "In the current arrangement, we're substituting one flawed business model for another. For-profit newspapers lose money accidentally. Nonprofit news operations lose money deliberately."

Thornton, the Tribune's chairman, hit back at the remarks: "I call it the Stockholm Syndrome. They are sympathizing with their advertiser-captors."

So who is right? Is the non-profit model the future of journalism?

Yes and no. It is unlikely to become a general solution for newspapers simply because of the huge sums of money involved, but for nieche reporting and more time/fund consuming journalism such as investigative reporting, it could definiatley be a viable option.

The idea compares favourably at least to the suggestion of government bailouts. As Thorton wrote of the "obvious fox-in-the-henhouse issues that arise--to mix animal metaphors--from government watchdogs funded out of government coffers."

As the first serious, state-focused news site with a decent enough amount of money behind it and what seems to be the right attitude toward embracing the capacities of the digital age and the changing face of journalism- whether or not the Texas Tribune succeeds will be key to the way in which the non-profit model is viewed.

As Tribune reporter Christe Hu suggests: "Journalism is at a crossroads right now. We're seeing not just survival of the fittest but a 'mutation of the species.' "

"I think the non-profit model has just as good a shot as anything else."

If national newspapers in the UK could persuade just three or four per cent of their online audience to pay for content, they could make more money than through advertising, a private equity financier told the Guardian. Dharmash Mistry, a former senior Emap executive who is now a partner at private equity firm Balderton Capital, said that if these 3-4% of users paid £3 a month, that would exceed current digital advertising revenue.

Mistry suggested that £3 a month was about 10% of the monthly price of buying print editions daily, and said that the statistics were based on analysis of a print website attracted 20 million monthly uniques. He estimates that national newspapers are probably each making less than £20 million in online ad revenue per year. If 3.5% of users of a newspaper website with 20m uniques were to pay £3 a month, that would generate £2.1m per month, or £25.2m per year.  Mistry told the Guardian that currently, "if any make more than £30m I would be shocked."

The German coalition, led by recently re-elected Chancellor Angela Merkel, has pledged to try to introduce a form of copyright legislation to help protect the content produced by journalists online, the New York Times is reporting.

The aim is to give German publishers a fighting chance when coming up against Internet giants such as Google, whom they accuse of exploiting content without sharing the profits.  

The Times and The Sunday Times are launching a membership scheme and customer retention programme called Times+, the Guardian has reported. Following Rupert Murdoch's insistence that in the future all content will have to be paid for, News International's decision to launch Times+ could perhaps be seen to be testing the water for the group's charging-for-access plans.

It is thought that James Murdoch, News Corporation's chief in Europe and Asia and the chairman of BSkyB, with his experience of subscription television, has been influential on the company's thinking. 

The Washington Post is the lastest in a series of publications to release a set of guidelines for its journalists to follow in their use of social networking websites. The move comes after a managing editor of the Post, Raju Narisetti, tweeted two messages which questioned his impartiality as a journalist.

Andrew Alexander, ombudsman for the Post, revealed the two messages raising eyebrows in his Omblog:

"We can incur all sorts of federal deficits for wars and what not," read one message. "But we have to promise not to increase it by $1 for healthcare reform? Sad."

Then another from last week: "Sen Byrd (91) in hospital after he falls from 'standing up too quickly." How about term limits. Or retirement age. Or commonsense to prevail."

Alexander writes : 'In today's hyper-sensitive political environment, Narisetti's tweets could be seen as one of the Post's top editors taking sides on the question of whether a health-care reform plan must be budget neutral. On Byrd, his comments could be construed as favoring term limits or mandatory retirement for aging lawmakers. Many readers already view The Post with suspicion and believe that the personal views of its reporters and editors influence the coverage. The tweets could provide ammunition.'

Though Narisetti was using his private Twitter account, and stressed the messages were 'personal observations' intended to be read by some 90 friends and associates, he said he now realises that his tweets were 'unwise' and that his opinions reflected on his position as managing editor of the Post.  

He has since closed his Twitter account.

The Los Angeles Times has reported that a group of residents from Orange County, California, are set to launch a non-profit news website by the end of the year. The project's initiators, who include retired state lawmakers, lawyers and newspaper reporters, hope that the Voice of the O.C. will act as a platform for watchdog, investigative and local journalism - areas particularly affected by newspaper job losses in recent years.

Joe Dunn, a former Democratic state senator who will chair the outlet's board of directors, commented that the new website aims to bridge the apparent gap between national and local news coverage, a symptom of staff cuts at the Orange County Register and the L.A. Times.

Last year, consumers spent more time using paid-for content, such as subscription based websites and premium cable channels, and less time using ad-supported content like newspapers and network television. That's the latest from private equity firm Veronis Suhler Stevenson's annual media survey.

The total amount of time spent with media remained unchanged from 2007 at 3,545 hours per year. However, consumers allotted that time in very different ways than seen in previous surveys. So, usage of media like e-books and mobile media increased, while that for magazines and radio declined.

ViewPass was one of the proposals put to publishers at the 'secret' meeting organised by the NAA in May which considered different ideas for monetising online content in a media landscape where revenue from traditional advertising methods is not generating enough income to support newspapers and other news outlets. With ViewPass, creators Alan Mutter and Ridgely Evers are essentially aiming to boost the value of page views by making advertising more effective and lucrative. The Editors Weblog spoke to Mutter to find out more about ViewPass and how he thinks it could be the solution the industry has been waiting for.

Target, target, target

Rather than directly charging consumers for online content, Mutter believes that increasing the revenue from advertising would be the best and most efficient way for publishers to up their overall revenue. Currently, most advertising systems are not producing high enough rates to support the production of content, so a significant change must take place.

The idea, he said, is that the consumer will in fact pay for content "but there are different ways you can pay." The most appropriate way to get the consumer to effectively 'pay' would be by providing information that could allow for highly targeted advertising. The consumer would both supply demographic details and allow their reading habits to be tracked throughout websites that support ViewPass so as to offer a rich picture of what they are interested in and which ads they might pay attention to. ViewPass is not aimed solely at newspaper publishers, but at anybody who puts content on the web, including bloggers. This will help the system really learn what people are interested in and develop a complex picture of them.

Mutter pointed out that the US newspapers who sell ads through Yahoo's targeted ad scheme can make far more than on a standard ad. Mutter stressed that he does not in any way oppose Yahoo's ad network, in fact he thinks that it and ViewPass could be compatible. But he maintains that his proposal is "superior" in the sense that it gathers more authenticated information about the consumer that can be used to target more effectively. For example, Yahoo "cannot target to zip code level because it does not have any way to validate post codes that customers volunteer," while ViewPass, as it takes credit card information when a user buys a piece of content, could easily authenticate postal codes. 

"If it's embraced," said Mutter, "ViewPass will create deep and accurate pictures of actual individuals." Hence, the system will have "a strategically powerful picture of every consumer who registers."

Privacy problems?

An obvious concern for the consumer when using this type of system would be privacy. Mutter said that he is very aware of this, and stressed that "the way we've developed this is so that the system will give information about a person and about what that person is reading in a way that the individual still remains anonymous." Advertisers will only be allowed access to that info for that moment, they will not be allowed to record it. If they do, they will be kicked off the system. He acknowledged that "we have a lot of work to do ourselves on the safety of the database." 

Industry-owned for greater profits

Mutter would ideally like ViewPass to be an industry-owned initiative and said "we're working really hard to enable that." Evidently, this would be an advantage to the industry as it would then be able to share in profits from the business itself. However, he realises that it would be quite a challenge to persuade the industry to agree as one on such a solution. Currently ViewPass exists as a detailed plan that has been continuously developed and discussed with industry leaders, but it is not yet a concrete product. If publishers do not support it as an industry-owned initiative, Mutter would consider taking it forth as a private company, he said.

How it would work

Publishers would have to insert a piece of Java code into their webpages and then would choose the stories that it wants to protect with ViewPass, and the ones it wants to leave open. The publisher has "complete control over the rules," Mutter emphasised and has several different options to choose from with regards to how they make their content available. ViewPass logos would be placed next to the articles to indicate to the consumer how they can have access. One article could be entirely free, or you might have to simply be a ViewPass member to read another, for one you might be required to pay and for another you could be asked to complete a short survey, for example.

For the consumer, the process "would be extremely low impact and non-intrusive," according to Mutter. Once you had logged into ViewPass at one website it would remember you from then on, and once you had entered your credit card details the system would remember them unless you told it not to.  There are a number of sites with whom ViewPass could cooperate in terms of registration, such as Facebook and Microsoft, Mutter suggested. A Facebook user could therefore tie their ViewPass account to this account, which would make it easier to get started.

It would, Mutter admits, be off-putting to the consumer to have to do anything extra to read news, and it would hence be important to market ViewPass in the right way. His idea is that the ViewPass brand would be associated with quality content that is valuable enough to pay for in some way, so that when people see ViewPass content they know they are seeing the best. Thus it would also be a way to brand the content as being quality.

So what are the benefits for the consumer?

The system is "first and foremost a solution designed to replenish the revenues of the publishing business," but there are also advantages for the consumer. Mutter believes that the consumer benefits from the possibility to acquire better calibre content than might otherwise be available if professional media sources continue to diminish due to falling revenue. More concretely, the system would start to recommend articles to users based on their interests, so "you may learn things that you would be delighted to know about if you only knew that they were out there." As Mutter points out, there is so much information on the web that having content pushed to you can be a highly valuable service. Equally, having advertising that is actually relevant could also be extremely useful. It could also be argued that being able to pay for news with time and information is a good alternative to being forced to pay with cash.

Paid-online content

Although Mutter is doubtful that charging consumers online could actually increase revenue, ViewPass would enable publishers to charge for online content by the article, or by a subscription to an individual paper. When asked about the possibility of paying a bundled fee for content from multiple publications, Mutter was sceptical. For the consumer, he believes it would be ideal, but there would be too many practical problems for the publisher. Dividing up such a fee so that all publications were content with their share would be an almost insurmountable obstacle, he maintains. He pointed out, correctly, that it could be difficult to equate the value of different types of content: could a 10,000 word article from the New York Times be awarded with the same compensation as a two line item on a sports score? He does not think that those publications who produce the more expensive content would be content with the small amount of revenue they would receive in exchange.

Bundling content is one of the options that another start-up, Journalism Online, is promising. Will the company be able to overcome the obstacles that Mutter highlights? Journalism Online, founded by Steve Brill, Gordon Crovitz and Leo Hindery, aims to facilitate charging online and to help its members work out the best way to charge by gathering data on their efforts.

And these two are not the only projects out there that are promising to enhance monetisation efforts of news content. Circulate from CircLabs is another proposal, focusing on upping the number of page views of newspaper articles and hence increasing advertising revenue. The company also intends to use the knowledge of its members that it gathers to institute targeting advertising on the Circulate bar that would follow users around the web.

Mutter pointed out putting too many hurdles in front of users when they are reading news content would swiftly put them off, meaning that publishers should adopt just one system. So which of these is it going to be? Mutter maintains that ViewPass is the one that can make publishers the most money. Journalism Online seems to have somewhat of a headstart, however, with partner publishers expected to be announced in the next few weeks. But will it satisfy publishers' monetisation needs?

The parliamentary committee enquiring into the alleged News of the World phone-hacking scandal has heard that James Murdoch approved a £700,000 payment to settle a case against the paper. It also heard from Andy Coulson that although he had no recollection of the use of phone hacking while he was editor at the paper, he acknowledged that "things went badly wrong" during his time in charge.

The first story to break out of the Guardian's investigations into the phone hacking affair declared that News International had paid more than £1 million to silence those who were bringing cases against the paper because their phone messages had been hacked into. One of these payments has been confirmed by current NotW editor Colin Myler, who told the committee that the decision to make a £700,000 payment to Gordon Taylor, head of the Professional Footballers' Association, was taken at a 2008 meeting between News International executive chairman (and son of Rupert) James Murdoch, Myler himself and Tom Crone, a company lawyer.

As News International started to fight back against the Guardian's phone-hacking accusations directed at the News of the World journalists and the director of public prosecutions examines the case, the affair has been discussed in depth by news outlets in the UK in a conflict that seems to be becoming increasingly personal: the Guardian vs News International.

The Guardian has passionately covered every angle of the phone-hacking story, and stressed repeatedly that this issue is about "Murdoch journalists." News International released a statement on Friday in which it described the Guardian's allegations as "irresponsible and unsubstantiated," denying that there is any evidence that News Group staff hacked into mobile phones or accessed individuals' voicemail, either personally or via private investigators. It also refutes that there was "systemic corporate illegality by News International to suppress evidence." An article in the News of the World on Sunday declares that the paper "was the subject of some ferocious and, at times, hysterical attacks on its credibility, integrity and journalistic standards."

The Guardian has reported that Rupert Murdoch's News Group paid out more than £1 million to settle cases that would reveal evidence that the group's journalists had been involved in illegally hacking into public figures' mobile phones. News Group is owned by News International, a News Corp subsidiary.

The payments secured secrecy over out-of-court settlements in three cases that threatened to expose evidence that reporters from the News of the World hired private investigators who "illegally hacked into the mobile phone messages of numerous public figures to gain unlawful access to confidential personal data, including tax records, social security files, bank statements and itemised phone bills," the Guardian reported.

Rupert Murdoch has denied the Guardian's report, telling Bloomberg that he was not aware of any payments made to settle cases in which the company's newspaper reporters may have been involved in criminal activity. "If that had happened, I would know about it," Murdoch said. The New York Times said that the Guardian report "could not be independently verified."

The Washington Post has decided to cancel its plans to host private, off-the-record dinner parties for political lobbyists at the home of its publisher after criticism from the newsroom at the suggestion that their services were effectively been sold. Publisher Katharine Weymouth was to host dinners that would give paying lobbyists and business leaders access to officials from the Obama administration and Congress, as well as Post journalists.

Politico first reported the story yesterday after obtaining a flier promoting the events that had been given to a healthcare lobbyist. The flier was entitled "Underwriting Opportunity: An evening with the right people can alter the debate" and advertised events with a maximum of 20 guests to discuss major White House policy initiatives, which participating firms could co-sponsor for $25,000 per event, with up to two sponsors per session. There was also an offer for 11 for the price of 10. The theme of the first July dinner was to be health care reform, and WaPo guaranteed the attendance of Obama administration officials and members of Congress as well as reporters.

The deal was 18 months in the making, but Richard Connor has finally succeeded in buying up the Maine-based properties of the Seattle Times Co. Connor's acquisitions include the dailies the Portland Press Herald/Maine Sunday Telegram, the Kennebec Journal and the Morning Sentinel, as well as MaineToday.com, the Coastal Journal and The Maine Switch.

As part of his new role as editor and publisher of the three dailies, Connor will write a weekly column, although he said he's not going to "foist" his opinions on the newspapers. Connor aims to make the group profitable by the end of the year - in part by slashing jobs. This week, 31 non-union workers were let go, and up to 100 more could meet the same fate.

As the Boston Newspaper Guild and Boston Globe management take a break in negotiations until next week, speculation has been mounting on possible buyers for the paper and what its future might be. The union and owner the New York Times Co are trying to come to an agreement on how to make $10 million of savings following the union's narrow rejection of a deal and the Times Co's subsequent imposition of a 23% pay cut for all staff. The company is also looking at selling the paper.

The Financial Times reported that one of the interested buyers is understood to be willing to work with the union to structure a buy-out. Stephen Pagliuca, listed by the Globe last week as one of three potential buyers, is a managing partner at Bain Capital private equity firm and an owner of the Boston Celtics basketball team. Union officials appear willing to work with a prospective buyer.

Yesterday's meeting between Boston Globe management and the Boston Newspaper Guild continued until past midnight and talks are set to resume this afternoon after the parties failed to come to an agreement. The meeting was purportedly about how to implement the 23% pay cut which was imposed last week following the guild's narrow rejection of a package of concessions which had been proposed by parent company the New York Times, but seems to have turned into a negotiation session.

The Globe reported that president of the Boston Newspaper Guild Daniel Totten and other guild leaders brought an offer of resolution to management, which sparked deep discussions over the mix of wage and benefit cuts needed to save the $10 million that the Times company has demanded. Today also sees the start of a hearing before the National Labor Relations Board after the union filed an unfair labour practice charge against management following the announcement of the 23% cut.