Reason number one: The Environment
Every two weeks we drag a blue box full of newsprint out to the street so it can be recycled. Given the near ubiquity of Internet access in Canadian homes, do we really need paper-based news any more? I don't think so. By cancelling my Globe and Mail subscription I'll save tons of CO2 over the coming years--not to mention dozens of trees. Still, many readers say they prefer getting their news on paper. It's easier to read . . . Well, that's changing. More and more people are getting their news online. You should too:

Q4 online newspaper readership during 2006 reached a record 57.6 million monthly unique visitors, the most since the Newspaper Association of America (NAA) started recording the data 3 years ago, according to figures released by Nielsen//NetRatings.

One other thing has bothered me. I have repeatedly asked the Globe's subscription service to have the paper put in our mail box rather than thrown on the porch wrapped in a plastic bag. After more than a year of asking, we still get it tightly packaged in that grey plastic wrapper. Frustrating.




Reason number two: Almost No Content
The Globe trumpeted its evolving redesign in Saturday's paper:

"Two main objectives have guided us: to introduce new ideas and perspectives, and to provide advice and suggestions to help readers more easily navigate the endless array of choices in front of them. In so doing, we aim to make the paper smarter, more accessible, more visual and more integrated with the Web."

There was a time when the Globe thought its readers were well educated. It assumed that they needed in-depth reporting in order to understand the complex issues of the day. With a few exceptions, that faith in the intelligence of Canadians has disappeared from the increasingly narrow and vacant pages of the Globe. Take a look at the paper's front page. It used to be dense with information. Now? The above picture is of yesterday's Globe--how is it more integrated with the web? I do not see the connection unless they believe the web is a vacuous digital abyss.




Reason number three: The Ads
I can't remember seeing so many full page ads in a national newspaper before. When ads take up more space than content, it is easy to decide that as a subscriber you are paying advertisers to give them access to your precious time. I hang up on annoying tele-marketers. Now I am hanging up on the Globe.




Reason number four: Canadian Fairness
In that uniquely Canadian way, I thought our country stood for a global ideal of fairness and equity no matter who a person was and where they came from. Maybe that identity is a self-serving myth held over from growing up during the Trudeau years, but it is one I am comfortable with. I don't get that sense of fairness when I read the Globe's editorial pages these days. The fear-driven 'dogs of war" seem to have had their way in the paper's editorial room. When did Canada's national newspaper decide we are a country that ignores the human rights of one nation in favour of those of another? When did it decide that the ideals that launched the United Nations were "quaint?" Pearson would be ashamed.

What are our options?
The Internet is a endless resource for news, information, and opinion from all sides of the political and social spectrum. Make it your friend. The multitude of sources can be daunting, but with a good RSS reader (like Google's) in hand you will soon be getting your news straight-up and without the environmental destruction of paper-based media. For example, do you want Toronto political news? Take a look at http://www.spacing.ca for a change. How about Canadian political news? Here is a list of sources from del-icio-us: http://del.icio.us/search/?fr=del_icio_us&p=canada+politics&type=all There are non-print options to "Canada's national newspaper." It is time to try them.

*I write a column on architecture in the National Post on occasion--my opinions could be biased.

1. I can’t do it! I am addicted to print.

   Posted by Meredith  on  10/28  at  12:31 PM

2. You write for the Post (in any capacity) and accuse the Globe of being right wing. WTF?

   The Star (to which I subscribe because I’m a cheapskate) took away the plastic bag but now throw it on the porch in an elastic band.

   It’s a pity the Globe doesn’t have an electronic subscription option as Macleans does – and if Macleans doesn’t stop occasionally hiccuping with its delivery by Canada Post I will be either going electronic or unsubscribing entirely.

   Posted by Mark Dowling  on  10/28  at  01:51 PM

3. Hi Mark, I’m not sure about the reasoning behind your statement above. I write for the Post therefore I agree with everything they write? No writer in any newspaper ever agrees with all the content contained in their respective journals—trust me on this one. In the Post’s defence, I really do think the Globe is more biased on some war-related topics than the Post, but it is a subjective measure to be sure.

   Posted by editor  on  10/28  at  03:40 PM

4. Newspapers keep taking the wrong thing from the internet. The internet look – broad streaks of open space and rammed with ads – is not a new aesthetic for a new time or any such thing, it’s just a poorly done way of working around technical limitations. It’s not the page layout that draws people to blogs, it’s that there is actual in-depth discussion of niche topics.
   And yet somehow newspapers in their increasingly frequent relaunches seem to feel that all it takes to beat the internet is to add more flashy bits. Perhaps the only newspaper that I’ve seen actually adapt to the internet effectively has been The Varsity, which now has massive amounts of content exclusive to their site.
   Just stealing a flawed aesthetic, rather than actually seeing why blogs are successful, somehow doesn’t seem like it is likely to work.

   Posted by Hugh  on  10/28  at  04:49 PM

5. News PAPER?

   Do you mean like print-outs?

   Posted by  on  10/29  at  09:22 AM

6. Please be nice to telemarketers. They are people, too. (And I am in no way being snarky.)

   Tip: If you tell them to “Please take me off your list”, they are legally required to put you on the DO NOT CALL list.

   Posted by  on  10/29  at  09:46 AM
8. What?! You're not cancelling your subscription because the Globe is about to inflict a month of Richard Florida on its readership? :) I'd take the Globe's claimed interest in building its web platform a little more seriously if it opened access to its articles and archives to all readers, not just paid ones. On September 19 2007 the New York Times opened itself up to all readers, subscribed or not. As the Times wrote recently in an open letter announcing the end of 'Times Select':

   the online landscape has altered significantly. Readers increasingly find news through search, as well as through social networks, blogs and other online sources. In light of this shift, we believe offering unfettered access to New York Times reporting and analysis best serves the interest of our readers, our brand and the long-term vitality of our journalism. We encourage everyone to read our news and opinion – as well as share it, link to it and comment on it.

   In the meantime, I'll confess to enjoying reading the Globe in bed on Saturday mornings (it goes especially well with toast and raspberry jam). It's no Ottawa Citizen, but it's not a bad weekend read.
   
   Posted by Amy Lavender Harris  on  {comment_date format=’%m/%d’}  at  {comment_date format=’%h:%i %A’}
Posted by Amy Lavender Harris  on  10/29  at  10:53 AM

9. I cancelled my subscription to the Globe and Mail about a year and a half ago. I think all the environmental-degradation reasons are the most important reasons for cancelling a subscription, but I’ll be honest that I had to do it one Saturday in disgust when they had a long article in the Fashion section about a bunch of people at a fancy house party. Yes, that’s what did it for me. A chattering-class reason, to be sure, but the environmentally sound after- effects, miniscule as they are, are an added bonus to my cancellation….

   Posted by Nyla Matuk  on  10/29  at  02:00 PM

10. You won’t cancel your subscription to the Star though will you hypocrite.

    Posted by  on  11/14  at  03:26 PM

11. My comment is meant for the author of this article by the way, not the similar hypocrites who posted comments although the same could be said to some of them.

    Posted by  on  11/14  at  03:28 PM

12. Hi Max, since I don’t have a subscription to any newspaper now I miss your point.

    Posted by Editor  on  11/14  at  05:52 PM

13. Dear Mark—the Globe does have an electronic subscription: see http://www.pressdisplay.com. It’s $9.99 US per month.

    Posted by Jeremy  on  11/20  at  12:04 AM

<< Back to main