What will Booth consolidation look like?

I'm going out on a limb here. Pretty dangerous place for a guy as big as me, but let's do it anyway.

When the editor talks about consolidation and having too many editors, it is apparent that Booth (or Newhouse) is looking to save money by merging operations. One of those could obviously be running the copy desk for the eight Michigan newspapers out of one, maybe two, locations.

While that might work to produce a common Nation and World page, it is hard to imagine (and as I said before I could be wrong) how this would work for local news. One of the strengths of any copy desk is the knowledge (many copy editors are former local news reporters) that the editors have of local figures and places. Without that background it is hard to imagine how a copy desk, say based in Flint or Saginaw, could competently edit copy from Jackson or Kalamazoo. More mistakes, more loss in credibility, something the paper simply can't afford now.

The Journal always had a strong sports and features presence. Sports seems to be intact, I still see a commitment to local coverage there, but the features pages have all but disappeared. Since Cookie (and we're praying for your quick healing) left there is a marked reduction in a focus on a strong local feature section. I used to love reading the Journal feature section, I'm not even sure if there is one now. That could either be consolidated out of one location, or eliminated all together under the new plans.

Readers need to watch for a drastic reduction in what is called the "news hole." Most newspapers when I started 30 years ago used to have a pretty healthy balance between ads and news. 70/30 or even 75/25 percent news to advertising was the norm. Watch for a cutback to a 50/50 balance, which will make the paper much thinner that the skinny version you get today.

How does that save money? Couple of ways. Less space for news, less need for more reporters or reporters to work overtime to fill the "hole." Even larger than that is the cost of newsprint, which like everything else has skyrocketed in recent years. Smaller paper, less newsprint, more savings. Can't say as I blame them here.

In fact, my preference would be to go ahead and shrink the news hole, but with the same number of editorial people, that would reduce the daily pressure and allow for more long range projects.

If the Journal cut out a niche as the crusading watchdog, people might tolerate a day or two of meager coverage to look forward to a monster breaking expose on say, the Mayor being secretly involved in a non-profit group trying to bring street racing to Flint. That wouldn't be so bad if there wasn't some suspicion, or even evidence, that the city has been doing the infrastructure work at taxpayer cost to make the thing happen. That's just one example.

For newspapers it's fourth down in the fourth quarter and your team is down by 5 points. You either kneel down and surrender or throw the Hail Mary pass! Throw the Hail Mary, go for broke (literally).

Of course, I could be wrong.