NY Times vs Globe and Mail
It's not a battle you see often. The New York Times' single Canadian correspondent, versus the Globe and Mail's army of bureau reporters scattered around this country. Plus, the Globe and Mail is a Canadian paper, so it knows more about Canada than those Yankees, right? Wrong. Yesterday, the British Columbia government pledged to protect 5 million acres of coastal rain forest in a complete reversal of previous policy. It's a wonderful step forward and you would expect the Globe to send a reporter to the actual forest to report. It's not far for the Vancouver bureau. Instead, the paper opted for a CP wire story from Vancouver, complete with a press conference quote and what I assume is a phone interview with a Sierra Club spokesperson. The NYT, on the other hand, sent Clifford Kraus to Hartley Bay, British Columbia, to report on the announcement. In fact, Kraus was able to report on the announcement in today's paper, while the Globe will have to wait until tomorrow, as the CP story came out after the announcement. The Globe wire copy just covers the news. The NYT story gives background on Native logging rights, logging in British Columbia and how the new deal breaks new ground in how governments are balancing the rights of Native Canadians, logging companies and the preservation of nature. The Globe story simply doesn't. It's one thing to use wire copy for an international story. But to not report on events in your own country as well as a paper from the United States is shameful.