Gloating's not my style, so although this blog's about Boston, I won't mention baseball. I won't.

As it gets harder and harder for print media to compete effectively with online news sources, major cities across the U.S. are facing the very real prospect of not having a local newspaper. The Boston Globe is now out for bid, and questions are surfacing about the impact that contamination at its properties may have on the value of its headquarters and printing facility, which are assessed at $47 million and $17 million, respectively. Whether environmental due diligence factors into the deal remains to be seen.

The Globe's owners bought the site back in 1955 from General Tire & Rubber (red flag). I searched EDR's databases for this address and found out there's a 2002 institutional control on the site, which states that “the property comprises a disposal site or part of a disposal site as a result of a release of oil and/or hazardous material.” The notice also states that operating “a residence, school and/or day care center” on the polluted land is inconsistent with state guidelines. Further, if there's a change in use "additional work might be needed." There are reportedly three parties bidding on the deal, and one has offered to pay $35 million and assume $59 million in pension liabilities, but "it is not clear if potential buyers are factoring in cleanup costs or contemplating redeveloping the Globe headquarters site in the future."

Even more interesting than the news story itself, titled Pollution Cuts Globe Land's Value, are the comments it inspired. The commenters are as colorful and entertaining as rabid Red Sox fans can be (oops). Here's a smattering of some of the best:

• "The whole Blob is contaminated so it's no wonder the land on which it operates is too. It's a toxic asset and only Soros or Obama would and could bail out the unethical and immoral rag."
• "Exactly! The 'writing' has been polluted for the better part of a half century."
• "Any potential buyer of the Globe, with deep pockets, no doubt sees the real estate along Morrissey Boulevard as a prime asset. It seems improbable - if not impossible - that potential buyers would not be aware of the contaminated site. It's public record, as the Herald pointed out today. The New York Times, owner the Globe, would have to disclose the information as part of a sale, would it not? There must be some estimates of a cost cleanup for the site and that would be factored into a sale (just guessing)."
• "The irony is hysterical. Here is the Globe screaming the Lying Lefty Line about the environment, sitting on a toxic sludge pile."

I should also mention that the article appeared in the Herald, the Globe's key competition so many of the comments are in the spirit of attacking a nemesis. The editors of the Herald may have relished the opportunity to publish a story about the environmental skeletons in the Globe's closet, and of course now that this story is out there getting visibility, it's going to be that much hard for the prospective purchasers to ignore environmental issues in the due diligence conducted, as well as the purchase price negotiations.