The good news: the New York Times Co. made nearly $13 million in net income in the first quarter. Quite a turnaround from last year, when the company lost $74 million in the quarter! The bad news: Total revenues were down more than 3%. And while digital ad revenues were up 18% (the About.com group was up 30%, so don't get too excited, newspaper people!), that, of course, paled in comparison to the money lost in print advertising, which was down 12%.

Oh, the Boston Globe? The paper projected to cost our already-flailing company $85 million this year? Where the employees hate management because of emotional union contract battles? Yea, we could sell it. Or not. Whatever. Why, you wanna buy it?

In your finally Friday media column: The NYT looks ethically inconsistent and its management is mush-mouthed, Bruce Wasserstein contemplates buying BusinessWeek, and Fleet Street dies, unnoticed.

The Boston Globe will not be shutting down just yet. The paper came to enough of an agreement with most of its unions to avoid immediate closure. They're still at war with the journalists, though:

Today is the deadline that the New York Times Co. originally set for the Boston Globe to come up with $20 million in cutbacks, or be shut down for good. So, what the hell's happening?

In your brittle Tuesday media column: Angry newspaper editors, starry-eyed newspaper veterans, desperate newspaper companies, and dead newspaper revivals. And, Portfolio's final party:

The New York Times Co. released its financial results for the first quarter this morning, which are just as bad as expected. Or, more accurately: even worse than expected.

So this finally happened: the New York Times Co. is threatening to close the Boston Globe if the union there doesn't agree to several harsh money-saving moves. In this case, it's not a bluff.

Fact-conveying site About.com has always been a moneymaker in the New York Times Co.'s portfolio (somehow), even as its newspapers were spiraling downwards. But now About has its own problems:

Hey, one more ominous day in the increasingly ominous life of the New York Times Co. The fact that the Times Co. announced plans to mortgage or sell its fancy headquarters building on the same day that the Tribune Co. took a step towards bankruptcy is really bad karma. Check this out, people: The New York Times Co. will eventually go bankrupt if it does not make a drastic change. No amount of fanboy love for Frank Rich or outcry from the journalism establishment will change this fact. Who will step in with a plan to save the paper of record? We will, improbably!

When the NYT Company slashed its dividend and announced ominous October revenues yesterday, we asked you, our kindly readers: Might this company go into bankruptcy? If so, when? And if not, what should they do? Many of you answered! And virtually every viable option for the company was suggested at least once. The Sulzberger family should just read the following list of your responses and pick one, depending on how optimistic they're feeling today:
The optimist:

Is the New York Times Company trying to buy Metro, the city's freebie daily and the rest of Boston's? Silly rabbits. Running Bill Kristol and buying yet another flagging property isn't going to scare off Rupert Murdoch's Wall Street Journal. Don't lets look too desperate and flail-y. [FishbowlNY]