Ahhh…the METRO.

How many of us can actually say that the daily METRO serves as our main source of information? Unfortunately, too many of us can. Like its universities, Boston’s newspapers also have their rankings, and the METRO is a far cry from the Ivy League, if you will.

But soon, this may not be such a bad thing after all. On January 4, The Boston Globe, owned by The New York Times Co., announced its $16.5m agreement to buy 49 percent of METRO Boston. The deal is expected to close by the end of January.

Janet Rubinson, president and chief executive of The New York Times Co., stated that this merger would help “to not only expand the METRO reach but for the readers to perhaps graduate to The Boston Globe as well.” The idea is to reach the METRO’s 20-30 something year old audience, a generation of American newspaper readers lost.

According to CNN.com, newspaper circulation has declined among younger generations. Many of the younger generations in cities like Boston, Stockholm, Montreal, and Philadelphia, where the METRO has daily distributed publications, rely on the abbreviated wire packed tabloid for their news-the dumbed down version of news, in essence. By purchasing METRO Boston, The New York Times Co. is keeping up with the latest in newspaper circulation trends, while in the meantime potentially rectifying a puzzling phenomenon.

But at the same time, the merger has Boston Herald publisher Pat Purcell in a tizzy, claiming that the move is “aimed directly at the Herald.”Although the idea of people shifting their news sources from the crummy tabloid to a reputable publication is appealing, Purcell’s claim is quite on target according to antitrust laws.

Section 2 of the Sherman Act prohibits monopolization of trade and commerce that would lead to unfair methods of competition, outlawed by the Federal Trade Commission Act.

The horizontal merger will eliminate a segment of the head to head competition in Boston when The Globe gains control over the free publication. When it will do so, The Globe plans to include its content in the METRO Boston. This has many negative implications in a nation where the press is meant to be open and free.

The fact of the matter is, The Boston Globe is owned by a larger corporation, The New York Times Co., which owns a whole host of other media outlets like the International Herald Tribune, 15 regional newspapers, 8 network affiliated television stations, in addition to Massachusetts’ own Worcester Telegram and Gazette and New England Sports Network.

Business consolidation threatens consumers financially, but the consolidation of information sources threatens consumers intellectually. These days the world is getting its information from too few sources. And to all those concerned (i.e. the readers of Noam Chomsky’s Manufacturing Consent), this merger may sound eerily familiar. After all, Janet Rubinson made The New York Times Co.’s intentions fairly clear by stating that she wants METRO readers to steadily gravitate towards The Boston Globe. METRO readers will practically be spoon-fed and tailored to prefer The Globe and The New York Times over competing information sources.It may be too soon to say that this is another News Corporation in the making, but Rupert Murdoch did begin somewhere.