First, one newspaper writes about the cutbacks at a couple of American book sections. Then, several more papers write about the same topic. (There aren't a lot of original ideas in journalism.) Next, print book reviewers and blog reviewers start squabbling over who's the keeper of the true cross. (That wasn't the original point.)
Now, finally and thankfully, an article in the Los Angeles Times calls for a truce. Here's the link.
And I'll repeat what I've said before: Any newspaper that eliminates books coverage, which is avidly followed by the most dedicated readers it has (as in, when they're done with the paper, they actually keep reading), is asking for tougher times down the road because it's not seeing the forest OR the trees.