Forum Topic

Possible New Owner For Local Paper

Unfortunately it doesn't look as though it will bring about much new investment https://www.wsj.com/articles/hedge-fund-backed-media-group-prepares-bid-for-gannett-11547427720

David Parker ● 2858d12 Comments

Unfortunately, I could not read the full article as I do not subscribe the Wall Street Journal.I think it was very sad when the Dimbleby Group was sold to the US Gannett Group.It appears that monopolies are back in fashion!

Ivonne Holliday ● 2858d

The article outlines the company's business strategy which is basically to incur no expense unless it demonstrably leads to revenue — hardly compatible with any journalistic enterprise. The sad truth is that his differs very little from the current way of operating of Newsquest which has cut and cut operations to the point of extinction. The great irony of this is that the Dimbleby's sold their papers in the area to Newsquest because of trouble with the unions and they felt the reputational damage of all the criticism was not worth the bother particularly with profits on the decline. Back in the day the Richmond and Twickenham Times was a serious newspaper which was well worth the cover price. Now, as far as I am aware Newsquest doesn't employ anybody working in either Richmond or Wandsworth. I very much doubt anyone who was complaining about the Dimbleby's has worked at the company for at least a decade.

David Parker ● 2857d

Yes, the Richmond and Twickenham Times was a serious and valuable paper, as was the Wandsworth Borough News, old-fashioned though it was in its presentation: it looked as though it hadn't changed in 100 years!

Richard Carter ● 2857d

The wider issue to my mind is the disappearance of one of the checks and balances in local democracy. It is that much harder to hold local councils to account for their actions when there is minimal local reporting. If a story is big enough it might get taken up by the national press. And I have seen (heard) no evidence that local radio is filling the gap.  The news that four sites in PHS generate a lot of traffic fine revenue for our council is a small example of what we see too little of. It came out thanks to a Wandsworth Times FOI request.

Jonathan Callaway ● 2857d

"“There’s no point in acting surprised about it. All the planning charts and demolition orders have been on display at your local planning department in Alpha Centauri for 50 of your Earth years, so you’ve had plenty of time to lodge any formal complaint and it’s far too late to start making a fuss about it now. … What do you mean you’ve never been to Alpha Centauri? Oh, for heaven’s sake, mankind, it’s only four light years away, you know. I’m sorry, but if you can’t be bothered to take an interest in local affairs, that’s your own lookout. Energize the demolition beams.”"(Douglas Adams)

David Ainsworth ● 2857d

The Wandsworth Times is still capable of doing good local reporting and David is right to highlight the FoI request as an excellent example. Unfortunately their staff turnover seems really high. Also on this particularly story it may be that more people found out about it through this site than in the paper.My brother-in-law works in the local newspaper industry in another part of the country. He says that there is a common misconception that the problems that local papers are having is down to Google and Facebook. He says they actually benefit from the existence of these sites because they provide them with lots of readers. His view is the real turning point was when local authorities started to launch their own magazines and publications. The Council would always be any newspaper's biggest advertiser but discretionary spending from this source has more or less disappeared over the last decade. Newspapers still get revenue from non-discretionary spending from local councils such as public notices and this forms the largest part of their income for many titles - including I would guess the Wandsworth Times. As Councils aren't particularly bothered how many people see these notices the paper it becomes less important for a paper to increase readership. For Newsquest or the kind of vulture fund that wants to take it over they will look on the return on investment that they will get on any operation they run. They get a much lower return on a well staffed newspaper with a healthy readership than a newspaper with minimal staffing and readership which just harvests the revenue from public notices. These companies don't see newspapers as a check and balance in a democratic process or an opportunity to spread cheer and enlightenment but as a revenue stream on which to maximise the return. Local newspapers are all struggling but it is the way the system operates that denies us decent ones.

David Parker ● 2854d

Sorry I meant Jonathan with reference to the FoI request although David's quote was very apposite.

David Parker ● 2854d

Thank you David for this and apologies for the late acknowledgement as I have just returned into the thread.I have not heard anybody complaining about the Dimbleby's. I was saddened when I heard it was being sold - a bit like the end of an era as the Dimbelby family owned the local newspapers (all in the south west of London) for more than a century....  And yes, Newsquest Media Group is the owner but its parent organization is Gannett Company, an American company based in Virginia.

Ivonne Holliday ● 2854d

Wasn't suggesting the criticism of the Dimbleby's was justified. They produced high quality local newspapers with staff who were probably on higher salaries than Newsquest pay now many years later. David Dimbleby's argument was that he had to 'pay peanuts' to have the kind of staffing levels necessary to produce a quality newspaper. Newsquest pay peanuts to produce one that isn't that good. There was also a dispute about the use of non-unionised printers. Lots of other newspapers were having to deal with very restrictive practices among the print unions at that time.His policy made him persona non grata among many of the left and with the NUJ for some time but in retrospect they might have to acknowledge that journalistic standards and jobs would have been better protected if he had remained in charge.https://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/unions-likely-to-oppose-dimbleby-as-bbc-chief-9179204.html

David Parker ● 2854d

Was pondering this matter over the weekend. When the Dimbleby's ran the local newspapers they would have regarded it as a dereliction of duty not to have sent a reporter to a significant council meeting. They were the paper of record and therefore it was an integral part of their function to do so.Last week's council meeting which decided on the housing budget was something they would have covered in some depth. Fast forward to 2019 and the Wandsworth Times coverage seems to be limited to the Council's press release sent prior to the meeting and, while this site has made an attempt to get comment from across the political range, they have provided very little extra detail. This is not meant to be a criticism, PutneySW15.com has provided better coverage than their competition, a multi-national company which benefits from huge subsidies denied to them.Nevertheless no local media is currently functioning as a paper of record. There is no independent report of what happened at this meeting in which decisions were made on how to spend tens of millions of pounds in the borough. The dysfunction of the press is being compounded by the dysfunction of the opposition. It is very noticeable that the local Labour party didn't respond to requests for comment on this meeting and generally don't seem interested in putting across their point of view. It is hard to avoid the conclusion that Labour in Wandsworth is chronically inward looking and all that matters is debate within the party rather than issues that concern borough residents in general. This basically gives the Council a free pass. No detailed media analysis of what they do and no oversight by an effective opposition. On the face of it it appears that the Conservatives in Wandsworth have been bountiful when it comes to their housing policy but I find it very hard to believe this is the whole truth. A profound democratic deficit has developed which cannot but have very negative consequences in the future. A US-based vulture fund taking over our local newspaper is going to make this a lot worse not better.

David Parker ● 2851d

Neither this site nor the Wandsworth Times nor the Labour party for that matter has mentioned the fact that the reduction in council rents is a requirement of the Government’s Welfare Reform and Work Act 2016. This isn't really a particularly arcane fact and something that a local newspaper reporter working a few decades ago would have known — the Dimbleby Group papers probably would have had a reporter specialising in local government matters. So now the Council have managed to claim credit for something which is not of their doing with the opposition and the media not capable of providing the public with the full facts. Maybe Labour felt it was a zero sum game pointing this out as the credit would just go to central government. Though this site has gone beyond republishing a council press release and attempted to present a balanced picture the coverage is still deficient. This is forgivable given the lack of resources but not so with the Wandsworth Times which is in receipt of significant sums of money from local taxpayers and is part of a large global corporation.

Barry Elms ● 2849d

Thanks for the information about the legislation on this issue. Casts the whole issue in a different light. Labour have now belatedly responded, perhaps they read this thread!

David Parker ● 2844d