Regional titles receive financial support to continue covering cricket

/0 Comments/in , /by

With football often dominating the back pages of the UK press, it’s easy for smaller (but nonetheless popular) sports clubs to feel slightly disenfranchised by the media.

But as the commercial pressures of running a newspaper continue to squeeze editorial budgets, editors need to make tough decisions. Football sells papers, and while readers may also be interested in athletics, cycling or tennis, it makes little financial sense to invest in coverage that won’t drive circulation (or page impressions).

Many sports journalists won’t like their craft to be talked about in such cold business terms but minority sports coverage doesn’t deliver a ROI.

Sports teams know that a lack of media coverage makes it harder for them to get new people involved in their sport. The less people get involved, the less the media are interested. It’s very much a case of ever decreasing circles.

This is why a scheme run by The England and Wales Cricket Board known as The Cricket Writers’ Club, which has recently awarded financial assistance to a number of regional titles for their coverage of professional cricket, makes so much sense.

Mark Baldwin, chairman of the Cricket Writers’ Club, told journalists: “The Cricket Writers’ Club’s continued support for ECB’s initiative in running these awards now includes offering prize monies in the Regional Newspaper of the Year category, precisely because the club wants to do what it can to support hard-pressed cricket writers in the regional press and also to underline its belief in the value to the game of coverage of county cricket in this area.

John Collings, editor of the Sunday Independent who received a £2,500 financial reward from the Cricket Writers Club said: “We’re honoured to win this award because its values share our values: a passion for and commitment to sport all levels, particularly grass-roots sport which these days too often struggles for the comprehensive coverage it deserves.”

PR has always been about earned media over paid media but when titles have to make editorial decisions based on cold economic facts, perhaps it’s time this line become a little more blurred.

How long before The Guardian follow The Independent’s profitable lead?

/0 Comments/in , , /by

The Independent has made its first profit in 23 years after abandoning print and focusing 100% on digital channels.

The Independent’s owner, Evgeny Lebedeb told journalists: “By going online-only we freed ourselves from the unwieldy infrastructure of print, and allowed ourselves to be far more flexible.

“It is still early days, but the first six months have shown that by being more nimble and digitally focused we can better serve our new, much bigger online audience.”

Highlighting a bright future at The Independent, Lebedeb added: “We are profitable for the first time in 23 years, which brings with it new opportunities.”

And it’s not just revenues that are on the up at newly digital Indy.

ABC figures in September showed a 17 percent year-on-year increase to 3,253,850 daily unique browsers.

Justin Byam Shaw, chairman of The Independent echoed Lebedeb’s comments by saying: “This historic return to profitability demonstrates the opportunities our move to digital brings.

“This puts The Independent in a strong position and with a sustainable long-term future, as we continue to grow our audiences globally and serve our readers and commercial partners with reliability and flair.”

The Independent made a brave move abandoning its print edition earlier this year.

Rivals at The Guardian even mourned the loss of the print edition of The Independent with an editorial in the paper’s Comment Is Free section stating: “Great newspapers which have survived for centuries find their business models challenged as never before. So no one will celebrate the end of the Independent in print. It was. Are you… next?”

Well, I imagine both Evgeny Lebedeb and the many journalists and editors whose futures are so much more secure now that The Independent is in profit will disagree and definitely by celebrating.

The question is, how much longer with The Guardian, The Telegraph, The FT, etc., etc. continue to be burdened by the high costs of print and distribution? If I was a journalist (or a shareholder) in any of these companies, I would personally be lobbying them to follow the Independent’s brave move online.

The Independent is profitable.

It is. Are You?

ITV blames Brexit for 120 Job Losses

/0 Comments/in /by

ITV is looking to make £25 million in savings next year to counterbalance a decline in advertising revenues which the broadcaster is blaming on “political and economic uncertainty”.

According to media reports, TV advertising is facing its worst year since 2009 with revenues set to decline by 2 percent.

As part of the savings process, ITV is planning to reduce its workforce by 120 people. The broadcaster currently employs 3,000 staff in the UK.

Speaking about the job losses, an ITV spokesperson told journalists: “At a time of political and economic uncertainty in our key markets, it’s important that we are in the strongest possible position to continue to invest in our strategy, and to meet any challenges and opportunities ahead, as we continue to grow a successful business.”

Because of continuing political uncertainty in the UK market and the financial impact it has on advertising market, the ITV is looking bolster its overseas operations.

The UK market currently accounts for 85 percent of the broadcasters revenues. However, recently the company has spent hundreds of millions of pounds investing in TV production in the United States.

A spokesperson said: ““We have taken costs out across ITV in a managed and sensible way over the past six years and we must continue to keep a tight control on spending to ensure that we are operating as efficiently and effectively as possible, while maximising our ability to invest in the high-quality programming that drives ITV’s success.”

Prior to the Brexit vote, the TV advertising market was expected to grow by 7.4 percent in 2016, following a similar pattern over the previous year.

The ITV now predicts advertising revenues over the first 9 months of the year will be down by 1 percent, year-on-year while a number of media booking agencies suggest the market has dropped even further due to fears over a “hard Brexit”.

Collaboration is key to the future of public affairs

/0 Comments/in /by

Design, engineering and project management consultancy Atkins hosted an Intelligent Mobility summit this week, which brought together the biggest industry names to discuss the future of transport design and delivery. Speakers discussed everything from decreasing emissions to the impact of autonomous vehicles on our quality of life, but one of the key points of the conference wasn’t so much what they talked about, but the theme of cross-sectoral, cross party collaboration which ran through it.  

The variety of guests points towards a broader, and more open, approach to lobbying and public affairs. Government, academia, clients, providers and business leaders came together for a frank discussion of the opportunities and threats which will likely arise in the future and, far from being a closed doors session between industry and government, this was an open policy discussion.

It also wasn’t a single issue conference: the variety of guests meant everyone had their own take on the challenges and opportunities facing the sector.  Tough questions were posed to speakers, ranging from the government’s bureaucratic tender process to the environmental impact of encouraging a new transport boom in the form of autonomous cars.

Despite the disparate group of guests, there was broad agreement on one thing: there needs to be real collaboration between the transport, infrastructure, digital and housing sectors in the future if the UK is going to successfully counteract the challenges facing each one. There was a ready acceptance that there isn’t enough being done to get cross-industry representatives round the same table, and because of their interdependence, this means a risk of duplication between sectors if this isn’t done.

 

Trinity Mirror continue with freesheet cull

/0 Comments/in , /by

Trinity Mirror has announced it will close three local freesheets in Milton Keynes, Luton and Northampton in what is being described as an ongoing purge of Local World titles. 

According to the National Union of Journalists, the newspaper titles, OneMK (formerly known as MK News), Luton on Sunday and the Northampton Herald and Post, are to close without consultation.

NUJ national organiser Laura Davison told journalists: “This announcement has come as a bombshell to staff on these titles. Once again Trinity Mirror has announced a shutdown of papers with no consultation with journalists or readers. Local people, democratic bodies and businesses are going to be stripped of a voice and plurality will be massively undermined.

“The company’s actions smack of arrogance. These operations are already run on a shoe string and now more jobs are set to go. It is another big red warning flag hoisted over the crisis in quality local journalism. We urge local people to join our campaign for properly resourced local journalism.

Trinity Mirror, which has closed 20 titles over the last two years, is unrepentant.

A spokesperson for the publishers said: “We are closing three free weekly titles in Luton, Milton Keynes and Northampton as part of a review of our portfolio to look at how we best serve our readers and advertisers in these markets.

“We are not exiting these markets but will retain a presence in a different way. We believe there is a better way for us to provide content and commercial solutions for the local communities, for example through a schedule of niche products and awards and events.”

“We will also be increasing the focus on Bedfordshire on Sunday which remains as both a print title and website. We will be increasing distribution of this title into Luton and broadening our online coverage.

“The number of roles we require to deliver the new portfolio of products is less than the current structure and as a result the business proposes to reduce the headcount, so unfortunately a number of roles in editorial and commercial are at risk of redundancy as part of these changes.”

Trinity Mirror is obviously making some very unpopular decisions regarding the closure of titles based on the cold, hard, financial realities of running a newspaper company in the digital age.

The question is, do these regions still offer an opportunity for smaller, more agile publishing companies to exploit? If journalists and editors think there is still an opportunity to make money from local news, now’s the time to prove the big guys wrong.

Will the “little man” suffer following Tesco’s PR win over Unilever?

/0 Comments/in , /by

British Supermarket Tesco earned more than a few PR points in their battle with Unilever and their proposed post-Brexit price increases. By standing their ground, Tesco took on the “greedy” multi-national organisation and won the day for us little guys who like to spread Marmite on our toast in the morning.

Tesco cleverly didn’t take any sides in the EU Referendum. They couldn’t afford to alienate their diverse customer-base. After so many PR gaffs in recent years, including their (albeit unforeseen) relaxed attitude to selling horse meat (how very European), so-called Marmitegate has been quite a comeback for the retail brand. They will undoubtedly be hoping to capitalise on this reputation boosting PR win.

But while Tesco smugly bathe in the glory of ultimately becoming Brexit heroes, it’s the little guy that stands to lose out.

Smaller producers affected by the current decline in the value of the pound, must already be bracing themselves for accusations of greed and profiteering should they attempt to raise their prices to cover any increases in the cost of business.

Note: While some producers, particularly those who export, might benefit from a decline in the pound there are many other businesses who are paying a higher price for imported goods and everyone suffers when fuel and energy costs increase.

Many UK producers (particularly in the dairy industry) have previously received public support because of “unfair” buying practices adopted by many supermarkets. However, with current rhetoric in much of the UK press, accusing any negativity towards the impact Brexit is having on the economy as “remoaning” you have to wonder where sympathies will lie.

Will the press continue to back Tesco while the thumb-screws are turned on smaller suppliers because the supermarket’s stance towards price rises suits their editorial policies?

Trinity Mirror Continue With Freesheet Cull

/0 Comments/in , /by

Trinity Mirror has announced it will close three local freesheets in Milton Keynes, Luton and Northamptom in what is being described as an ongoing purge of Local World titles.

According to the National Union of Journalists, the newspaper titles, OneMK (formerly known as MK News), Luton on Sunday and the Northampton Herald and Post, are to close without consultation.

NUJ national organiser Laura Davison told journalists: “This announcement has come as a bombshell to staff on these titles. Once again Trinity Mirror has announced a shutdown of papers with no consultation with journalists or readers. Local people, democratic bodies and businesses are going to be stripped of a voice and plurality will be massively undermined.

“The company’s actions smack of arrogance. These operations are already run on a shoe string and now more jobs are set to go. It is another big red warning flag hoisted over the crisis in quality local journalism. We urge local people to join our campaign for properly resourced local journalism.

Trinity Mirror, which has closed 20 titles over the last two years, is unrepentant.

A spokesperson for the publishers said: “We are closing three free weekly titles in Luton, Milton Keynes and Northampton as part of a review of our portfolio to look at how we best serve our readers and advertisers in these markets.

“We are not exiting these markets but will retain a presence in a different way. We believe there is a better way for us to provide content and commercial solutions for the local communities, for example through a schedule of niche products and awards and events.”

“We will also be increasing the focus on Bedfordshire on Sunday which remains as both a print title and website. We will be increasing distribution of this title into Luton and broadening our online coverage.

“The number of roles we require to deliver the new portfolio of products is less than the current structure and as a result the business proposes to reduce the headcount, so unfortunately a number of roles in editorial and commercial are at risk of redundancy as part of these changes.”

Trinity Mirror is obviously making some very unpopular decisions regarding the closure of titles based on the cold, hard, financial realities of running a newspaper company in the digital age.

The question is, do these regions still offer an opportunity for smaller, more agile publishing companies to exploit? If journalists and editors think there is still an opportunity to make money from local news, now’s the time to prove the big guys wrong.

The Canary Proves Online Journalism Pays (If You Give Your Readers What They Want)

/0 Comments/in /by

The left leaning news website set up a just over 12 months ago on an initial investment of just £500 is proving that online journalism can pay if you give you readers what they want.

The Canary turned over £250,000 in its first year of operation, has grown to become a top 100 UK news site and now employs an editorial team of 25 (mainly) part-time workers.

The site is funded, like many other online publications, through a combination of advertising, sponsorship and subscriptions.

Unlike many other publications, The Canary doesn’t feel it needs to offer readers any other incentive to support the title other than their content.

The Canary’s editor-in-chief Kerry-Anne Mendoza told journalists (http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/the-canary-from-500-start-up-to-top-100-uk-news-website-in-the-space-of-a-year/): “Paying subscribers for this whole first year don’t get anything. They don’t get a mug, they don’t get a t-shirt, they don’t even get an email from us saying welcome.

“They are paying for content that they could get for free purely because they want our writers to earn more money.”

Highlighting the success of the operation Mendoza said: “What people seem to like us for is breaking open legislation that’s coming through and actually explaining it in a way people understand and can see what the risks are and then take action.”

The Canary operates a unique business model which it explains on its website:

  • First, we pay tax. We are based in the UK and are happy to contribute our share to develop a wonderful country, not without its problems of course.
  • Then we pay costs which we keep below 5% of our gross revenue.
  • What is left is our net profit. We split this simply:
    • 50% to our writers
    • 10% to our section editors
    • 20% to our leadership team
    • 20% goes back into the company for marketing and new projects

Each writer and editor is paid in two ways. Firstly, each article receives a flat rate equal payment from our monthly income from supporters. So with each new supporter the pay per article goes up every month. Secondly, each article receives a top-up payment based directly on the percentage of web traffic, and therefore advertising income, that articles generate during a given calendar month. It’s as simple as that.

While The Canary’s politics might not be everyone’s cup of tea (including many left-wing supporters), their approach to business should be of interest to any writer or publisher that wants to invest in the future of journalism.

Robot reporters and mobile newsrooms – the future of journalism is now

/0 Comments/in , /by

There is little doubt that journalism, as a career, is undergoing more than a little disruption at the hands of technology. The recent news that Press Association are about to start employing robot reporters will do little to elevate fears of job security in newsrooms up and down the country.

Speaking at the Society of Editors conference in Carlisle, Pete Cliffton, PA’s editor-in-chief, said: “This won’t be replacing any of our fantastic journalists, it will be more a case of offering an extra level when it comes to short market reports, election results and football reporting.”

He continued: “Will it take over from proper journalists? Of course it won’t. We won’t have a robot going to a big fire or covering a crown court case.”

Addresses the question of accuracy and potential to be spoofed by pranksters, Cliffton said: “We will be taking very small steps in this area.”

He also suggested that trials in Denmark showed that robot reporters were more accurate than a human trying to write too many short stories on their own.

In other technology-related news from the conference, BBC Academy trainer, Marc Settle, spoke about how smart phone technology was changing the media’s expectations of what a journalist should now be capable of delivering.

Settle said: “When you have got a smartphone in your pocket it is remiss of your employees and you as editors not to know how to take advantage of it and use it to its full capacity.”

Settle suggested that a journalist equipped with the right apps and a small pack of accessories (an external microphone, a light and a small tripod) could transform the way audio and video news coverage is covered.

However, not all attendees at the conference were so welcoming the technological change.

Catherine Houlihan, managing editor of ITV Border, would prefer to exercise a little restraint and said: “We embrace it but I think it’s keeping everything in proportion.”

She continued: “It will be foolhardy to ignore how technology is changing and how that’s changing how we provide news and services but equally we should take comfort in what we do best, which is making regional television and enhancing that with an online edge.”

Does Brexit mean new avenues for lobbying?

/0 Comments/in /by

Despite very little discussion during the referendum of how a pro Brexit vote would actually be translated into Britain leaving the EU, since the outcome of the vote this controversial topic has built considerable momentum, shifting further into the public eye and rising up the government’s agenda. Last week we saw this topic take centre stage when investment banker Gina Miller took legal action against the government in high court, something which could have far broader implications in terms of non-traditional lobbying processes.

Miller made the case in that the Government does not possess the legal authority to wield royal prerogative to enact Brexit without parliamentary approval. The central element of her argument rests on the fact that, legally speaking, ministers cannot use prerogative powers to remove rights established through an act of parliament. The Government enacting Article 50 would violate this and therefore she argues they must seek parliamentary approval.

While this particular news piece is interesting it opens avenues for perhaps a more engrossing debate around circumventing more traditional lobbying routes and using the courts as a means of enacting change within politics.

Recently we have seen the BMA and law organisation ClientEarth launch legal action against the Government with varying success. While the BMA failed in their attempt to block the junior doctors’ contract through the courts, ClientEarth had far more success and the High Court granted their request to pursue a Judicial Review against DEFRA as a result of their inadequate plans to tackle air pollution.

This hearing will take place this week. Regardless of the outcome, ClientEarth has made great strides in bringing public attention to this issue, as well as evoking some fierce media criticism towards the lack on action from the Government.