Andy Burnham, the Culture Secretary, has told the Times that he wants more government and local authority advertising to be placed in local papers to help the struggling firms. Ministers are also looking at council funded newspapers and the impact they are having on local papers and the possibility of creating local media trusts supported by councils.
I find it is better for lining the cat litter tray and have cancelled the Gazette and Journal.
Why don't these papers just charge personal services more?
Interesting suggestion. There are two points I would make here:
1. The more advertising the council places with local papers, the more power the council has to affect the news and editorials that that paper chooses to print. There may be some evidence of that already (no names, no pack drill). No paper wants to irritate big or their biggest advertisers and the threat of withdrawal of advertising is a big stick to beat papers with. I understand (from a quasi council-enterprise), that it is unusually expensive for a private company to advertise in Haringey's glossy propaganda publication: count the number of genuinely independent paid-for ads in HP (you won't need more than one hand. Of a careless butcher).
Is the reason that companies don't bother advertising in HP just the sheer cost, or is it that everyone knows that no one bothers reading HP?
2. As well as the normal propagandist fare (and snippets of useful information) Haringey People also publishes purely news stories. Example from the current (July/August 09) issue, "Guilty of gambling without a licence". There was a council angle to this story, but we could equally well have read this in the local free press (i.e. free as in not-controlled by the council majority group, rather than free as in no cover price). There are many stories in Haringey People that if they were truly newsworthy, they would be covered in the normal way, rather than (in effect) our council taxes being used for this purpose.