Press Gazette: the post mortems begin
27/11/06 19:23 Media
issues
Inevitably, people have started picking over the
bones of the Press Gazette and wondering what went
wrong. Roy Greenslade's blog in Guardian Unlimited is
probably about the best. There's more to it than
he suggests, though.
For my money, after discussion with a number of
fellow hacks, I'd agree that the nature of
journalists has changed since the PG's heyday. In the
1980s desktop publishing started and with that came a
whole bunch of DTP'd magazines. Many were about
computers. This is important because these magazines
brought with them a new form of journalist, one who
popped up ready-formed rather than going through the
traditional local press followed by national press
route. This has spread way beyond the IT press by
now.
This meant that a lot of journalists - many of whom are now pretty senior - have grown up respecting but taking no real interest in the regional press. This in turn made a lot of the content of the PG redundant for a lot of its readership.
I don't know what you do when your readers start to fragment, and by dividing its pages up accordingly PG did its best. Other issues contributed, though. As a former contributor I'll admit to finding it galling that the MD who took it increasingly into loss and then buried it was on £133,000 per annum while contributors were getting £190 per 1000 words. The commissioning editors often seemed embarrassed at the word rate and I don't blame them.
I'd like to think there'll be another trade mag for the press emerging at some stage, but the silo mentality - in which the magazine journalists are only interested in passing in the newspaper journalists and in which trade journalists don't readily identify themselves with their colleagues on the regionals- will remain an obstacle for anyone attempting to set it up.
And that's from an editorial point of view only. How you'd make a case for advertising in a mag that attempted to straddle all of those groups I just don't know.
This meant that a lot of journalists - many of whom are now pretty senior - have grown up respecting but taking no real interest in the regional press. This in turn made a lot of the content of the PG redundant for a lot of its readership.
I don't know what you do when your readers start to fragment, and by dividing its pages up accordingly PG did its best. Other issues contributed, though. As a former contributor I'll admit to finding it galling that the MD who took it increasingly into loss and then buried it was on £133,000 per annum while contributors were getting £190 per 1000 words. The commissioning editors often seemed embarrassed at the word rate and I don't blame them.
I'd like to think there'll be another trade mag for the press emerging at some stage, but the silo mentality - in which the magazine journalists are only interested in passing in the newspaper journalists and in which trade journalists don't readily identify themselves with their colleagues on the regionals- will remain an obstacle for anyone attempting to set it up.
And that's from an editorial point of view only. How you'd make a case for advertising in a mag that attempted to straddle all of those groups I just don't know.
|