The National Union of Journalists has come out in support of staff working for a council newspaper after details of their salary packages were published in the local press.
The East London Advertiser reported that staff costs at the Tower Hamlets council paper East End Life averaged more than £47,000 after a Freedom of Information request to the authority.
Now the NUJ has sent a letter to the Advertiser criticising it for its story and challenging the Archant title to publish wage details for its own managers and reporters.
But Advertiser editor Malcolm Starbrook, who says he has yet to receive the letter, today said he was standing by the story and accused the union of “spin.”
The letter was written by Nic Mitchell and Phil Morcom, co-chairs of the Public Relations and Communications Council at the NUJ, who said it was not possible to work out an average salary simply by dividing the staff costs of £218,000 by the 4.6 employees at the council paper.
They wrote: “In reference to your story ‘Newspaper Society to meet with Eric Pickles amid pressure on Tower Hamlets council publications’ on 22 August 2012, we would like to point out an inaccuracy.
“The figure of £47,500 per annum was arrived at via a Freedom of Information request to Tower Hamlets Council. It is not possible to work out an average salary by simply dividing £218,000 by the number of staff (4.6). The overwhelming majority of our members at the council earn nowhere near this amount.
“Council grade rates and salaries of senior council staff are a matter of public record. Staff on the newspaper are paid the local authority rate for their grade as set by national agreement.
“We were, however, disappointed that you decided it appropriate to publicise the individual salaries of our members in the communications department. In the spirit of openness on these matters is Archant prepared to publish the salaries of its management and reporters’ wages?
“The NUJ is keen to foster better relations between all journalists, in the private and public sectors, and we are keen to have a good working relationship with the staff of the East London Advertiser.”
The council has said that the figure for staff costs covers a range of salary grades and includes payments for National Insurance, pension contributions and other costs.
The Advertiser reported that Tower Hamlets Council had justified its continued production of the newspaper by arguing that its £1.2m budget was covered by advertising, but the FoI showed 49pc of its revenue came from internal advertising from its own departments.
Malcolm told HTFP he had not received the letter from the NUJ.
He said: “Had I done so, I would state that the complaint from the NUJ’s Public Relations and Communications Council, as it appears on your website, seems more about spin than substance.
“It is equally clear that no-one there seems to have read the report in the Advertiser, which is still available on our e-edition for all to appreciate the facts.
“Our FOI request was directed at staff costs, production costs and advertising revenues of the council-funded East End Life.
“As a result we wrote about the average cost to the council of the remuneration packages for the 4.6 employees of the council-run newspaper. We did not describe the amounts as take-home payments; neither did we identify any individual.
“East End Life, unlike the East London Advertiser, is funded out of the public purse in one of London’s most-deprived areas. Our intention was to draw East Enders’ attention to the high cost of council propaganda for which they are paying.”
The Newspaper Society is to meet with communities secretary Eric Pickles to urge him to speed up plans to bring into law his code of conduct, which would limit the publication of council newspapers to four times a year.
Sign up for our free daily email bulletin
Follow HTFP on Twitter
Got a story? Email the Editor at
Oh dear, it appears I have hit a nerve.
But first, as editor of the Docklands and East London Advertiser, I can state that I have not received a letter from the NUJ.
Had I done so I would state that the complaint from the NUJ’s Public Relations and Communications Council, as it appears on your website, seems more about spin than substance.
It is equally clear that no-one there seems to have read the report in the Advertiser, which is still available on our e-edition for all to appreciate the facts.
Our FOI request was directed at staff costs, production costs and advertising revenues of the council-funded East End Life.
As a result we wrote about the average cost to the council of the remuneration packages for the 4.6 employees of the council-run newspaper. We did not describe the amounts as take-home payments; neither did we identify any individual.
East End Life, unlike the East London Advertiser, is funded out of the public purse in one of London’s most-deprived areas.
Our intention was to draw East Enders’ attention to the high cost of council propaganda for which they are paying.
Report this comment
Good argument by the NUJ, which exists to drive up wages and improve terms and conditions for all its members. I’m sure Archant pays its journalists a pittance.
Report this comment
Well done to the NUJ.
A needless attack by the advertiser on hard-working staff, they’ve broken one of the first rules of journalism and have printed a lie. This is work straight out of the gutter, absolute garbage.
East End Life staff are recognised by the NUJ, are probably qualified journalists and probably have previous experience at other local/national papers – they are journalists.
I’m sure not all staff who work at the Daily Mail/Guardian/Sun agree with all of their editorial content and decisions.
Report this comment
Malcolm, stick to your guns. You know you were right to run the story. When an organisation uses public money, it has to justify the spending of every single penny. It’s the job of a local paper to scrutinise that spending.
To many journalists (probably the silent majority who read HTFP) your story is absolutely spot on. A council pays staff over the going rate to distribute its spin… of course it’s a story you should carry.
If you’d have ignored the story, then you could have expected to have got hammered on HTFP.
This perfectly sums up why I am no longer a NUJ member. It picks the wrong fights.
Report this comment
You can almost always rely on the NUJ to grab hold of the wrong end of the stick and beat themselves around the head with it.
As Mr Starbrook states: “Our intention was to draw East Enders’ attention to the high cost of council propaganda for which they are paying.”
Says it all really and you might have expected the NUJ to get the point.
Report this comment
Why does anyone think that the NUJ has anything at all to do with journalism? It is a Left-leaning political movement which works within journalism to further its objectives, something to do with controlling the means of production and re-distribution of wealth, I believe. It says everything about the journalism credentials of some of its members that they appear not to have read the report before ripping the head off teddy and writing the screamy letter. NIce work Malcolm – any real journalist will be 100 per cent behind you. Other town hall Pravdas should regard themselves as being on notice of impending financial disclosure. Who’s next?
Report this comment
Starbrook and Blakey are spot on. Preachy nonsense from the NUJ who should actually be worrying about in-house council propaganda rags undermining local newspapers.
As for the council claiming the ridiculously high cost of pumping out their pap is covered by advertising, well that’s revenue which should be providing a shot in the arm to a genuine newspaper, protecting journalists’ jobs and livelihoods.
NUJ really should know better. Like a 1980s student union sometimes.
Report this comment
Bit worried about the .6 fellow. Is he really pulling his weight?
Report this comment
“The NUJ is keen to foster better relations between all journalists, in the private and public sectors”. Since when were council employees journalists? The NUJ has completely missed the mark on this one.
Yes, they should be drawing attention to the low salaries local journalists receive but comparing their salaries to PRs’ is neither helpful nor relevant.
The fact of the matter is, this is public money, so of course it should be scrutinised! Should an organisation that evidently fails to understand the actual definition of a journalist be representing them at all? No wonder the industry is in such a state.
Report this comment
The story says that 49 per cent of Tower Hamlet’s newspaper/propaganda sheet is paid for from internal ads.
I don’t remember any stories from local newspapers compaining that 60 per cent of their ad revenue was made up from public notices back in the days before council papers.
The problem with these reports are that they are entirely self-serving. If Tower Hamlets was putting £600,000 of ads a year in the East London Advertiser would we be reading the same story about waste?
Maybe Mr Starbrook shoudl go through the accounts and from before East End Life and do an expose of how Archant has been an enabler to council tax payer waste for years. Just be honest – you’re jealous and want the revenue for your paper. It has nothing to do with local democracy or accountability and everything to do with newspaper revenues.
I couldn’t find a single report from about the council on East London Advertiser’s website in two months that came from an actual council meeting. It may not be riviting stuff, but that’s how to support local democracy. Report it and not just the stuff you get from press releases, whinging opposition members and disgruntled residents.
Report this comment
“It is not possible to work out an average salary by simply dividing £218,000 by the number of staff (4.6).”
Bear with me because I’m really quite backward when it comes to these things. Could someone please explain to me why not?
Report this comment
Good on you, Malcolm.
Council-run papers are nothing more than propaganda sheets and I fail to understand how the people working on them can actually even be described as journalists – surely they are little more than glorified press officers?
Journalists are there to see through the self-congratulatory nonsense pumped out by all public bodies – these council-run papers by their very nature will gloss over the negatives of the council, police, fire, and any other of its ‘partner agencies’ (to borrow one of their favourite terms).
The NUJ is completely out of sync with the real world, it seems.
Report this comment
Divide and rule. Works every time. Just suprised everyone keeps rising to the bait.
Report this comment