Editors have moved to stress their newspapers’ neutrality after a week which saw party political advertisements adorn the front of many local titles.
As HTFP reported on Thursday, an identical wraparound promoting the Conservative Party appeared on the front pages of a number of papers prior to yesterday’s local elections.
The Chester Standard also recently ran a front page ad endorsing the city’s sitting Labour MP Chris Mathieson.
But after the Tory wrap was run by Brighton daily The Argus, Andy Parkes, Newsquest group managing editor for South London and Sussex, wrote an editorial to remind readers that the paper is “completely apolitical”.
Wrote Andy: “Every time we publish an ad which promotes a particular political party I always get complaints from those of a different persuasion. In fact, when I’m getting complaints from Conservatives, Labour supporters, Lib Dems and even a smattering of others, all saying we are biased and showing favour to a party other than theirs, I know we’re doing something right.
“It’s not that I want to upset anyone, it’s just that if I know I’m upsetting everyone equally and they’re all moaning we must be taking an even-handed and balanced approach.
“So, if you see advertisements in any of our newspapers, including this one, from any political party over the coming weeks please be assured I will have scrutinised it very carefully to see it complies with all our terms and conditions. I will also be checking that it falls within the very stringent guidelines set out by the Advertising Standards Authority.
“We will show no favour to any particular party but are bound to consider all applications for ads, from whichever political group, provided they adhere to our policies.”
The same wrap also appeared on the front page of the Exeter Express & Echo, whose editor Jim Parker said: “We would just like to emphasise that this week’s wrap-around of the Echo is an advertisement paid for by the Conservative Party. The Echo has always been and will continue to be politically independent.”
Patrick Phelvin, editor of Devon Live, the county-wide Trinity Mirror website which provides content for the Express & Echo added: “There is a distinct line between paid-for content and editorial content which we are proud to uphold. All our reporters and writers are impartial and work hard to ensure content is balanced and fair.”
Other regional dailies to have run the Tory advert in recent days include the Lancashire Telegraph, South Wales Echo and The Sentinel, Stoke.
Political advertising has also been carried by the Mansfield Chad, Rhy Journal, Stockport Express, Frinton Gazette, Chorley Citizen, Sutton Guardian, Westmorland Gazette, Derbyshire Times, Bury Times and Scunthorpe Telegraph in recent days.
Scotsman editorial director Frank O’Donnell has also told readers his newspaper will accept political advertising in the run up to the General Election.
In a piece launching the Edinburgh-based daily’s pre-election ‘manifesto’, Frank wrote: “Our first and most important pledge is The Scotsman will not tell you how to vote. Not at the council elections. Not at the General Election. And not at any future independence referendum.
“This title is politically independent and we believe that a quality newspaper should strive to present the facts without this being coloured by a political rosette. And let’s face it, there are many other newspapers who will do this.”
But he added: “As part of the build up to any election there will be a spike in advertising for political parties. The Scotsman will accept political advertising provided it is clearly marked as an advertisement and creates no confusion in the minds of readers with regular editorial copy. Accepting advertising does not indicate support for any political party.”
Sign up for our free daily email bulletin
Follow HTFP on Twitter
Got a story? Email the Editor at
Here come the editors and their laughable excuses for grabbing the money at any cost after showing total disregard to their papers credibility and integrity.
Think this one is missing the point somewhat , the main issue is not around accepting adverts from and for political party messages within the paper,it’s about selling off their covers and to all intents and purposes waving a big flag under the masthead for whichever party has pushed enough money across the table to hijack that weeks issue.
Take them Inside if you wish but dont be surprised if your readers see you as supporting the featured party by allowing it to be that weeks front page and making their own minds up.
However with ad reps having more clout than an editor these days it should have been one of the many commercial chiefs responding on here as to why they’ll do anything to get any ad revenue at any cost including floguing off the entire covers to a political party,when all other forms of commercial selling has run dry.
What little credibility remained has been further eroded by lame justifications such as this one
Report this comment
How predictable that editors rush to declare themselves as being politically unbiased desoite happily accepting political wraps to their papers and are now on the defensive after seeing the huge backlash on social media.
They gladly took them and allowed their papers to be plastered with party political messages all over the front and back so must accept the fall out as a result.
Had they considered the matter seriously and put them inside as ‘adverts’ no one would have taken exception, instead everyone has seen that when ad revenues are on the floor, ad money, at any price speaks louder than integrity.
It would be interesting to know if any regional editors across the uk turned down requests of this type, if indeed there were any.
Report this comment
You’re fooling nobody, chaps. Given a free choice you wouldn’t have carried it, but the nasty men told you you had to.
Report this comment
I was working at Trinity Mirror when I first heard about the possibility of the first front page wraparounds, some time in the early 2000s. Everyone was absolutely appalled, and it took a very long time for the idea to gain traction. We knew only too well that it would be a fateful step, and here we are, all these years later, seeing it as the norm. Things are so bad now, they may as well try everything to get some money in, but it is never going to be a comfortable thing to do, and there is no getting away from the fact it is always seriously at odds with any title trying to do a proper job.
Report this comment
I despair – yet again. Editors defending political ad wraparounds. Whatever excuse they may make for the practice it does not alter the fact that many readers will assume that the paper is backing a particular party or candidate. Apart from that I think many readers are fed up with ad wrap arounds so hiding the “real” front inside. Sales of papers partly depend on an eye-catching front page attracting a would be reader – but a political ad certainly won’t do so. Of course, papers need money to survive but there should also be a matter of principle applied to the situation. The word “prostitution” comes to mind.
Report this comment
Commercial wraps on many of the weekly free sheets where I am are very common and are published most weeks as,I’m told by the reps, they’re easy to sell and are easy money.
They look awful and anger the advertisers on the true cover who will then lose their front page presence by appearing under a wrap, they’re also the first things to be removed so readers can get into the paper itself so serve no real benefit to the advertiser ( but when had that been a consideration when ad money is offered?)
Let’s be honest,the days of real editors who would be against this type of commercialism are long passed. Any wrap, political or otherwise, is done purely for commercial reasons irrespective of how cheap they make the paper look and we all know the editors,under pressure from the bean counters and ad people, feel obliged to take them, just please don’t run to offer pitiful excuses for doing so once the fall out begins.
Report this comment
“..if I know I’m upsetting everyone equally and they’re all moaning we must be taking an even-handed …”
Sorry Andy Parkes you’re missing or avoiding the point, it’s not about favouring one party or another or of giving equal coverage in editorial pieces, it’s about allowing the entire paper to be enclosed and cloaked by a party political message with the papers own masthead giving it credibility and one of compromising the entire papers integrity by doing so.
Tell me, what would happen if all three main parties wanted to wrap a particular weeks issue? would it result in a Dutch auction with the highest bidder being published?
I also wonder how many parties would pay for the four pages to be run inside the main jacket as opposed to around it? Or do they make a take it or leave it offer to the rep knowing the publisher will happily take it and let the editor handle the fall out?
Another nail in the already nail filled coffin for regional publishing
Report this comment
As a wise man once said: ‘Money doesn’t talk, it swears.’
Report this comment
While the Guardian newspaper “asks” readers to put their hand in their pocket to support their news, they have criticised the Conservatives for paying for newspaper adverts in other press.
In today’s newspaper https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/04/tories-criticised-for-election-day-newspaper-adverts?utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Media+briefing+2016&utm_term=224584&subid=1185194&CMP=
It claims that ‘The Conservative party came in for criticism on Thursday when it took out front-page adverts in local newspapers in areas where elections were being held. The four-page wraparound advert, which would have cost several thousand pounds in each publication, appeared like a normal newspaper front page with the headline “Theresa May for Britain” above a large picture of the prime minister. A line of much smaller type reveals it is an “advertiser’s announcement”.’
Can I remind them that newspapers need advertising to continue to raise local issues and unlike the Guardian can not allow their newspapers to become the mouthpieces of only one political party.
In response they do fairly quote ‘a Conservative spokesman said: “Newspaper advertising covers are a long established form of campaigning that are used by all political parties. We are proud to support local newspapers.”
And also that a spokesman for Trinity Mirror, which publishes the Stockport Express, Stoke Sentinel and seven other titles carrying the Tory advert, said: “Our policy is to take wraps as long as they’re labelled as an advert, and the Stockport Express clearly was.”
ALL media but particularly local and regional press, need advertising revenue. So long as that is clearly labelled and included on the election spend – what matters is that money will go towards supporting local journalism
I hope the critics are taking a similar stance with local authorities who would rather divert the council tax money from services to promote their own in-house “biased” news? Oh no they are silent on that one….
Report this comment
Pretty sure the ASA guidelines detail how such deplorable carbuncles should be clearly labelled ‘advertisement’ or ‘advertising feature’.
There’s no place for subtlety here.
DP
Report this comment
As long as the Tories paid the going rate for a wraparound, I’ve got no problem with it.
And there’s still plenty of time for the other parties to pay for their own wraparounds. Come on Jeremy & others, get your hands in your party’s till and have your say.
Might keep a few of us in a job!
Report this comment
@liz justice
This isn’t about the old excuse of papers needing ad revenues to pay for quality journalism, wages etc its about the ethics of allowing the FRONT and BACK COVERS to be given over to a party political message under the masthead of that local newspaper or free paper.
advertising inside, clearly identified as an ‘advertisers announcement’ is all very well and good , this is about a publisher allowing a political message to be wrapped around its entire publication, there’s a huge and significant difference.
TM spokesman and the ” Our policy is to take wraps as long as they’re labelled as an advert, and the Stockport Express clearly was.” Is conveniently grouping all commercial/ local business/ furniture warehouse/ discount supermarket wraps with party political messages, again there’s a huge and ethical difference between the two,the former are clearly seen to be advert promotions , the latter thinly disguised ‘news’ paper editorials.
This is all about publishers grasping for money at any costs irrespective of the ethics of doing so,or how the paper is likely to be perceived by many of its readers as a result
Report this comment
I’d have more respect for editors if they were straight talking. Why can’t they just say, we are a business and as such need the income to offset other revenues that have been falling over the years.
Report this comment
I bet there are plenty of hacks out there who have seen their local pet MP done a favour by a friendly editor pulling an unfavourable story. I know of at least one editor who pulled a story justifiably criticising a council because he was desperate for their ad income. Wraps are least obvious, though I once said to an editor if you have a wrap you might as well put the weather forecast on front news page. He didn’t.
Report this comment
All depends whether the owners wish their papers to be advertising sheets or news sheets. I think we can guess. And the editors would probably love to stand up for their principles but families and mortgages are a huge barrier to their tilting at windmills. Fings ain’t wot they used to be.
Report this comment
Better that electioneering is paid-for than being allowed to clog up precious editorial/ news space.
Local newspapers should stop being so generous to politicians – parliamentary and council candidates alike..
Report this comment
Sorry DAVE S – A NEWS PAPER IS SUPPOSED TO be just that not a vehicle for advertising per se.
Report this comment
Doug Pickford
I agree that there are mortgages and bills to be paid but if someone accepts the job as ‘editor’ they have a duty to stand up for what they believe is right for them,the paper, their staff,their readers and their communities,it goes with the territory, if they dint do so they don’t deserve the right to be an editor and should step aside.
Unfortunately majority in my experience are little nor than yes men to the content chiefs so issues such as this are allowed through unchallenged.
If there’s any editor reading this who has taken a stand please comment on HTFP
Report this comment
There’s some pious twaddle going on here.
As I’ve said, I have no problem with wraparounds but for those that do to bang on about lily-livered editors being unfit for the job is just posturing.
If you feel that strongly about working for a paper that carries such ads, collect your principles together and resign!
Report this comment
Regional
it would seem a raw nerve has been hit and your only concern is encouraging other parties to dig deep to sponsor your covers by advertising in your papers, a seemingly desperate cry for advertising at any price when all else has failed ;integrity for sale ‘at the going rate’ the more party wraps the better then eh?
Oh and who said I work for a paper that carries political wraps?
Like many commenting I have high standards and put a higher value on the credibility and integrity of local papers and the communities they claim to serve than certain others matey
Report this comment
Norridge,
I was an editor long since made redundant (so a raw nerve in that sense, not because I authorised or challenged such ads).
No one said you work for a paper with political wraparounds matey! The comment was directed at those that do.
Report this comment