AddThis SmartLayers

Dyson at Large: Poor splash choice for free weekly

Imagine you’re running a free weekly with a fair bit of space for editorial in the front end. What would you splash on from the following stories – all involving locals?

  • Jail for disgraced charity treasurer
  • Man claimed benefits while sailing in the Caribbean
  • Councillor bids to catch dog poo pests
  • New tactics to tackle yobs

My top three choices would have been the above list in descending order: readers hate charity cheats; someone managing to claim dole while enjoying the sun is both fascinating and outrageous; and ‘dog poo’ is one of the most talked about community irritations.

The fourth story on the list – ‘New tactics to tackle yobs’ – sounds too generic and strategic, perhaps an inside page lead but lacking the obvious ‘grab factor’. Yet this was the splash choice for the North Devon Gazette on Wednesday May 9.

Perhaps the story was better than its headline sounded so, in case you can’t read the text on the above image, let me type out the first three pars for you to weigh up its quality.

‘The anti-social behaviour blight that makes life a misery for thousands of people in North Devon every year is being tackled with a pioneering approach.

‘This week, Safer North Devon unveiled the Hub, a commonsense initiative for dealing with problems that plague individuals and communities where local police, fire service, councils, housing associations and other agencies work together.

‘Instead of a piecemeal approach, they now join forces for daily tasking meetings to tackle anti-social behaviour (ASB) reports across North Devon and Torridge as they arise, in what is being hailed as the first approach of its kind in Devon.’

Are you still awake? What on earth are the terms ‘anti-social behaviour blight’, ‘pioneering approach’, ‘commonsense initiative’, ‘piecemeal approach’ and ‘hailed as the first approach of its kind’ doing in this copy? It reads to me like a lightly rejigged press release.

All the story is really saying is that local authorities – all paid for by readers – have finally twigged that if they share information they might have more success in identifying and tackling bad behaviour.

If anything, a better angle could have been just that: ‘Yobs have roamed free across North Devon for years because councils, police and fire services have failed to share information or work together to tackle the problem.’

Here are the page positions and first pars of my top three choices from the above list:

  • Page 10: ‘The former treasurer of North Devon Animal Ambulance has been jailed for 14 months after stealing almost £100,000 from the charity.’
  • Page 13: ‘An Ilfracombe man falsely claimed nearly £2,000 in state handouts while sailing a yacht in the Caribbean.’
  • Page 3: ‘A North Devon Councillor says he is prepared to do ‘whatever it takes’ to shop dog walkers who don’t clear up after their animals.’

These stories show that the editorial team can do their job: the headlines were good, the intros snappy and the obvious human interest was all there. Any of them could have made page one, so why choose the jargon-filled ‘yob tactics’ tale?

The paid-for opposition, the Northcliffe-owned North Devon Journal, is not out until Thursday, the day after the Gazette, and so it wouldn’t have been first with the alternatives. And the charity worker was jailed the previous Thursday, after both papers’ previous editions were out, so the Gazette had the first local print pickings for this story.

“Ah,” I hear someone say, “but this story was all over the TV news and so was an old one six days later for the Gazette.” I’m not so sure – this was a huge local case with the thief coming from Barnstaple, the home town of the Gazette, and it would have had all tongues furiously wagging for days.

Although the jailing had been on the local BBC, it was still prime for a quality follow up – chats with neighbours, local cat lovers, charity workers, and so on.

There may have been other reasons for the random story placements, but if there were they didn’t excuse the lame choice that was the splash.

Even though the Archant-owned Gazette’s 42,440 circulation is 97% free, it still needs to put its best content on the front to be the talked about by readers and advertisers.

Splash choices aside, that week’s Gazette had 119 stories on 31 news, features and sports pages, with the other 77 pages in the 104-page paper healthily packed full of ads.

26 comments

You can follow all replies to this entry through the comments feed.
  • May 23, 2012 at 9:25 am
    Permalink

    Front page looks like it has been done by a bunch of 13-year-olds doing a school project

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • May 23, 2012 at 9:58 am
    Permalink

    It might have puzzled the readers but it would have kept the local authority happy. And that is more important to today’s tame, deferential local newspapers.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • May 23, 2012 at 11:00 am
    Permalink

    How about the head for the pic story on that front page:

    “Torrington’s fairy tale May Fair – see page 22 for report and pictures”
    Welcome to dullsville!

    Why couldn’t they crop the picture tighter and add some tantalising teaser copy instead?

    Agree with all the comments thus far.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • May 23, 2012 at 12:01 pm
    Permalink

    North Devon’s highest circulation newspaper it might be – but how big is their ‘audience’? Put it alongside the North Devon Journal and you wouldn’t even use it for your chips.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • May 23, 2012 at 12:21 pm
    Permalink

    I’d have gone for the benefits cheat – I’m sure the hard working good folk of North Devon would have been outraged to learn of him !

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • May 23, 2012 at 1:34 pm
    Permalink

    Interesting that Dyson has chosen to go to town on the editorial decisions made by the editor of the North Devon Gazette in the piece above. What a shame, therefore, that he didn’t show us how a news story should be put together. Nowhere in the piece does he mention the name of the editor concerned. Nor, it appears, does he make any attempt to contact the editorial staff at the paper. Surely his story would have been much more interesting had he inserted some quotes from the people he has so happily slagged off. Maybe there was an explanation, like the editor was on holiday or the chief reporter was sleeping with the person who sent in the press release. What a shame we’ll never know because of Dyson’s own sloppy journalism. Case of people in glasshouses…, I think. But then maybe I’m now guilty of the same offence… . Defend yourself Dyson!

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • May 23, 2012 at 1:39 pm
    Permalink

    Speculation, this, but…Friday, day after publication, “oh blimey, we’ve got to fill three pages today” so… benefits cheat. Same thing Monday/Tuesday. Come press day, they’ve used up all their good stuff, they’re not about (or allowed) to chop and change at the back of the book and no friendly fatal car crash etc has come along to give them a proper splash. I don’t know who makes these decisions, but wasting your potential splash in desperation at the beginning of a week is a trademark error of the inexperienced. Been there, done that.
    As to the look of the front page…well, that’s templating for you.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • May 23, 2012 at 2:01 pm
    Permalink

    Except Dyson isn’t writing a news report Patrick, he’s writing a review.

    You don’t contact the director of a film when writing a review, or even a manufacturer when reviewing a product on Amazon.

    You take the product and talk about what you find.

    If there is a justification for such a poor choice of front, then there is plenty of room to respond in the comments.

    But whatever the reason, it’s a very poor front.
    If you’re a reader, you don’t care about excuses and justifications.
    If you don’t like how a piece is written or presented, you don’t pick it up.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • May 23, 2012 at 2:04 pm
    Permalink

    On the batting order, I’d say it was a toss up between the top two. They’ve definitely gone for the wrong front but the overall content is good.
    I don’t agree with Patrick about contacting the staff. They are perfectly capable of defending themselves here if they wish too.
    I wouldn’t do a review of anything and water it down with self-defence. They have a right of reply after publication.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • May 23, 2012 at 2:29 pm
    Permalink

    Agree with Row, as with all his reviews Steve writes what he thinks, shouldn’t have to call every editor to justify a decision.

    Although it would be interesting to hear the editor try and justify this one. I don’t know what is more shocking, the fact it is obviously a renosed press release or the fact that it had to be “continued on page 3″.

    Dear God.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • May 23, 2012 at 2:34 pm
    Permalink

    In fairness to the Gazette the charity fraud woman had been all over the front of the rival North Devon Journal several weeks earlier when she first pleaded guilty, plus an exclusive interview with the founder of the charity she turned over.

    It’s a shame editors aren’t offered a chance to explain their decisions to Mr Dyson before he sticks the boot in.

    Fair point on the dreadful splash though.

    Interestingly the paper this week has a full page saying how great it is for a variety of reasons. These include the fact that it supports a local charity appeal, has a partnership deal with a local hotel chain and employs a lot of delivery people. But no mention of compelling or exclusive content.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • May 23, 2012 at 3:07 pm
    Permalink

    It’s the the wholesale use of of PR-speak on a front page splash that is galling, rather than the choice of story. Ten years ago (when I got out) that would never have happened. It all went downhill imho when the phrase ‘smoke-logged’ was swallowed hook, line and sinker by provincial news editors…

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • May 23, 2012 at 3:08 pm
    Permalink

    I was at the ASB hub press conference. It was dull as dishwater and the Gazette’s reporter even nipped out half way through to make a phone call.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • May 23, 2012 at 3:22 pm
    Permalink

    Steve Dyson has every right to say what he thinks, that’s what he’s there for, and the editor of the paper can reply if he/she wishes.
    But there can’t be many of us who haven’t chosen the wrong splash or churned-out a below par front page once in a while, no doubt under pressure, and some of the comments are hurtful. There should be a certain amount of honour amongst thieves.
    And while Rowyourboat is getting all high and mighty about what the reader wants, perhaps he/she should remember that this is a free paper we are talking about and so the overall package, which seems to be good, takes on more importance than a sell-at-all-costs front.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • May 23, 2012 at 3:32 pm
    Permalink

    Spot on Steve – it’s boring story, appallingly written. I did enjoyed the juxtaposition headline and picture though. Look at those yobs. Dressing as fairytale characters doesn’t fool me.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • May 23, 2012 at 4:32 pm
    Permalink

    I’m not defending the choice of story or the quality of the layout. Several people have said on here that the editor has the right to defend themselves. Well, how can they, unless the criticism is brought to their attention (ie by Dyson contacting them and saying he’s going to be writing a piece about them)? Not everyone reads HTFP. As for the quality of the layout etc – well how many of you have actually worked in local papers recently? It’s a different world to what it was 10-20 years ago. The money’s sh*t and you’re expected to pile an incredible amount of work into each working day. If the sub gets more than 20-25 minutes per page then he’s very lucky indeed. I know because I’ve been there and it’s the reason why I moved back to London.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • May 23, 2012 at 6:44 pm
    Permalink

    I’m not here to defend the North Devon Gazette, but I hope for the sake of completeness, Mr Dyson took time out to look at the North Devon Journal and will give us his views. The edition of the NDJ which went toe to toe with this Gazette contained a toe-curlingly juvenile leader column, which was so badly written it was hard to understand what the central message was – i.e. that the paper “makes a difference”. A news piece on the same topic was accompanied by the kind of logo last seen in the days of Adverkit. The week before the NDJ had full page ads on pages 2 & 3 AND the back page.
    People of Nortb Devon – move away if you want proper, quality journalism!

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • May 23, 2012 at 11:42 pm
    Permalink

    I’ve never discussed reviews with editors of the papers concerned beforehand, for the reasons already pointed out by others above. However, Patrick makes some good points about stretched resources and other unknown problems that at times might hit any newsroom. He’s right that we should bear this in mind.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • May 24, 2012 at 12:18 am
    Permalink

    People don’t buy a local newspaper on the basis of what’s on the front. They buy it for the package. Regular readers don’t necessarily like Gotcha-style headings or salacious stories on the front. As long as it’s all there, somewhere – that’s what counts. Only we journalists think we know the bloody rules.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • May 24, 2012 at 10:44 am
    Permalink

    Patrick’s comments aren’t as daft as some people are making out. Believe it or not, most editors and news editors do have pretty sound news sense but anybody who has done the job will tell you there are other factors involved when choosing the splash. I think one of the drawbacks of this blog is that Steve fails to carry out the most cursory investigation into what other titles in the area may have published.
    If, as Simon says, a rival had published this story at time of conviction it’s entirely right that the Gazette should choose something else to lead with.
    Steve’s got previous form for this, once lambasting a title for not splashing a story about a dead schoolgirl – it transpired this story had, in fact, been the splash on the relevant district edition. Do an honest review by all means, but do the legwork too to give a fair picture.
    As Eyebrox says, people don’t necessarily want salacious fronts. Nor do they necessarily want the kind of fronts that we all think are really clever and that win awards (such as writing headlines in Mandarin, eh Steve?)
    All that said, it was a crappy splash!

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • May 24, 2012 at 1:34 pm
    Permalink

    Can this be the same North Devon Gazette which for many months (and possibly to this day) claimed in its flannel panel to be “published by Archant South West from it’s (sic) office at…” etc etc. Hardly surprising they can’t recognise a poor front page – it seems no-one reads it, not even the staff.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • May 24, 2012 at 1:35 pm
    Permalink

    Do you mean this one, RT? http://htfpnew.adaptive.co.uk/2007/news/mail-publishes-front-page-headline-in-mandarin-chinese/
    Or this one? http://htfpnew.adaptive.co.uk/2007/news/chinese-front-page-as-mail-marks-trade-partnership/
    The first was for all readers… and maybe you’re right, but I still remember it fondly.
    The second was a ‘special’ edition front just for the trade delegation (and bought as a bulk – groan – by the council).

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • May 24, 2012 at 3:13 pm
    Permalink

    That’s the one. Very creative, but I wonder if the readers appreciated it as much as the subs? (That’s not a rhetorical question, can you remember how it sold?)

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • May 24, 2012 at 3:24 pm
    Permalink

    You’re right, RT… I can’t remember and so probably not outstanding sales. It did make local TV and national broadsheet (Times) as a media story, though, so was arguably good branding. But do readers really enjoy ‘clever’ fronts? No. (But they do demand at least good page one content).

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • May 28, 2012 at 2:04 pm
    Permalink

    It’s still badly written chod as the splash.
    I would rather they had an original report on the Great £648,000 Furniture Disposal Sale than some non story about how the authorities claim they will tackle the yob menace.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • June 14, 2012 at 6:42 pm
    Permalink

    As the reporter concerned I’d like to respond to some of this on my own behalf. These views are my own and not those of the North Devon Gazette.
    Regarding ‘nipping out for a phone call’, yes I did. I was waiting for a call from the hospital and this was mentioned to some at the meeting, but clearly the pre-prepared handout had not filtered down to everyone. Oh, that was sarcasm, by the way.
    It turned out all was well, but at the time I did not know that.

    Was it the best story I have written? Hardly, but it touched on something that has probably affected the majority of our readers at some point. And here I was thinking it was our job to report the news and not sensationalise it.
    The continuation of the story of page 3 contained a live case study and demonstrated how the scheme worked, by the way.

    I won’t debate reasons for editorial content, that’s up to the editor to respond if they wish, although I will say the charity fraud story had by then run its course – all that remained was to report on the length of the sentence and get reaction to it.
    Not quite as strong a lead as it might appear on paper and also a story we broke in the first place.

    Thank you to those who have made balanced comments on this – for the rest, glad to see some in the media industry have nothing better to do but sit and criticise others’ work.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)