AddThis SmartLayers

Dyson at Large: Paper dulled by lack of good pictures

‘Pictures of people sell papers’ was regularly drummed into me by various chief subs and editors.

I couldn’t get this old maxim out of my head as the importance of photographers was angrily debated in the wake of Johnston Press’s decision to axe the ‘snapper’ as a staff role across its Midlands region, and to reduce them in the North-West.

This background was perhaps unfortunate for the Dunmow & Stansted Observer, a Local World newspaper whose Thursday 23 January edition I’d already chosen for today’s review.

“Where oh where,” I lamented to myself, “are the cracking pictures and sharp images of people that might grab the reader and prompt them to buy this paper?”

The splash itself was a half-decent story – although the ’POLICE PROBE DRUG DEATH’ headline lazily missed the chance of projecting either the arrest or the emotive reaction from bereaved relatives.

But the fingerprint-sized picture of the late Jason Wyatt was nowhere near the size or grade needed to fulfil the role and importance of the page one image.

The second lead on a sex assault was also newsworthy enough, but the dark drop-in shot of the crime scene again couldn’t hold the page.

Yes, I know, these were probably the only images available with those stories, but if that was the case I would contend that a picture write-off using a quality shot from an inside page should have been considered.

Except once I’d looked through the Observer’s inside pages, I realised these were few and far between: a sent-in PR picture on page two; probable stocks used in single columns on page three; archive snaps on page four; a fuzzy aerial of fields on page five; blurred readers’ diet pictures on page six; a cheque picture on page seven; sent-in school pictures on page eight; another PR shot on page nine; a brick building on page 10; another cheque and a headshot on page 11; and a columnist’s broken boiler with his posed grimace on page 12.

Finally, on page 13, I found a snap just about sharp enough to have held the front page together – a traumatised elderly couple cuddling their three-legged cat after it had been mauled by a dog

But that, I promise you, was the only half-decent news picture throughout the whole paper, the rest being more cheques, blurred sent-ins, head-shots or obvious PR images.

I made enquiries, and it seems there’s no picture desk at the paper’s Bishop’s Stortford base although, as part of Local World, journalists can mobilise a snapper from Cambridge if their case is considered good enough.

Mainly, however, it seems that staff just have to get along without them, which is a shame because the Observer had enough good stories, but most were poorly projected because of a lack of quality images. Aside from those already mentioned, decent tales included:

  • ‘Man free after planning to rape 10-year-old boy’ leading page two (no picture, such as a court snatch);
  • ‘Ex-mayor at centre of police call for pub licence probe’ leading page three (tiny picture, probably stock);
  • ‘1,200 submit views on new housing’ leading page five (fuzzy aerial);
  • ‘Driving instructor is hurt in head-on smash’ leading page seven (no picture); and
  • ‘Ground Force’s Tommy sells home for £299,950’ leading page 14 (in this case, a good use of stock and buildings for an inside page).

Last week, Roy Greenslade was monstered by furious comments on two of his Media Guardian blogs after saying, and then repeating, that staff photographers on local weekly newspapers were largely redundant because of the increase in quality pictures from readers, and reporters armed with iPhones.

I don’t agree with these views: yes, there’s a case for fewer photographers, but real newspapers should retain enough trained staff picture resource to have three or four great shots in every edition, rather than scratching around with sub-standard cheque snaps.

If they don’t – and ‘they’ means Johnston Press and all other publishers as well as Local World’s Observer in this review – I’d argue they will only hasten the fall off in sales because dull fronts don’t entice readers to buy papers, and tedious inside pages switch them off.

Perhaps Greenslade, so often a sound media commentator, ought to take a more regular look at small, weekly papers and think about why so many people – 160 comments when I last looked – might have found his blogs to be so condescendingly offensive.

The Dunmow & Stansted Observer sells for 70p, and is an edition of the Herts & Essex Observer series, which sold 12,109 copies a week in the second half of 2012, the last reported figures. 

9 comments

You can follow all replies to this entry through the comments feed.
  • February 5, 2014 at 11:28 am
    Permalink

    Oh thank you Steve – the perfect illustration of why we need trained, skilled photographers.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • February 5, 2014 at 11:46 am
    Permalink

    Would I advertise in there if I ran a business?

    Erm, no.

    The end is nigh….

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • February 5, 2014 at 12:45 pm
    Permalink

    According to Jicreg, a single issue of the Observer is read by over 40% of adults who live in Stansted. It’s probably just as well that ‘Observer’ (see above comment) doesn’t run a business.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • February 5, 2014 at 12:51 pm
    Permalink

    Same story all over the corporate-run regional press industry.

    The suits have been phasing out weekly snappers in a process that’s been going on for at least 20 years, maybe more.

    Their mission is nearing completion.

    They must be very proud.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • February 5, 2014 at 1:18 pm
    Permalink

    That front page is a complete mess. The downpage merges with the splash head so it looks like the two are combined. All you can see is text, text and more text.

    Have some pity for the reporters whose work is so valued that they’re not given bylines.

    The masthead contains a puff for a hard news story inside. Shame the puff box is in jolly colours and you can barely read the copy.

    Why are so many regional papers lumbered with such uninspiring design? The loss of picture desks doesn’t help as there’s fewer resources to play with.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • February 5, 2014 at 2:17 pm
    Permalink

    Having worked as a photographer for over 20 years and for 28 years in the darkroom before that I could weep at the standard of submitted pictures now being used. The few staff photographers that are left are hamstrung by the ridiculous template shapes they are given.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • February 6, 2014 at 9:37 am
    Permalink

    I completely agree with you, Steve. That front page illustrates perfectly why we need properly trained professionals in our industry!

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • February 12, 2014 at 9:55 pm
    Permalink

    That is actually just shocking subbing. In this case nothing to do with lack of staff photographers. Dare I say a JP template would have looked much better?…

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • February 17, 2014 at 11:08 am
    Permalink

    ‘The few staff photographers that are left are hamstrung by the ridiculous template shapes they are given’ – what a wide or a deep?!!

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)