Goodbye and goodnight to The London Paper

The end of The London Paper leaves me with a feeling of sadness having been one of the launch team back in September 2006.

I know from experience there are some seriously good journalists and decent people who are losing their jobs and who deserve far better than the hand that has been dealt them.

There was a definite place for a paper of its type to take on the negativity and Kensington-centric smugness regularly espoused by the Evening Standard. In terms of economics, the concept of opening up a way for advertisers to target the pockets of the all-important 20-35 commuter demographic also made sense.

Although News International poured millions into the product, the feeling that things were being done on a shoestring was never far away. Many of the staff were put on shorter, one-month notice periods and given different pension rights and lesser benefits than others in the News International stable.

However, there was a genuine pride among the launch team when the paper went live - and I think one which was shared by Rupert Murdoch. This was his one and only UK newspaper launch after all.

Of course, there were teething troubles and some mornings turned into a never-ending rollercoaster of just about scraping through because of a mismatch between resources and aspirations. There were also regular internal debates about the identity of the newspaper - was it too showbizzy, what prominence should be given to crime stories, were readers really that bothered about having a daily page on green news?

As time went on, the paper did assume a more confident character and reader reaction was overwhelmingly positive. Yes, there were sniffy critics - step forward Roy Greenslade, a paid-up member of the Standard so no axe to grind there then - but the hard-working team was regularly bombarded by PR calls and emails, a sure sign of its influence and importance.

So why have things turned out as they did? The newspaper industry generally is suffering from the slump in advertising and a paper based on it is obviously going to be in trouble even without a recession. The fact The London Paper had a dogged opponent in Associated Newspapers' London Lite also ate into the advertising pie. The final blow, however, had to be when News Corp announced £2 billion losses earlier this month. Even though Murdoch was desperate not to concede to his rival Lord Rothermere in the battle of Who Has Got The Deepest Pockets, in the end no business can sustain that sort of deficit without making economies.

The London Paper was last in and first out of the News International plant at Wapping and was the easiest to close. Its demise will be toasted by some but lamented by many - and I'll be one of them.


See also:
Schadenfreude meet Karma, Karma meet Schadenfreude

thelondonpaper folds. Capital-centric media bias alive and well on Twitter.

Comments

[Your mum]

I'll second that!

The London Lite is shite.

[Steve George]

I have a 20 minute train journey on my daily route from work. I can confirm that without The London Paper I will spend 10 minutes of that journey bored.

I'm going to have to make London Lite last longer.

[Will Sturgeon]

Great post David - delighted The Media Blog's 100th post was so good and on something genuinely of great importance to the debate about the UK's changing media landscape.

[David Brown]

Thanks Will.

Mistakes were made at the London Paper but the concept behind its launch was sound.

Ultimately, the recession, the slump in newspaper advertising and Associated's dogged maintenance of the London Lite took their toll. Murdoch loathes losing money and ultimately that won out over his pride.

Very concerned for many of the staff there both in terms of pay-offs and future prospects as the newspaper market is hardly buoyant. News International titles will try to absorb some of them but I can't see how they can take all 60 journalists.

Be interesting to see what happens to the Lite now it has accomplished its mission of seeing off the Standard's main rival.