EVERY Thursday lunchtime in the Scottish Parliament there is a well-rehearsed ritual; immediately after First Minister’s Questions the Presiding Officer instructs those MSPs not staying on for the next debate to leave the chamber quietly.
The MSPs duly leave the chamber as noisily as possible, dissecting the leaders’ performances as they scuttle off to get to the front of the soup queue in the Garden Lobby canteen.
The debates which follow rarely get much coverage, as media attention focuses on the weekly Punch and Judy show and last week was no different, with the added spice of whether Labour’s Neil Findlay had called Nicola Sturgeon a liar, which the official record said he did. Tut, tut.
But the dedicated few left behind had a matter of considerable importance to discuss and here I can freely plead guilty to unashamed bias. The motion, supported by 38 MSPs from all parties, stated “that the Parliament celebrates the importance of local newspapers to communities across Scotland; believes that a well-resourced, diverse, free press is vital to democracy in Scotland and provides a type of coverage not available via other platforms”.
Well, having spent virtually all my life in newspapers, I would agree with that, wouldn’t I? And that 38 MSPs were prepared to express their support for this industry should give those who value a vibrant and diverse Scottish press cause for optimism. So Graeme Dey, the Angus South SNP MSP, is to be congratulated for enabling the debate to take place.
Mr Dey spoke passionately and fondly about the Arbroath Herald, as did George Adam about the Paisley Daily Express and the former deputy editor of this paper, Joan McAlpine, was rightly fulsome in her praise for the family-owned Annandale Observer.
Tory Jamie McGrigor spoke up for another family-owned title, the Oban Times, while Christine Graham wet into bat for the Midlothian Advertiser, the Southern Reporter and (three cheers from me) the Edinburgh Evening News. Labour’s Clare Baker celebrated the achievements of the East Fife Mail.
The debate was sparked by the decision by my former employer Johnston Press to reveal it had split its 200 titles into four categories and effectively put most of them up for sale. The company inevitably drew criticism for describing the fourth category as “sub-core”, interpreted as the newspaper equivalent of sub-prime. In other words valueless.
In fact it represented the re-shaping of the Johnston Press business, a process which became clearer when it announced the purchase of the i newspaper and a focus on building a stronger national advertising business.
The titles unfortunately dubbed “sub-core” might not be central to JP’s future, but the papers are by no means sub-standard. The Buchan Observer, for example, has featured in discussions about the weekly newspaper of the year prize in the Scottish Press Awards.
There isn’t a publisher in the world which hasn’t had to adapt to the new communications landscape and the virtual disappearance of the big motors, jobs and property classified sections which underpinned the big profits of the past. They were regarded almost uniformly by 1990s managements as dripping roasts to be protected at all costs, which only drove advertisers to cheap and nimble websites.
As has been noted on one media comment stream this week, the one firm which saw it coming was Thomson Regional Newspapers and its response in 1995, having just invested millions in new presses at all their centres, including Edinburgh, was to sell up.
Wrapping up last week’s debate, a magnanimous Humza Yousaf said that while he had been on the end of newspaper criticism he recognised that “it is in all our interests to come together to defend them”, although there were no suggestions about what could be done.
In the media world reliable future planning has been all but impossible because the technological sands have shifted so quickly, but the Scottish Government can play a part in finding solid bedrock. It could make a commitment to support local publications by pledging to maintain the place of public notices in community papers, the dull-looking but important adverts detailing road closures and elections which are actually seen by 80 per cent of readers. At approximately half the adult population of Scotland, that’s around 1.5 million people.
Yet in the drive to cut costs, this vital aspect of local accountability is under threat. So those 38 MSPs who have pledged their support for the Scottish newspaper industry can go one step further; they can ensure a key source of income is protected, and with it the livelihoods of more than 4,000 people working directly or indirectly in Scottish news publishing.
John McLellan is chairman of the Scottish Newspaper Society.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel