GREENWICH Council looks set to continue publishing its weekly newspaper, Greenwich Time, despite a government crackdown on council publications.
Council officers have prepared a report in response to guidelines from the Department for Communities and Local Government which say councils should not publish their own newspapers more than four times a year.
The tightening of rules for council newspapers was initiated by the Secretary of State for Local Government, Eric Pickles, who singled Greenwich Time out for criticism.
He told Greenwich.co.uk last year, “Councils should be focusing resources on frontline services, not running one-sided Town Hall papers that threaten the genuine local press. ‘Greenwich Time’ is one of the most blatant examples of this practice that I’ve seen, and demonstrates why tightening the rules is so necessary.”
But Greenwich Council officers believe they can demonstrate continuing with a weekly newspaper would actually SAVE money. Their cost analysis claims that switching from a weekly to a quarterly publication would see the net cost of the paper per year leap from £170,000 to £2,328,760 because of the loss of third party advertising.
The report says that Greenwich Time doesn’t compete for the same advertising as local newspapers because it doesn’t “accept advertising from escort services, massage parlours and chat lines.”
It also says that Greenwich Council would need to advertise its statutory public notices “in at least two commercial newspapers, such as the Mercury and the News Shopper, to achieve anything close to the reach of GT”, which is delivered across the entire borough.
Some changes have been made to the paper already in response to the Code of Conduct. The Council’s logo now appears on the frontpage and the strap line explicitly mentions Greenwich Council. It has also dropped TV listings and the crossword from its pages.
Cabinet members will consider the report by council staff at next Tuesday’s Cabinet meeting.
I have no objection in principle to weekly publication if this saves money, although if the figures are so clearly in favour of keeping GT weekly then it’s strange why other Councils don’t want to take the same route. I’m not convinced by the argument that the Council would have to buy space in both the News Shopper and the Mercury.
It’s a pity that the Government hasn’t considered modernising the rules about statutory notices. The stuff about planning applications and road closures that goes into Greenwich Time (and for which Lewisham uses the Mercury) could be communicated just as effectively and probably more cheaply on Council websites, supplemented by leaflets through doors and on lamp posts in places directly affected.
However the Cabinet paper is unsatisfactory as it doesn’t properly address the two things which have generated discontent with Greenwich Time – predatory advertsing and biased content.
The jibe about escorts and massage in Para 7.3 is pretty nasty and anyway irrelevant as the two publications which complained most vocally about being undercut by GT were Meridian and SEnine, neither of which take such adverts.
And there’s nothing at all about the occasional one sided coverage of controversial issues which is the worst feature of GT – the recent row over the BMX track in Hornfair Park and the terrible Olympic edition in 2009. These articles suggest that the controls mentioned in Paragraph 6.1 don’t always work and that there is a need for an independent level of oversight if GT is to continue in its present form.
Which is cheaper, weekly, monthly, or none at all? Has everyone noticed that the cost of parking in Greenwich has gone up by nearly double in some cases? Why? Is the council raking in where it can? Would that we could have town councils for much more and not the bl**dy borough for everything…
I think they should carry on with the weekly publication……….How else would my Cat have any lining for the litter tray??
This the same response as I posted else where:
I really don’t understand why people are wasting their time objecting to the Greenwich Time. It pays for itself(see Council newspaper, L Barnett made this Freedom of Information request to Greenwich Borough Council), it provides the residents across the borough of Greenwich with import news and information. The information published in this paper enabled Greenwich residents to prevent the Council bringing in new and restrictive parking arrangements in my area.
If column inches are to be written regarding this subject then it should be directed at minister Eric Pickles money wasting on preventing councils from running a successful and informative paper in an area where local press has poor coverage and is uninformed. I believe there are a lot of bandwagon jumpers who want to disagree with there powers that be before sitting down and thinking about the situation rationally.
Greenwich Time needs to be taken for what it is, a free newspaper informing the residents of Greenwich on council initiatives and news on what’s happening in the area. It should also be held as a case study how producing a council newspaper can be successful and self funding.
If you don’t receive a copy then get in touch with the council and they will be able to assist you.
Helen, your writing seems to resemble very closely the style of “readers'” letters in GT. I mean your unusual combination of common spelling and punctuation mistakes and folksy word selections contrasted with very accurate accounts of the council’s processes and wise decisions. The call for action in the end also features very often in these letters, just like it did in Soviet posters. You wouldn’t be “the reader” by any chance? I might be wrong, and I do apologise if I am, but I thought it was important to point this out as the debate around Greenwich Time is fundamentally about biased reporting and misuse of power.
Greenwich Time is a hopeless waste of my tax. It is so awful that I file 13 (bin) it as soon as it comes through the door. A total waste of MyTime!!!!!!!!!!!
Very interesting comments on Greenwich Time. The decsion of the Council is the right one. It is a community newspapers supported by the Council and has its critics and supporters. Residents of the Borough have the ability to challenge its content as and when itis appropriate. There is absolutely no reason for the dead hand of central government to decide based on the news baron lobby that Eric Pickles has been subjected to. Biased reporting and abuse of power. We seem to be hearing about this quite a lot lately. Greenwich Time is not the Murdoch Empire. The local press has no regard for residents of the Borough reflected both in terms of its distribution and reporting content. Is the Council decision a wake up call for them – hardly as they are only interested in advertising revenue.
But John if GT is a community newspaper shouldn’t it carry views both favourable to and critical of the Council? We both know that it is occasionally biased – there was no excuse for the recent story about the BMX track in Hornpair Park appearing in the same week as the Planning Board met to consider the application. It could be construed as a deliberate atempt to taunt opponents of the track – did you ask it to go in GT that week rather than waiting until the track was ready to open?
And have a look at the story about Greenwich Market on 25th January this year where Councillor Ray Walker blames the Government for the Planning Inspector’s decision. Then contrast it with the balanced piece of the same length in that week’s Mercury.
I don’t think that the local commercial press publish enough about Greenwich Council, but what they do print is pretty fair.
By the way I thought you were good on the Eddie Nestor programme last Thursday, best performance of the week by a Greenwich councillor on BBC Radio London.