Upload
jimchisholm
View
220
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/9/2019 UK Political Analysis 100409 V5.1 JPC
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/uk-political-analysis-100409-v51-jpc 1/9
C H I S H O L M
ARE MURDOCH AND ROTHERMERE
BETTER OFF UNDER LABOUR?
An analysis of politics and the fortunes of the UK national press
© C H I S H O L M, April 2010
8/9/2019 UK Political Analysis 100409 V5.1 JPC
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/uk-political-analysis-100409-v51-jpc 2/9
An analysis of politics and the fortunes of the UK national pressFor publication.
© C H I S H O L M, April 2010. 2
ARE MURDOCH AND ROTHERMERE BETTER OFF UNDER LABOUR?
What’s more important? Political conviction? Business? Or Influence? Do people own
newspapers, and other media for that matter, for business reasons or reasons of influence?
As we now hurtle toward a general election the facts are more interesting than the
perceptions. Prejudice is against. Democracy is for. So how should we advise Mr Murdoch
and Lord Rothermere to vote in the coming election? The historical facts would suggest more
with their heads than their hearts.
It’s a fact that most British newspapers do better in opposition to their own political instincts.
This has to be a good thing for democracy, and free speech, but hey…. It’s not necessarily
good for business.
Take The Times, the once bastion of the establishment. More than any other newspaper it
needs Labour more than the Conservatives. Its circulation share has performed significantly
better under Labour, than when the Tories were in power. Since it was acquired by Murdoch
in 19811, every year of Tory power has cost them 6% of their circulation share relative to
when Labour was in power 2. (Price warring and a heavily promoted shift to tabloid accepted.)
Now that The Tories may be returning, is its hard won share slipping?
The Daily Mail has rightly developed a great reputation as a commercial success since the late
Lord Rothermere brought the paper back from the brink in 1969, to become a commercial
phenomenon. But the reality is that it owes much of its success to Labour. Most periods when
the Tories were in power rather than Labour have cost the Mail market share, against a
consistent gain when Labour have been in power. Over the period of a government, that’s a
lot of sales. In translation the Mail has gained around a million copies in share equivalent
under Labour, and lost around half a million copies under the Tories).
Over the last 40 odd years, The Daily Telegraph’s picture is shrouded in lost opportunity.
During the sixties and seventies it is true that the paper followed the model of contrary
performance, and certainly its circulation plummeted during the Thatcher years. For other
reasons it showed little sign of recovery when Labour came to power. It was revitalised under
its new owners and a refreshing strategy, but now, as the Tories may return to power, its share
is beginning to decline again.
Rupert Murdoch’s Sun has always run an opportunist editorial strategy, supporting whichever
party was most likely to be in power. While its greatest period of growth was during the price
wars of the mid ’90’s, its period of fastest decline was during the time when it supported
Labour around the 1997 election. During the late ’90’s and early 2000’s circulation share was
relatively stagnant. However in recent years The Sun’s circulation share has again been
steadily rising.
1For the purpose of modelling the analysis estimates the average the circulation of The Times between the period of its closure
due to a strike and its recommencement of publishing.2
That is 6% of its share of 8%. Not 6% of the total market.
8/9/2019 UK Political Analysis 100409 V5.1 JPC
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/uk-political-analysis-100409-v51-jpc 3/9
An analysis of politics and the fortunes of the UK national pressFor publication.
© C H I S H O L M, April 2010. 3
Meanwhile the left leaning Guardian has enjoyed a serendipitous relationship with the
political system, overlaid against a strong circulation performance over the years. But one
only needs to look from the ’60’s to the late ’80’s to see that its circulation fortunes ran
contrary to those of the country’s political sentiments.
It has historically benefited from a conservative government – look at how badly it formed
during the end of the Callaghan government, and how well it performed during the Thatcher
era - but as the graph below shows, since the last election The Guardian’s share has improved.
Is this a reflection of the general trend, or that the newspaper has been an opposition in
residence?
In the case of the Mirror, the issue has to be seen in the context of its less successful
circulation performance over time. But even here, the inverse influence of politics is
instructive. For whatever reason the newspaper has suffered a decline in market share back to
the sixties. But its rate of decline under Labour has been double that when the Conservatives
have been in power. Could it now enjoy a revival under a change in government?
Meanwhile the other titles show little pro or contrary influence of the party in power. In the
case of The Express this may reflect its range of owners and allegiances. The Stars’ new
found success is certainly not down to its political persuasion. And in the case of The
Independent? Maybe it is.
Finally, can circulation be used as a barometer of likely shifts in voting behaviour? Well a
careful look at trends immediately leading up to and following general elections suggests that
newspapers’ circulation trends regularly reverse. Take a look at the following graphs and
decide for yourself. This may simply reflect the amount press barons will spend on promotion
to get their result, whether it’s business or influence. Ultimately commerce wins over
conviction, every time.
Each of the following charts shows the variance in sale versus political control (e.g. % votes
in the General Election). The sharp lines show the specific variances in every period. The
curved charts show the “line of best fit” over time. Political share (measured as Tory
advantage or disadvantage is in black. Newspaper circulation share is coloured. Judge for
yourself what they say.
© Jim CHISHOLM.
April 2010.
For more information or clarification
Email: [email protected]
Phone: +447775817797
Skype: jpchisholm
8/9/2019 UK Political Analysis 100409 V5.1 JPC
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/uk-political-analysis-100409-v51-jpc 4/9
An analysis of politics and the fortunes of the UK national pressFor publication.
© C H I S H O L M, April 2010. 4
1 THE TIMES
2 DAILY TELEGRAPH
8/9/2019 UK Political Analysis 100409 V5.1 JPC
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/uk-political-analysis-100409-v51-jpc 5/9
An analysis of politics and the fortunes of the UK national pressFor publication.
© C H I S H O L M, April 2010. 5
3 THE GUARDIAN
4 DAILY MAIL
8/9/2019 UK Political Analysis 100409 V5.1 JPC
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/uk-political-analysis-100409-v51-jpc 6/9
An analysis of politics and the fortunes of the UK national pressFor publication.
© C H I S H O L M, April 2010. 6
5 THE SUN
6 THE MIRROR
8/9/2019 UK Political Analysis 100409 V5.1 JPC
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/uk-political-analysis-100409-v51-jpc 7/9
An analysis of politics and the fortunes of the UK national pressFor publication.
© C H I S H O L M, April 2010. 7
7 THE INDEPENDENT
8 THE EXPRESS
8/9/2019 UK Political Analysis 100409 V5.1 JPC
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/uk-political-analysis-100409-v51-jpc 8/9
An analysis of politics and the fortunes of the UK national pressFor publication.
© C H I S H O L M, April 2010. 8
9 DAILY STAR
10 ALL TITLES SUMMARY
8/9/2019 UK Political Analysis 100409 V5.1 JPC
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/uk-political-analysis-100409-v51-jpc 9/9
An analysis of politics and the fortunes of the UK national pressFor publication.
© C H I S H O L M, April 2010. 9
APPENDICES:
Technical notes:
The analysis involved the following steps.
1. A table of ABC six month data back to 1963. Many titles didn’t register with ABC
until the sixties. The analysis includes titles such as The Independent or Today, that
either launched or closed during the period. It does not include the Financial Times or
Scottish Daily Record.
2. A table of general election results from 1964, which includes a measure of the
difference in Labour and Conservative shares of the vote.
3. The analysis is based on circulation share trends, rather than circulation actuals, in
order to track competitive performance relative to the total market which has grown
and shrunk considerably during the period of analysis.
4. A measurement of shift in political power – measured by shift in voting between
Conservatives and Labour, at each election outcome. The change in voting share is
taken in the six-month period of change, and not weighted to the point of the change.
5. A correlation between the shift in circulation market share during the period of the
election with that of shift in political control.
6. It takes no account of changing pricing or bulks policies, or subscription policies, all
of which have had some effect on circulation.
© Jim CHISHOLM.
April 2010.
For more information or clarification
Email: [email protected]
Phone: +447775817797
Skype: jpchisholm