Bloggers’ verdict on the free London papers
Posted by
Martin Stabe
on 19 September 2006 at 09:29
Tags: Journalism, London Lite, thelondonpaper
If the opinion of London bloggers is anything to go by, neither Associated Newspapers or News International have impressed with their rival free evening papers.
“Why anybody would need two evening newspapers with exactly the same ‘news’ is completely beyond me,” writes In The Fray, in what appears to be the consensus view of the London blogosphere. “They’re both a waste of ink, energy, paper and other resources.”
“Both are as lowsy, sloppy and unappealing as each other,” concurrs Alistair Myles. “Hardly surprising, really, when you realise one, London Lite, is published by the same company that is responsible for The Daily Mail (Associated Newspapers), and the other, thelondonpaper, is the work of Rupert Murdoch (News International).”
“What a grubby, pitiful and ultimately pointless contest: two disreputable organisations trying to outplay each other for the same tranche of upmarket of readers and the same downmarket content.”
SandDancer confesses to being “rather obsessed” by the two freebies, but also rather disappointed. “I think both papers are pretty awful,” she agrees.
“The teaser advertising in Metro (which I also must read every day, but don’t particularly like) for Lite was appalling and the paper hasn’t been much better,” she writes of Associated’s offering.
News International’s version gets a kicking, too: “I had high hopes for TheLondonPaper and the first edition wasn’t so bad, but since then its gone downhill and I might even be swaying towards Lite in my preference. But I will keep going with them both (subject to availability) for a while before declaring a winner.”
Tim Shepperton of Middlesex took thelondonpaper to a Starbucks for a critical analysis, and offers some advice.
“It was OK, but, and please excuse my editor’s eye here, poorly designed and a bit lacking in content. It clearly thinks it’s the next best thing in bringing news to the masses. Well I’ve got news for you, buddy: the internet does it better, quicker, and on better quality paper if you print it out on photographic stock.”
Got that, Stefano?
The absuse is unrelenting. Pashmina of Grammar Puss recounted playing spot-the-difference “between the ghastly London Lite and the only marginally less vapid thelondonpaper”.
Music blogger Iain only found out about a Guillemots gig at Islington Academy thanks to an “atrocious review” in London Lite, “the far more godawful of the two new free papers we have now”.
Meanwhile, Ecolocal is agitated by the environmental implications, particularly the disposal of all that additional newsprint:
“I have a 20 minute walk through London each evening, and tonight I counted 1 paper recycling point, lots of newspapers shoved in bins and lots lying around at bus stops and on the ground. All of these extra papers (thousands of them) are just going into landfill. I wouldn’t mind so much if the printers were providing recycling facilities, therefore completing the chain, but they aren’t.”
What a waste.
