{"id":128,"date":"2026-03-30T15:51:02","date_gmt":"2026-03-30T15:51:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/shahed.org\/news\/?p=128"},"modified":"2026-09-11T12:05:37","modified_gmt":"2026-09-11T12:05:37","slug":"lsj-7-lesson-7-the-nationals","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/shahed.org\/news\/2026\/03\/30\/lsj-7-lesson-7-the-nationals\/","title":{"rendered":"LSJ 7. Lesson 7 : The Nationals"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

7. Lesson 7 : The Nationals<\/h1>\n<\/div>\n
\n

How national newspapers differ from the provincial press. The importance of politics and exclusives; what is meant by a ‘national outlook’, issues surrounding chequebook journalism and other ethical concerns. How nationals identify their target readership, and how that shapes their content.
\nAssessment tasks include:<\/strong><\/em>
\nComparing news styles in the morning dailies
\nWriting a feature article based on a major news story<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

ORGINAL LESSON 7 – DOCUMENTS – LESSON 7\u00a0 LSJ NEWS JOURNALISM – LESSON 7 – JN7<\/a><\/h1>\n

DETAILS:<\/p>\n

JOURNALISM AND NEWSWRITING
\nLESSON 7
\nThe Nationals
\n\u00a9 LONDON SCHOOL OF JOURNALISM
\n1
\nCHAPTER 7
\nTHE NATIONALS
\nFleet Street then and now. A national outlook. Working for a national.
\nExclusives. Journalism ethics. Case study.
\nFLEET STREET THEN AND NOW
\nFleet Street used to be the Mecca for all journalists. To be \u201cin the Street\u201d was the
\nprivate dream of every youngster who decided to make journalism a career \u2013
\nwhether or not they ever fulfilled it.
\nIt ceased to be the focal point of the British newspaper world as companies moved
\nout of the City of London to occupy new, larger premises in other parts of the capital
\n\u2013 premises full of new printing and journalistic technology, where papers are easier,
\nquicker and cheaper to produce. But you can still take a stroll down \u2018Memory Lane\u2019,
\nfrom the Royal Courts of Justice where it begins as a continuation of The Strand,
\nround a slight right-hand bend and down a fairly gentle slope to Ludgate Circus
\nwhere it ends.
\nThe buildings on either side are tall and many may not seem worth a second glance.
\nBut echoes of the past are hidden down alleys, in photographs inside the pubs, on
\nsmall plaques that are easy to miss and in a handful of newspaper mastheads that
\nstill provide a poignant reminder of the significance of the street in its heyday.
\nOn the sober, stone-fronted building which was the headquarters of the Daily and
\nSunday Telegraph, you can still pick out the faint outline of the paper\u2019s title \u2013 and
\nnearby you can still see Express lettering on the gleaming black glass palace which
\nhoused the Daily Express and its Sunday sister paper.
\nBefore that, if you want to spot any newspaper offices, you will have to look for
\nnames painted on the entrances to passages or on side walls, or even up at first or
\nsecond-floor windows for the tell-tale signs of the street\u2019s past history, and the
\nhomes of provincial papers like The People’s Journal and Dundee Courier.
\nBut if you dawdle a moment savouring a pint amid the gloom of Ye Olde Cheshire
\nCheese pub \u2013 or one of the many other hostelries favoured by generations of
\njournalists \u2013 you may fancy you can still hear echoes of their conversations.
\nA NATIONAL OUTLOOK
\nNo national paper is actually housed in Fleet Street now, but perhaps it should come
\nas no surprise that these national papers should have relocated. Apart from the
\npractical advantages of moving to modern offices equipped with state-of-the-art
\ntechnology, unlike regional papers they do not have the same close links with the
\nspecific community within which they are physically based.
\n2
\nNational papers are intended to appeal to and to offer something of value to readers
\nno matter where they live. A national paper is not governed by geographical limits: it
\ncan and must hold up a mirror to the country as a whole, and to the world. The only
\nfactor which has any real bearing on its content is the type of reader at whom it is
\naimed and to whom it seeks to appeal. A national paper aims to cater not only for the
\ncuriosity of its readers about what is happening in the country and the world at large,
\nbut also for their tastes, attitudes, beliefs and prejudices.
\nPart of the power of the national press lies in the fact that they are so few in number
\nand can reach \u2013 and sometimes influence \u2013 so many people. There are thousands of
\nweekly papers, both free and paid-for, but their strength lies in the penetration rather
\nthan the outright size of their circulations.
\nIn other words, they may only sell 10,000 copies in a small town, but that figure may
\nrepresent 80 per cent or more of the local adult population.
\nThere are over 100 regional daily papers, with circulations varying according to the
\nsize of the cities in which they are based.
\nMany now sell only 20,000 copies a day or less \u2013 even those in big cities like
\nGlasgow, Leeds, Birmingham, Liverpool and Manchester. It\u2019s a far cry from the days
\nwhen some big city papers topped 100,000 sales. However, although the figures
\nmay not sound huge, there are many more people who follow\/subscribe to the
\npapers\u2019 various online platforms, so their influence should not be underestimated.
\nBut now look at the sales figures of the nationals. Of the serious broadsheets, the
\nDaily Telegraph sells more than 300,000 \u2013 albeit a figure that has fallen dramatically
\nin recent years.
\nTabloid sales are even more dramatic \u2013 over one million for the best-selling papers,
\nthe Daily Mail and the Sun. Their Sunday sister papers, the Mail on Sunday and the
\nSun on Sunday shift just under a million copies apiece. The British then, despite the
\ncontinuing fall in circulations in recent years, still value their newspapers. But of
\ncourse many more prefer to consume their news online and access newspaper
\nwebsites and apps or read random stories on their social media news feeds.
\nIt is a popular belief that the political ‘colour’ of a paper has a great bearing on its
\ncirculation. This is a moot point. For many years prior to the 1997 General Election
\nnearly as many people voted anti-Tory as Tory; yet the combined circulation of those
\ndaily papers with a Conservative bias was staggering.
\nNonetheless, in the run-up to the 1997 election, even papers which had traditionally
\nechoed a staunch pro-government line began to sound increasingly critical. Sensing
\na mood-swing among voters and anxious not to become disenfranchised from their
\nreaders by adopting an opposing political viewpoint, many papers began to switch
\ntheir allegiances.
\n3
\nSome, like The Sun, were suddenly throwing their weight behind the Opposition, and
\nexplaining to their millions of readers why they too should back Tony Blair as the
\nnext British Prime Minister.
\nTo what extent newspapers influence public opinion and to what extent they merely
\nreflect it has long been the subject of heated debate. Certainly UK national
\nnewspapers are as passionately partisan as ever and their front pages still pored
\nover and discussed on TV news and politics shows as opinion-shaping vehicles, but
\nthe new media with its bloggers, tweeters, podcasters and youtubers have gained
\nmuch more power and influence in recent years in lobbying and raising
\nconsciousness, particularly amongst the young.
\nWhatever a newspaper\u2019s in-built politics, the need to sell itself will always take
\npriority over political judgment. Political ‘colour’, therefore, although an important
\nfactor, is not the major one influencing readers. People read a paper which reflects
\ntheir social position, certain working interests, hobbies, tastes and general outlook.
\nWORKING FOR A NATIONAL
\nSo what is it like to join a national daily paper as a journalist?
\nLet\u2019s consider an imaginary broadsheet paper, the Daily Post \u2013 which, for safety’s
\nsake we will say is politically independent. The Post has a daily circulation of more
\nthan 200,000 and is aimed at that wide belt of readers in the middle-income bracket,
\nneither very poor nor very wealthy.
\nIt offers comprehensive coverage of the major news from this country and abroad,
\nrestrained comment on topics of importance, lively, topical feature articles, a daily
\n\u2018best of the web\u2019 column which is occasionally dryly humorous but not often
\nmalicious, a smattering of \u2018human interest\u2019 stories and all-round sports coverage.
\nIt has a popular website that is updated every five minutes and its social media
\nplatforms receive millions of views every day.
\nIt has a large staff of reporters, sub-editors, web editors and feature writers based at
\nhome and in the office and a network of staff and freelance correspondents
\nthroughout the UK and abroad.
\nThe paper also carries specialists in many fields \u2013 politics, business, money,
\ntechnology, education, motoring, farming, gardening, health \u2013 as well as a culture
\nwriters.
\nThe world of these specialists will be examined more closely in a later lesson; suffice
\nit to say at this stage that many of them will have begun their journalistic careers as
\nreporters.
\n4
\nOne of the first things you will become aware of as a reporter on the Daily Post is the
\nfierce competition for space in the paper. Whereas on the Melford Gazette almost
\nevery word you wrote appeared in print, and on the Dorningham Star most of what
\nyou wrote saw the light of day in some edition or other, on the Post you will write
\nmany stories that will end up \u2018spiked\u2019. This will not necessarily be because they are
\npoor stories, poorly written; merely that, with the whole world available as a source of
\nmaterial, a story needs something very special about it to be worth a place on a
\npage, online or in print.
\nWith online space not such a huge issue as it is in print, you are still competing for
\nthe attention of the time-poor reader, so that means most stories must be put across
\nin the fewest possible words. Look through any daily paper, tabloid or broadsheet,
\nand you will find only a few stories that have rated more than half a column including
\nheadlines. So you must master the art of writing crisp, concise English.
\nThat \u2018special\u2019 quality required for a story to be printed in a national daily relates not
\nonly to subject matter, but also to the way it is written. Most stories in papers like the
\nDaily Post have more dramatic impact about them than those that appear in weekly
\nor daily regional papers.
\nThey get this dramatic impact because the reporters have narrowed their vision of
\nthe story, have grasped the essential dramatic facts and appreciated that the quality
\nof the finished copy will depend as much on what they leave out as what they put in.
\nThis is not to say that a story is distorted: all the essential facts are there, but any
\nsuperfluous matter that blurs the sharp edge and blunts the impact is left out.
\nWhat kind of assignment is the daily paper reporter likely to be given? A court trial or
\ninquest, perhaps, or a strike at a hospital, a human interest story about a missing
\nchild, the opening of a new tech company or an interview with a Hollywood actor
\nchanging planes at Heathrow Airport.
\nAs on a local paper, the assignments will range from the mundane to the most
\nchallenging and exciting breaking stories \u2013 although it may take time to be sent out
\non your first genuine \u201cpage lead\u201d.
\nAt first the reporter may be slightly overawed at times by having to talk to people who
\nare household names; later, the biggest battle may be to avoid becoming cynical, for
\nit will soon be realised that, famous or not, they are just people with the same human
\nfoibles as the rest of us.
\nA newspaper’s task is to satisfy public curiosity. But the news side \u2013 the reporters
\nand sub-editors \u2013 can satisfy that curiosity only in part. So much is happening all the
\ntime, with every day providing more stories than can possibly be accommodated,
\nthat daily paper reports can often do little more than record the bare facts. These
\nbare facts often stimulate the readers’ curiosity in a topic; it is the job of the features
\neditor and the writers and sub-editors working under him to satisfy that demand
\ncompletely.
\n5
\nFor this reason you are likely to find a far bigger team of features writers on a
\nnational than on a regional paper. Sunday papers, in particular, may carry a higher
\nproportion of features than breaking news stories.
\nTopics for national paper features are almost as abundant as news stories \u2013 and
\nevery day provides far more news stories than any national can possibly print or
\ninclude online.
\nLet\u2019s say a couple have launched a website to help people host refugees in their
\nhome. But what feature does it suggest?
\nOne paper might consider a factual account of the legal position of anyone wishing
\nto host refugees in their home \u2013 can they? If so, from what age? Another might study
\nwhy so many refugees are being able to fully integrate as part of this scheme, while
\na third might focus on the individual stories of those who have travelled so far and
\nsacrificed so much to be in a safer, more secure and welcoming country.
\nWhatever the tone, in all cases features are important weapons in the national
\npaper\u2019s armoury and its constant battle to satisfy existing readers and attract new
\nconverts.
\nEXCLUSIVES
\nIf there is one factor which sets national journalists apart from their provincial
\ncounterparts more than any other, it is the intensity of professional rivalry between
\npublications seeking to woo readers from \u2013 and score points over \u2013 their
\ncompetitors. This is not so pronounced at a regional level because so many papers
\nenjoy a virtual monopoly on news on their \u2018patch\u2019, or feel they can cater for their
\nreaders by adopting a different approach from rival media like local radio and TV.
\nNational papers, on the other hand, may often be seeking to appeal to the same kind
\nof readers, and can realistically only boost their own circulations at the expense of
\nanother paper. This applies to both broadsheet and tabloid titles, although the
\ncompetition is particularly intense between those papers which share the most
\ncommon ground \u2013 between the Times and Telegraph, the Express and Mail, the Sun
\nand Mirror.
\nThere are a number of ways in which this intense spirit of competition has an impact
\non the working lives and professional practices of journalists. They know that even
\nthe most trivial item will have landed on the newsdesks of all the other national
\npapers; the question is, which of those papers can make the most creative and
\nimaginative use of the material?
\nFrom the above example, it should be immediately obvious that national papers prize
\noriginality above all else. To sell more papers than their rivals, they want to publish
\narticles which other papers do not \u2013 or present the same news in a much more
\nappealing, vibrant, exciting and stimulating way.
\n6
\nEditors would argue that they hire the best writers and sub-editors in the country with
\nexactly that aim \u2013 which means that heads will roll if a humdrum little story appearing
\non page 20 in their own paper is transformed into an eye-catching, dramatic feature
\nor follow-up story on a rival\u2019s front page.
\nAt one level, this means national journalists honing their ability to spot all the
\npotential angles of a story \u2013 to have the vision to transform an apparently mundane
\nor run-of-the-mill item into something much more exciting. This may mean speaking
\nto someone that no one else has thought of approaching, or it may involve
\npresenting the article in a visually exciting way on the page by incorporating images
\nor comparisons that rivals have neglected to chase up. At its simplest level, it may
\nmean cropping a picture differently, making a \u2018connection\u2019 that others have missed or
\neven posing an outlandish \u2018what if?\u2019 question and following through the idea with a
\nseries of interviews.
\nFor example, a survey may be published showing that youngsters in one part of the
\ncountry receive more pocket money than in another. One regional paper might
\npublish a short news story containing the survey\u2019s results and not think any more
\nabout it.
\nA features editor on another regional paper might suggest interviewing a selection of
\nlocal school kids to compare their expectations and interview a cross-section of
\nparents about their views. Another features editor might suggest publishing a table
\nshowing how pocket money has risen since the turn of the century, and comparing it
\nwith the cost of living \u2013 or even the cost of specific items, like a bag of crisps, a bar
\nof chocolate and an energy drink.
\nAll the above approaches are valid, but they are unlikely to excite a tabloid editor.
\nThey might wave the survey in front of senior executives and lambast them until they
\ncome up with some more exciting ideas. What about trying to track down some of
\nthe children who receive the most pocket money in the country? \u201cSpeak to some pop
\nstars, fashion models, company bosses,\u201d she storms. \u201cI want to find half a dozen kids
\nwho are obscenely rich.\u201d
\nOne executive might suggest contrasting this with some of the poorest youngsters in
\nthe country. \u201cHow about highlighting the fact that the vast chasm between the haves
\nand the have-nots in this country start at an early age?\u201d she suggests. \u201cOr why not
\nshow that the money one of our rich kids spends in a week could keep a child in an
\nAfrican orphanage for a year?\u201d
\nNow the chief sub \u2013 always eager to find good pictorial images \u2013 chips in. \u201cI heard a
\n12-year-old boy from Herefordshire has bought his own flock of sheep by saving up
\nhis pocket money. He bought the six sheep for \u00a3240 and keeps them at nearby
\nfarm,\u201d she says.
\nFrom this single hypothetical example, you can see how the senior staff of a national
\nnewspaper have hijacked a basic idea and started setting their own agenda, injecting
\nsufficient life and depth into a straightforward news story to make it appeal to readers
\nof all ages.
\n7
\nThis is a natural extension of the critical thinking you learned about earlier on the
\ncourse. But in the world of national newspapers it is a prerequisite for any journalist
\nhoping to make it to the top \u2013 however trivial, off-the-wall or politically incorrect some
\nof the ideas may seem.
\nA further extension of this originality of approach is demonstrated by the importance
\nof the exclusive (or scoop) \u2013 in other words, a story which no other paper has
\naccess to.
\nOn the day of publication this can be heavily publicised to sell that particular edition:
\n\u201conly in tomorrow\u2019s Mirror\u201d, \u201ca Sun world exclusive\u201d etc. Exclusives are viewed by
\neditors as important weapons in their armoury when it comes to selling more copies
\nof their paper \u2013 and embarrassing their rivals.
\nSome reporters stumble across exclusives by accident \u2013 through a chance
\nconversation, perhaps, or simply by being in the right place at the right time.
\nFew reporters will get to taste the excitement of picking up a world exclusive, but
\nthere are plenty of occasions when they will savour the excitement of stumbling
\nacross a new \u2018angle\u2019 which they know none of their rivals have got.
\nThe national papers\u2019 obsession with exclusives means that a freelance writer or
\nphotographer or agency may be able to command top rates \u2013 sometimes a four- or
\nfive-figure sum \u2013 for providing an exclusive news story, picture or feature. But should
\nthat be broken in print or online?
\nDigital journalist Alison Gow in a fascinating article entitled \u2018When should
\nnewspapers break exclusive stories online?\u2019 sent out a tweet to her followers which
\nread: should newspapers break exclusive court cases online or wait to go to print.
\nTwitter \u2013 your thoughts please?
\nShe said: \u201cObviously those on Twitter would be more likely to be biased towards
\nweb-publish first, but the reasons posters supplied were very strong: \u2018There is an
\nexpectation now that things go online first\u2019; \u2018You will get the respect of your readers
\nfor immediacy and increased followers\u2019 (a good point \u2013 build readers online, build
\nadvertiser interest); \u2018break \u2019em online \u2013 how many people buy a paper to see a court
\nstory you know is exclusive\u2019.
\n\u2018How can a court case be exclusive? It\u2019s a public hearing\u2019 was another point raised.
\n\u201cFor me,\u201d continued Alison, \u201cthe continuing distinction between a newspaper\u2019s print
\nand online products is just another extension of the \u2018journalist as gatekeeper\u2019 debate
\n\u2013 when do we decide to share things with our readers and when do we let them have
\n(some) information? At the most basic level, when I posted a tweet about a serious
\nroad accident near my home on Tuesday night, I was depriving my newspaper of an
\nexclusive. But that\u2019s social media \u2013 people who witness incidents now don\u2019t
\nautomatically tell their local paper; they update their blog, their status, share links,
\nphotos or videos online \u2013 this is what we are up against and what we have to be able
\nto compete with. This is also a phenomenon that is only going to grow. Exclusive is
\nan empty word unless you can prove that no other person knows about the story \u2013
\nthat it hasn\u2019t been shared on a forum, Twitter, Facebook or a niche blog.\u201d
\n8
\nDespite this there are many different types of exclusive, of course \u2013 the unique
\npicture story, the chance comment in an interview, the journalist who just happens to
\nbe in the right place at the right time.
\nThe Telegraph\u2019s historic revelations about MPs\u2019 expenses were an excellent
\nexample of the type of story that demands an enormous amount of effort and
\npersistence.
\nIt took 45 journalists sifting through a million pages of expenses to secure three
\nweeks\u2019 worth of front-page leads \u2013 but the long hot summer brought an end to the
\ncareer of at least 20 MPs and led to a massive shake-up of MP\u2019s pay and
\nallowances.
\nIt made the lead item on most TV news bulletins and it led to the TV channels
\nbroadcasting live from outside Westminster. It caused MPs to travel home to their
\nconstituencies in trepidation and it led to heated debates in the House.
\nFew stories can claim to have quite such a direct impact on people\u2019s behaviour,
\nalthough Robert Peston\u2019s scoop for the BBC about Northern Rock\u2019s request to the
\ngovernment for emergency funding prompted savers to queue outside its branches
\nand was the first of a series of credit crunch exclusives which created shockwaves
\naround the world\u2019s financial markets.
\nPatience is a virtue, they say, and it helped Splash news agency journalist David
\nLeigh to bag two front pages \u2013 in the Mirror and the Mail \u2013 when he went to Panama
\nto track down Anne Darwin, the woman whose husband faked his own death in a
\ncanoeing accident.
\nInvestigative journalism is responsible for many of the great exclusives of all time \u2013
\nincluding the Sunday Times Insight Team who tracked down British intelligence boss
\nturned Russian spy Kim Philby in Russia in 1967, and the revelations by the World In
\nAction current affairs team in 1995 that defence minister Jonathan Aitken had
\nbenefited from bribes from Saudi royalty to arrange arms deals.
\nSometimes investigations will involve elaborate \u201csting\u201d operations \u2013 as when
\nObserver journalists posed as rich American businessmen and exposed the role of
\nlobbyists with strong links to the Labour hierarchy in 1999, or when Mirror graduate
\ntrainee Ryan Parry went undercover as a royal footman for two months in 2003 in
\nwhat the paper described as the \u201cbiggest royal security scandal ever\u201d.
\nContacts are everything for a reporter, as demonstrated by many of the great
\nscoops. The Telegraph\u2019s Jeff Randall beat the BBC to the news that their own
\nchairman was defecting to ITV in an \u00a38m deal in 2005.
\nSome scoops are of genuinely historic proportions \u2013 like the Times\u2019 revelation in
\n1922 about the discovery of the burial chamber of Tutenkhamen, the Daily Express\u2019s
\nfirst picture of the moon\u2019s surface in 1966 and John Pilger\u2019s revelations in 1979
\nabout the genocide caused by Pol Pot\u2019s reign of terror in Cambodia.
\nOthers are of mundane sexual matters which may nonetheless cause the downfall of
\npoliticians and celebrities alike.
\n9
\nThe News of the World scoop in 1986 about Conservative Party chairman Jeffrey
\nArcher paying off a prostitute eventually landed the peer in jail for perverting the
\ncourse of justice \u2013 while the same paper\u2019s revelations in 1988 that Frank Bough
\n\u201csnorted cocaine with prostitutes and drug pushers\u201d effectively ended the career of
\nthe affable jumper-wearing TV show host.
\nTelevision interviewers sometimes encourage interviewees to be disarmingly frank,
\nand so it was for Martin Bashir in 1995, when his Panorama interview with the
\nPrincess of Wales ended with Diana dishing the dirt on her marriage to Prince
\nCharles, three years after their separation. However, this ended ignominiously for the
\nBBC years later following an independent inquiry which found Bashir guilty of deceit
\nand of breaching BBC editorial conduct to obtain the interview.
\nJOURNALISM ETHICS
\nChequebook journalism is frowned on by many regional journalists and editors, who
\nmight never dream of paying someone to tell their story. But an individual who has
\nundergone a unique experience \u2013 being kidnapped and held hostage, perhaps, or
\nsurviving a similarly dramatic ordeal, might be offered a huge sum to tell their story
\nexclusively to one paper.
\nThere are also cases where it might be necessary to pay for a story which is
\noverwhelmingly in the public interest, if it helps to detect or expose crime or antisocial conduct, prevents the public being misled or protects public health and safety.
\nHowever, criticism of the ethics involved in such practices has been particularly
\noutspoken in cases involving court cases and \u2018kiss-and-tell\u2019 stories where otherwise
\nanonymous individuals have sold the story of their relationship with a well-known
\npersonality.
\nSince the British Press has traditionally always been self-regulatory, there will
\ninevitably be individual circumstances in which newspapers overstep the mark and
\nbehave in a way which the public \u2013 and politicians \u2013 find unacceptable. For many
\nyears the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO), formerly the Press
\nComplaints Commission, has attempted through adjudication and declarations of
\nprinciple, to offer guidance to newspaper editors and has called on them to exercise
\ndiscretion and a sense of responsibility.
\nIPSO was set up following the Leveson Inquiry in 2012 into the phone hacking
\nscandal and which called for a more independent and accountable press regulatory
\nbody. It exists to \u201cpromote and uphold the highest professional standards of
\njournalism in the UK, and to support members of the public in seeking redress where
\nthey believe that the Editors’ Code of Practice has been breached.\u201d
\nOn the question of payment for articles, IPSO has made it clear that payments
\nshould not be made to witnesses in court cases, to criminals or other \u201cnotorious\u201d
\npersons. The only exception outlined in the Press Complaints Commission\u2019s Code of
\nPractice is \u201cwould need to demonstrate that there was good reason to believe the
\npublic interest would be served. If, despite payment, no public interest emerged, then
\nthe material should not be published.\u201d The question of exactly what constitutes \u201cin
\nthe public interest\u201d has given rise to many heated arguments over the years and
\nnumerous grey areas which are unlikely ever to be satisfactorily resolved.
\n10
\nIt may also help trainee journalists to remember that just because a story is of
\ninterest to the public does not mean that it is \u201cin the public interest\u201d. This also applies
\nto many articles which have involved the infringement of privacy, misrepresentation,
\nharassment and intrusion into people\u2019s grief or shock \u2013 as well as those which have
\nled to lawsuits for defamation.
\nThe phone-hacking scandal which led to the closure of the News of the World in
\n2011 and prompted the Leveson Inquiry into press standards is discussed in more
\ndetail in the law lesson which follows \u2013 but it\u2019s clear that most stories have an ethical
\ndimension and this is something that even the most brash national tabloids have
\nbeen forced to consider in more detail in recent years.
\nThe growth of privacy law and changing public perceptions of what is \u201cacceptable\u201d
\nbehaviour by journalists has also put pressure on editors to think through the
\nconsequences associated with each story and the way it is pursued.
\nDoes it involve interviewing young people under 16, for example? Is any element of
\nsubterfuge necessary and justified? Such issues are not arcane matters for
\nphilosophical discussion but practical dilemmas which journalists face every day,
\nwhere a poor decision could result not just in embarrassment for those involved, but
\nthe possibility of a multi-million pound law suit.
\nFor individual journalists, such considerations are also likely to dictate which papers
\nthey feel able to work for, since editors are unlikely to look kindly on staff who raise
\npersonal moral objections about tackling everyday tasks which are an important,
\nunpleasant but unavoidable part of the job \u2013 like interviewing grieving relatives,
\nperhaps.
\nIt therefore makes sense for anyone attracted by the high profile and professional
\nchallenge of working for a national newspaper to consider in advance whether they
\nwill find it possible to work for a particular publication.
\nCASE STUDY
\nThe identity and content of each national newspaper is unique and it is useful to
\ncompare how different papers choose to approach and handle coverage of the same
\nstory. Since papers also vary greatly in size and content from one day to the next, it
\nis also worth studying at least one full week\u2019s worth of papers in order to form an
\naccurate impression of its target readership. (Most titles have special pull-out
\nsupplements published on different days of the week dealing with everything from
\njobs to motoring and sport).
\nHowever, to get an initial impression of the sort of material which we might expect to
\nfind in the pages of our national press on any one day, let us take one of the most
\nsuccessful daily UK tabloids at random: Metro, which is given away free on public
\ntransport and boasts a daily circulation figure of almost one million. It takes a neutral
\nstance politically and appeals to professional and working people alike.
\n11
\nThe paper we have chosen contains 32 pages. The paper dedicates nine pages to
\nnews, showbiz gossip and readers\u2019 views, two pages to money and business news
\nand has a regular one-page Q&A interview called \u2018Sixty Seconds\u2019. It has a substantial
\nseven-page travel section called \u2018Escape\u2019 in this edition followed by five pages
\ndedicated to sport. The rest are full page ads, save for a \u2018puzzle\u2019 page.
\nThe adverts also reflect the target readership of the paper with ads for a smart
\nmoney app, a budget airline, a broadband company, a property auction house and
\nan app that enables people to sell their unwanted stuff.
\nThe front page splash details the latest developments in a murder hunt, while page
\ntwo has the latest political news with a column down the side for NIBs (news in brief).
\nPage three has some celebrity and royal news, while page four continues the murder
\ninquiry story from the front page. It also has two columns of NIBs the paper calls
\n\u2018news bites\u2019.
\nPage five has a couple of human interest stories and page seven covers the latest
\nclimate change catastrophes. There are yet more NIBs on this page. The showbiz
\npage follows on page nine entitled \u2018Guilty Pleasures\u2019 and then there are two pages of
\nreaders\u2019 views taken from text messages and emails.
\nThe large travel section includes reports on Switzerland, Croatia and LGBT+ travel
\noptions. The sports section is predictability dominated by the English Premier
\nLeague with one page set aside for F1 motor racing.
\nMetro.co.uk
\nThe Metro has a highly successful website which boasts millions of visitors every
\nday. Its substantial and seductive mix of breaking news and sport, clickbait pictures
\nand videos, celebrity gossip, columnists and lifestyle content bears little
\nresemblance to its print counterpart. Indeed in 2014 production of the newspaper
\nand website was separated. Since then, they have been produced independently by
\nseparate editorial teams while remaining part of the same parent company.
\nIts Facebook page is also connected to the website team and boasts more than two
\nmillion likes. It has considerably less engagement on Twitter with 350,000 followers.
\n12
\nASSIGNMENT SEVEN
\nThis assignment is designed to encourage you to study how different newspapers
\nstructure their content in order to meet the needs and expectations of their target
\nreadership.
\n1. Clip out or highlight a news story from any daily paper and suggest ideas for
\nthree feature articles based on it. Send along the clipping with the exercise
\n(or give details of a weblink, if appropriate).
\n2. Write up any one of the features ideas from Exercise 1 as an article in 600
\nwords. Try to make this exercise as realistic as possible by using your own
\nsources and interviewees.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

7. Lesson 7 : The Nationals How national newspapers differ from the provincial press. The importance of politics and exclusives; what is meant by a ‘national outlook’, issues surrounding chequebook…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[3,1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/shahed.org\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/128"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/shahed.org\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/shahed.org\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/shahed.org\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/shahed.org\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=128"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/shahed.org\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/128\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1294,"href":"https:\/\/shahed.org\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/128\/revisions\/1294"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/shahed.org\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=128"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/shahed.org\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=128"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/shahed.org\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=128"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}