The London Evening Standard was relaunched yestedray in a haze of orange, as it’s rebranded look and editorial content aims to take back the eyes and ears of Londoners from the London Lite and the London Paper. The newspaper has also recently been part of a ‘sorry‘ campaign, apologising for ‘not treating Londoners right’ – part of Alexander Lebedev’s come-be-nice-to-meet-you strategy which has been lambasted by former editor Veronica Wadley.
“London is laughing at this ludicrous campaign. Saying ‘Sorry’ for the past smacks of a Soviet courtroom ‘confession’. ‘Sorry’ has all the hallmarks of a KGB-style smear campaign. It denigrates the judgment of 500,000 loyal readers who have been buying the paper in recent years.
The ‘Sorry’ campaign’s suggestion that the Standard and its journalists lost touch with London is a malicious invention. Daily, we campaigned for better and safer public transport, a cleaner city, affordable housing, the rights of cyclists and police accountability. We received endless praise for championing the arts and talents of a great city.”
So, is she right?
Here’s some numbers (especially for @garyandrews!) looking at the number of different story types:
These numbers are my interpretation, yours may be different and I’d love to know how we differ…
The Monday free edition had 72 pages.
16 and 1/5 pages of this were ads, including 8 full pagers
There were 7 pages of classified ads (that’s nearly a third of the paper dedicated to adverts)
News – 28
Business News – 27
Celebrity gossip – 3
PR led news – 11
PR led features – 5
Features – 15
TV guide – 2
Letters – 1
Games – 1
Now at first glance that seems an awfully small amount of PR led features, but what would you say if it turned out that of those, one took up three pages, and other took up two?
So it would appear, as Adam Tinworth astutely pointed out, that the paper is indeed a PR’s dream.
Veronica smacks of sour grapes with the language she uses when slating the Evening Standard, and, to be honest, she’s missing the point – the KGB reference is a cheap and easy shot and makes her remarks less credible.
Is a front page lead on a city tycoon’s affair really what London wants to know?