The Sun's sucker-punch endorsement of the Conservatives has already been over-analysed to death within the Westminster-currently-in-Brighton bubble. Most of that analysis is about what it means for the politicians (consensus: game over), so briefly, here's what it means for journalists.
Firstly, it's not about the Sun's readership. Yes, the Sun has the biggest daily circulation on Fleet Street, but we're still talking a bit over 3 million, which in a country of more than 60 million isn't overwhelming.
And in any event, no one's suggesting that simply because the Sun tells its readers to vote one way, any more than a handful will actually be swayed to do so. The interaction between a newspaper and its readers' voting patterns is hideously complex - and if you doubt that, you can read this 31-page research paper from the Centre for Research into Elections and Social Trends which proves it.
No, the significance of the Sun's announcement is related to the Sun's position of cultural power - as a newspaper. It may be edited by north London meeja types, and the ultimate decision may be taken by an Australian global media-mogul... but as a newspaper it has a powerful position and role to play in British public life. It's a position and tradition which stretches back at least to the 80s, to the days of 'Gotcha', 'Paddy Pantsdown' and the classic 'Who Told That Chopper Whopper?'. Rightly or wrongly, the Sun has now been seen for decades to speak for a large part of Britain.
And the signficance for journalists? For all the talk of the death of newspapers, the Dead Tree Press and the end of Fleet Street as we know it, the Sun is still seen to speak for a large part of Britain. The Mail Online, with its 18.7 million monthly unique users, hasn't supplanted that role, and neither have any bloggers or Facebook. As of this morning at least, newspapers still matter.
(Labour MP and 'Twitter Czar' Kerry McCarthy disagrees - she twittered last night 'Labour doesn't need the Sun - we've got Twitter!'. Iain Dale's right: Is this woman for real?).
3 comments:
It is easy to over or under estimate the influence of the Sun on its readership but let's be clear about the figures. The UK has a population of 60 million but only 45 million are eligible to vote. At the last general election turnout was 61% meaning only 27.5 million could be bothered to write X on a bit of paper. Three million may be a small proportion of 60 million but it's over 10% of the voting public. Also, the Murdoch Empire is likely to follow suit as evidenced by the ignorant way in which Sky's Adam Boulton recently concluded an interview with the Prime Minister by addressing him as Gordon Brown rather than his title. Murdoch can see which way the wind is blowing and he doesn't want to lose any readers/viewers by supporting the wrong side. His problem at the moment is there is no right side to suck up to.
Fair point about the voting public - but those figures don't quite add up either. You assume all three million of the Sun's readers actually bother to vote...
Worse than that, I assumed all three million Sun readers could read!
Post a Comment