Talking Past Each Other: Journalists, Readers and Local Newspaper Reporting of General Election Campaigns in the UK Bob

Franklin

A paper for the symposium Can Vote, Wont Vote, organised by Goldsmiths College and PSA Politics and Media Group 6 November 2003

Bob Franklin, Department of Journalism Studies, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, S10 1DF, UK. r.franklin@sheffield.ac.uk 0044 114 222 2505

Talking Past Each Other: Journalists, Readers and Local Newspaper Reporting of General Election Campaigns in the UK BOB FRANKLIN, Department of Journalism Studies, University of Sheffield, UK.
ABSTRACT: Drawing on an extensive database of local press reporting of the last four general elections (1987, 1992, 1997 and 2001), as well as contemporary interviews with journalists and editors, this paper argues that local press coverage of the constituency campaign has changed markedly since 1987 and in ways which may contribute to diminishing voter interest and participation in elections. Local newspapers election coverage in 2001 was: considerably reduced (fewer articles and shorter articles); more focused on local issues; more concerned to report candidates than party policies; increasingly driven by journalists efforts to entertain and keep readers interested than to inform them; more than ever informed by news values rather than a distinct concern to report election events and, finally; more partisan and less even handed than previously (and contra the national press, favoured the Conservative party by this editorial shift). Significantly, journalists do not perceive themselves as the cause of voter apathy but the cure: the latter role being exemplified in the considerable efforts journalists make to lighten up election reporting. Readers interest in the election is judged to be slight and declining but this understanding reflects, at least in part, journalists emphasis on local stories as the touchstone of good election stories: a view reinforced by party news management ambitions to stress the local in their campaign initiatives. For their part, readers letters reveal a substantial interest in the campaign but with national rather than local concerns. Journalists and readers appear to be talking past each other in the pages of the local press. One further factor is significant in explaining the changing character of election coverage and reflects the increasingly corporate character of local media with the consequent emphasis on market above editorial priorities: namely, the declining number and quality of political journalists working in the local press.

Introduction The electoral consequences of political communications in the local setting have been appreciated more readily by Westminster than the academy. An early priority for Peter Mandelson, coordinator of communications for new Labour in 1997, was to undertake a communications audit of the regional offices of the Central Office of Information: a reinvigorated Government News Network (GNN) to convey government messages in the regions emerged in March 2002. But, seduced by the centralised political and media structures located in London, scholars of political communications have, with few exceptions, largely ignored the implications of local news media for local party and electoral communications (Carty and Eagles, 2000; Denver and Hands 1998; Franklin, 2003 Lilleker and Negrine 2003). This paper argues for the importance of local political communications and suggests that the ways in which local journalists and editors have reported the constituency campaign during the general elections of 1987, 1992, 1997 and most recently 2001, may have contributed to the apparent decline in public interest and participation in elections across that

period. Much of the argument here rests on evidence derived from a detailed and longitudinal analysis of local journalists coverage of election campaigns in selected constituencies in the West Yorkshire region of England1. The period between 1987 and 2001 has witnessed considerable changes in the local political as well as media environment2, but a persistent and continuing pattern of change in election reporting is apparent. Coverage is: reduced with fewer and shorter published articles; more focused on local issues; more concerned to report candidates than party policies; increasingly driven by journalists efforts to entertain and keep readers interested than to inform them; more than ever informed by news values rather than a distinct concern to report election events and, finally; more partisan and less even handed than previously (and contra the national press, in favour of the Conservative party). Most significantly, analysis of local coverage of recent elections suggests that instead of providing a public forum where local communities of readers and voters might debate electoral issues of consequence, local newspapers in part driven by the campaigning agendas of local parties have become a public space where readers and journalists conflicting agendas clash or, more accurately, where these two communities talk past each other rather than engaging in political dialogue. Consequently, in the 2001 election, journalists expressed their commitment to providing essentially local election stories, while readers letters revealed their preference for national concerns. Journalists and editors, moreover, offered a trivialised and dumbed down electoral agenda, focused on candidates and personalities
Two methodological techniques have been deployed to generate data for these election studies. First, semi structured interviews have been conducted with journalists and editors of local newspapers as well as political candidates, their agents and press officers for the three major political parties (Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat) in 10 West Yorkshire constituencies located in central England: Batley and Spen; Bradford North; Bradford South; Colne Valley; Halifax; Leeds East; Leeds North; Leeds West; Pudsey and Wakefield. Second, each item of election coverage (article, editorial or readers letter) in a comprehensive sample of free weekly, paid weekly newspapers and daily evening and regional morning newspapers, circulating in the ten constituencies, was coded for 38 variables (including, for example, partisanship in coverage, incumbency status of candidate, the type of newspaper, the use of photographs and headlines, etc) across the campaign period and analysed using SPSSx.
2 1

There have been significant developments in local newspapers and local electoral politics across the study period. The number of local newspapers, for example, has shifted radically expressing the launch of new titles and the closure of others. The 21 newspapers reporting the elections in 1987, had grown markedly to 31 by 1992, but declined to 25 by 1997 and reduced further to 24 by 2001. Circulations also dipped, reflecting more general trends to declining number of titles and circulations throughout the UK local press. Sales of the daily Yorkshire Post reduced from 87000 in 1987 to 77,535 in 1997; by 2001 it had declined markedly to 71,632. Circulation figures for the Batley News reveal a similar pattern with the 1987 readership of 12,843 dipping to 9,156 in 1997 and 8,833 in 2001. These changes have been accompanied by significant shifts in patterns of newspaper ownership. Half the newspapers in the 1987 study were independently (often family) owned by small local companies: by 1997 all newspapers had been incorporated into large media conglomerates. Political change has also been evident. In 1987 the ten constituencies in the study were represented by 4 conservative, 4 Labour and 2 Liberal democrat MPs: political balance had been a crucial criterion informing the selection of constituencies for study. Following the 1997 election all constituencies had elected a Labour member: 10 labour incumbents entered the 2001 contest.

rather than policy, reflecting their concerns that sustained coverage would prove boring or a turn off: again readers expressed different priorities. Finally, in the context of a second labour landslide in 2001, unprecedented national newspaper support for the Labour party and a monopoly of Labour incumbents in all the constituencies in the study, signalling a majority of readers supporting Labour, the local newspapers analysed revealed an editorial shift in favour of the Conservative party: the first such shift recorded since the study began in 1987. In brief, local journalists presentation of the 2001 election, refracted through the prism of local interest, a pro conservative partisanship and an emphasis on entertainment rather than policy discussion, created dissonance between them and their readers. Journalists Versus Readers A local versus a national election agenda Local journalists believe that a good election story is synonymous with a local story. A senior editor claimed that a good election story is something that affects local people, a local issue, while a second editor confirmed that in pre-election meetings with parties he advised them to deliver local stories if they wanted coverage: We tell them that we like local issues being addressed he claimed and they tend to follow that as past practice shows So most of the stories were carrying are actually local stories: all the issues of the town with the politicians getting involved. So its not all tax and NHS. Its actually addressing local issues. Analysis of the 24 local papers coverage revealed that of the 1250 election related items which were published (934 [74.7%] articles, 64 [5.1%] editorials and 252 [20.2% readers letters) across the four weeks of the campaign, an emphasis on the local was evident in 733 (58.6%) items of coverage compared to 517 items (41.4%) emphasising national concerns. Indeed coverage in 2001 was notably more locally oriented than in 1997 (49.7% local), 1992 (47.7% local) or 1987 (44.7% local)3. Most significantly, Table 1 illustrates not merely the extent to which different editorial formats correlate with different emphases on the local or the national in election coverage, but a more significant phenomenon. Since articles can be considered an expression of journalists issue agenda, while letters articulate readers preferred concerns, Table 1 reveals nothing less than the highly divergent appetites of journalists and readers for local and national news and the degree to which these two communities pursue distinctive issue agendas. This divergence is curious on at least two counts. First, these two groups seem to be talking past each other with little if any shared interest in the particular focus of election concerns. Second, while journalists perennially claim to be market led, providing their readers with the local stories they demand and which allegedly constitute the bread and butter of local journalism, for their part readers express little interest in local concerns and seem to be preoccupied with national issues.
All items of election reporting were assigned to one of four categories reflecting their focus on national or local concerns: local; predominantly local with national; predominantly national with local; national. In 2001 the great majority of items were distinctly local or national and consequently the categories were conflated.
3

Table 1 here Two findings are striking. First, while almost 70% of articles are locally oriented expressing journalists ambitions to provide readers with election stories with a focus on local issues, only 25.8% of readers letters share this local concern. By contrast, 74% of readers letters concentrate on national matters. Local journalists, at least so far as election coverage is concerned, seem to be talking past, rather than to, their readerships. Second, Table 1 illustrates the disjuncture between different journalists approaches to election coverage. The journalistic emphasis on the local, so evident in articles (69.2%), finds no equivalent among the senior group of journalists who write the editorials where the preferred focus (65.6%) is on national policies and issues. These latter journalists appear to be closer to their readers interests and concerns than others. The mismatch between readers and journalists electoral focus is more strikingly presented in figure 1.
Figure 1: Local and National Emphases in Election Coverage By Editorial Format
80

60

40

Item type
20 Article Editorial 0 Local National Reader's letter

Percent
4

Type of issue reported in the item

The distinctive electoral agendas of journalists and readers are revealed when the thematic priorities expressed in articles and letters are compared (See Table 2).4

The thematic contents of articles and letters were coded for 29 issues/themes. Table 2 lists the 15 most frequently occurring themes.

Table 2 here For readers, the two key issues in their wide ranging electoral agenda are Europe (17%) and taxation (13.5%), but these topics figure much less prominently in journalists concerns (Europe 3rd - 7.7% and taxation 7th 3.6%). In pole position for journalists, in a much narrower agenda, is candidates (52.7%) reflecting their ambition (a constant theme in interviews) to present readers with information about candidates and to stress candidates localness. This theme does overlap journalists and readers five most frequently cited items, but occurs in third place in readers priorities (12.9%). There are many other divergences between readers and journalists priorities expressed in Table 2. Education and Crime, which rank 4th and 5th respectively in the journalists agenda, are well down the listings at 12th and 13th for readers. Similarly, the journalist preoccupation with polls and the horse race element of the election (ranked 2nd) and the significant issue of agriculture and the foot and Mouth outbreak (10th) find no resonance in the readership agenda. A Dumbed Down Agenda for Local Election Coverage? In interviews, journalists reported their expectation that 2001 would be a difficult election to sell to their readers. Their editorial response was twofold. First, most confirmed that they were happy to lighten it to keep the readers interested. One time-tested editorial strategy is to report quirky, amusing stories which nonetheless retain an electoral theme. In 1997, for example, a number of newspapers carried a story about a local butcher who was selling red (Labour) blue (Conservative) and yellow (Liberal Democrat) sausages on election day (Franklin and Parry, 1998, p. 217). Analysis of newspaper contents confirmed the increased emphasis on such gimmicky and quirky stories in the recent election. In 2001, nearly a quarter (295 - 24%) of all published items were coded as quirky or amusing compared to 230 (19%) in 1987. The increase here is modest but clear. Pick Up Your Party for example, an article on Election Ales, replaced sausages with beer and announced that a local supermarket was selling Red Flag Bitter, True Blue Bitter, Alliance Bitter and Nationalist Brew (Halifax Courier 25 May 2001, p. 13). The more sober Yorkshire Post, keen to engage its readers, reported a poll of 999 members of the public seeking their reactions to the leaders of the three main parties growing facial hair: the headline announced Growing Beards Would Shave Votes off Voters, Party Leaders Warned (4 June 2001). The overwhelming majority of respondents disapproved, but alongside these results the paper published photographs of the party leaders with airbrushed beards. The visual effect was not quite as crude as a graffiti artists marker pen on an election poster, but the flamboyance of the facial hair added to politicians portraits made clear the newspapers intention to keep the readers interested. A final example. On 31 May the Morley Observer carried an editorial headed Bottoms Up For A Politician Free Week in celebration of National Bottoms Week: an almost identical editorial was published in the Dewsbury

Reporter (a sister paper within the same newspaper group) on 25 May 2001 entitled Getting To The Bottom Of Things Away From Politics. Ultimately this turned out to be another poll story! We cant help thinking that most people will be more than happy if we give politicians and the General Election a wide berth this week the Editor suggested, as he reported the findings of a national poll which revealed that Tony Blair is generally regarded as having the best rear of the party leaders with William Hague, well, bottom. Charles Kennedy, as you would expect, occupies the middle ground. A journalist on the same newspaper who was asked about this particular editorial argued, We were really worried about overkill. So I think he tried to lighten it Its been hard work. We felt that people had just about had enough. A second editorial strategy for engaging readers with the election was more significant and seemed to have been adopted almost universally by local newspapers. It involved devoting coverage in the early stages of the election to highly personalised candidate profiles which sought to engage readers interest through a human interest focus rather than any discussion of candidates policy commitments: a substantial proportion of local election news was refracted through the prism of human interest. An editor explained: We decided for the poor readers sake that we were going to make the election as interesting as we could. So my suggestion was that we interview the candidates as people as well as politicians - get pictures of them at home with their family and try to find out why they came into politics and what they hoped to achieve: rather than go on their policies. Such a strategy reinforced local journalists enthusiasm for focusing on political celebrities. One local paper profiled Ann Taylor a well-known and senior member of the Labour party. The editorial emphasis was on her high profile job, how she could do it as a mother and the small things like her clothes and how shes started wearing make up because shes going on television. It might seem rather banal but it does grab the reader seeing the person and how she has had her haircut. These profiles also allowed journalists to reinforce the stress on candidates local credentials. The Conservative candidate, for example, was a Barrister: But he was born in a one up and one down council house with an outside toilet and his grandma was a single mum. So I went on that and said in my introduction that he isnt your typical pin stripe Barrister parachuted in from down south: hes a local lad and hes standing on that. Oh, and his granddad was the local preacher at the Heckmondwike upper Chapel. This strategy of writing personalised candidate profiles to promote readers interest in the election resulted in a considerable increase in election stories focused on candidates rather than policies. In 2001 a striking 552 (44.2%) items of election coverage focused on candidates at the expense of policy (698 - 55.8%): in 1987 the equivalent figures were 394 (33%) and 798 (66.8%).

Many journalists denied that this approach representing any dumbing down of the election coverage, but some were undoubtedly uncomfortable, if not defensive, about this editorial emphasis. I hope it doesnt come across as tacky one journalist commented because it wasnt done in a sensational way and it always seemed to swing around to politics anyway because politicians didnt want to talk about their private lives. Some journalists, moreover, genuinely believed that it was equally important to provide readers with an insight into candidates, their personalities and their personal histories, as much as their policies. We wanted to show that these were real flesh and blood human people with foibles one seasoned journalist remarked with things to be proud of but foibles as well. There was also an opportunity towards the end of the campaign for candidates to draft a personalised policy statement which the paper agreed to publish because, as a journalist commented we knew they were itching to get their policies into print. But local journalists endeavours to engage their readers with election coverage may possibly have resulted in the opposite effect. Changing Press Partisanship: moving away from readers? This study employed a number of indicators to measure partisanship, but the most decisive is the comparison of the number of positive and negative appraisals each political party receives in press coverage.5 On this account, previous studies revealed a balance of partisanship. This seemingly paradoxical phrase implied that the overall approximate balance in press coverage, achieved across the West Yorkshire region, did not result from aggregating the balanced reporting of a number of individual newspapers but, on the contrary, reflected the partisan sentiments expressed in one newspaper being offset or neutralised by the differing political commitments of a different newspaper. In 1997, for example, the Conservative Party received 889 press appraisals of which 308 (34.6%) were positive compared to 789 appraisals for the Labour party of which 287 (36.4%) were positive. Journalists would be hard pressed to produce a more equitable balance between parties in their election coverage: especially across 1248 items of coverage reported in 25 different newspapers. But the partisan sentiments of the press became apparent when the appraisals of parties in a particular newspapers coverage was analysed: The Yorkshire Post in 1997, for example, was strongly supportive of the Conservatives. This balance of partisanship has not been sustained in press reporting of the 2001 election disrupting a pattern of election coverage evident since 1987 (see Table 3). Table 3 here

The other three indicators include: party prominence (measured quantitatively) in press coverage; the number of published quotations by party spokespeople, and; the number of photographs of party members. But while these indicators measure which party has been the beneficiary of press coverage they do not indicate the political direction of the press coverage. The Conservative party, for example, might enjoy substantial but highly critical coverage. Consequently it is the assessment of the number of positive and critical appraisals which each party receives which offers the definitive judgement

In 2001, the West Yorkshire press reported the Conservative Party more favourably than the Labour party. The Conservatives received an aggregate 751 appraisals of which 345 (45.9%) were positive compared to Labours overall 1245 appraisals of which only 462 (37.1%) were positive. The Labour party received considerably more press attention than the Conservatives (494 appraisals) but a substantial proportion of these (377 or 76.3%) were critical. The shift in favour of the Conservatives, which occurred in this balance of partisanship, in 2001 is illustrated neatly in Table 4. Table 4 here Table 3 illustrates the partisan commitments of particular newspapers. While the Batley News remained strikingly balanced in its coverage, The Yorkshire Post published 248 appraisals of the Conservative Party of which 108 (43.6%) were positive, but only 117 (25.5%) of the papers 426 appraisals of the Labour party were similarly positive. At the Dewsbury Reporter, 21 (61.8%) of the 34 published appraisals of the Conservative party were positive whereas only 22 (28.2%) of the 78 published appraisals of Labour were positive. Across the paid weekly newspapers, only the Brighouse Echo reported the Labour party more favourably than the Conservatives. What is noteworthy here is that this move away from balanced partisanship towards a more notable support for the Conservative party in these local papers, occurred at a time of unprecedented national newspaper support for Labour (Wring, 2001; Deacon, Golding and Billig, 2001). Moreover, all of the constituencies in the study had returned Labour candidates in the 1997 election and were fielding labour incumbents in 2001: in short, local newspapers were at odds with the expressed partisanship of the voters in their circulation areas. Explaining Change These changes in local newspapers election coverage have undoubtedly been triggered by a complex range of factors reflecting change within both political and media organisations and processes, but two factors seem particularly noteworthy. First, the increasing professionalisation of local and regional political parties approach to political marketing and the local campaign, expressed in their determination to try to influence and shape the local election agenda to their advantage. Second, the increasingly corporate and monopoly character of local press ownership seems to have prompted a centrally driven editorial emphasis in election coverage: it has also prompted a perception among journalists that local newspapers are increasingly poorly resourced in terms of the quality and quantity of their journalistic staffs. Each is considered in turn. Local Parties, Local Media and the Election Agenda Parties growing commitments to a media based campaigning strategy in the constituency setting is evident across the study period since 1987. A party

official claimed, A campaign is about selling as much as anything: its about promotion. So it means using all kinds of media to try and promote the candidate and the party. I think we are all getting a lot more aware of the power of local media and I think local media must be feeling that. I think back to earlier times in the Labour party and Im not sure we would have said straightaway Who is the Press Officer and You sort out your campaign team. I think in those days we were a bit more blind to the importance of local media. Parties try to influence news coverage by issuing press releases and organising press events each day of the campaign period: a strategy which has proved highly successful in winning and influencing press coverage in their favour (Franklin 2004). Armed with a carefully considered and constructed press strategy, parties have come to believe that they can influence the way in which their candidate and policies are reported in the local press: especially when local newspapers are hard pressed for resources and journalistic staffs have been paired to a minimum. A regional press officer acknowledged that: When we train volunteers to become press officers we tell them that the more stuff you can give to an overworked journalist the better, because they dont really have the time to go through it. So in terms of the weeklies, we just gave them press releases which they reproduced, we gave them photographs that they just reproduced. The Brighouse Echo pretty much prints things as you give them. The Hebden Bridge Times and the Todmorden News they more or less print anything you give them as you give it them. In brief, local newspapers seem increasingly vulnerable to local parties news management initiatives which may not always be in accord with readers preferred electoral agenda. There are, of course, many factors which help to shape newspaper coverage and parties may be exaggerating their influence here. But when there is a coincidence between journalists and parties ambitions, parties ability to influence the electoral agenda might become considerable. This conjoining of ambition occurred in 2001 when journalists commitment to an emphasis on local election news was shared to an unprecedented degree by the parties, if not by local newspaper readers (see Table 1 above). Within the Labour Party the emphasis on local issues was part of a concerted strategy of the national party. I dont know whether I should tell you or not a regional officer confided but there was a determined effort by the national party in the 246 seats that we won for the first time in 1997, we were all following the same plot: being local. Another party worker confirmed that the local emphasis was a conscious shift from 97 because 97 was a national campaign built on national heroes like the Blairs, the Prescotts and the Browns. This time the strategy was lets play it local. When the campaign is quite muted like this one you need to stress the parochial issues. The parties efforts paid off in a flurry of newspaper coverage focused on local concerns and stressing the local credentials of the candidates. In some cases the journalists reliance on a press release was evident. An incumbent Labour MP, for example, confessed in a carefully crafted soundbite

I could not think of living anywhere else. Ive lived here all my life (she can just about see the house in New Bond Street, where she was born, from her office window), and I cant see me leaving There is no place like Halifax. (Halifax Courier, 17 May 2001: 4-5). This emphasis on local news, reflecting journalists professional judgement that readers should be presented with a local news agenda, in tandem with parties determined news management efforts to stress the local, is evidently highly influential in shaping local newspapers editorial priorities, but these priorities were not shared by local newspaper readerships in 2001. Parties ability to reinforce journalists emphasis on the local also helps to explain newspapers focus on candidates above policy: again a concern not shared by readers. 52.7% of articles focused on candidates but only 12.7% of readers letters shared this emphasis Local Newspaper Ownership Patterns of local newspaper ownership have shifted radically since the first election study reported here in 1987. At that time, approximately half of the newspapers in the study sample were independently owned, often small family businesses located within their circulation areas: by 2001 all newspapers were owned by media corporations, in some cases with cross media interests. Two implications follow: the first for content of election coverage, the second for journalism staffs. Corporate ownership by an ever decreasing number of large media organisations requires local newspapers increasingly to develop new ways to maximise revenues and contribute to group profits: one consequence here is that market considerations have achieved a new influence over editorial concerns. In 1997, an editor complained about shifting editorial priorities and the move down market in the newspapers election coverage, to meet demands for sustained circulation, two years after the purchase of his paper by the Johnston Press Group. The pressures of circulation are upon us he explained, We obviously would love to have a human interest story day after day on the front page Reporting about schools, councils that sort of thing, you might have got away with that in the past, but now you have to look for good stories and the good stories which sell newspapers are tabloid stories. So for a couple of years now I think there has been a bigger pressure on us to report these tabloid stories (Franklin and Parry 1998, 225). Market considerations offer further constraints on editorial with another editor suggesting that the papers political line was highly responsive to the social demographics of the papers readership. If we did say we were pro Labour, he claimed, a large number of our readers would object. But on the other hand we have massive council estates we are trying to sell on, so its obvious you are not going to be shouting too many Tory lines (ibid). The election of 1997 marked a watershed in journalists approach to election coverage. For the first time election coverage was wholly driven by news values. Election news was no longer reported simply by virtue of being election news, it had to be a good story: what Blumler and Gurevitch designated the shift from a sacerdotal to a pragmatic approach to coverage. As one journalist expressed it during the 2001 campaign, people wont read a

story simply because its an election story. A good election story has got to punch its weight. By 2001, the impact of market considerations on coverage prompted the prospect inconceivable in 1987 - that a major local newspaper might not offer the election any coverage at all. The editor confided that in 1997 we sat down and asked is this election really worth the space we give it? We decided yes. But this time [2001] the debate took longer. Another editor confirmed the impact of market considerations in decisions even about election coverage: We had to sit down and ask Will election coverage give us value? We only have so many pages and we are governed by strict ratios to make a profit. So we have to fight for space for election stories and yes, it ahs to be of interest to the reader. I think you have to say not only are people interested in this, but can we get value for money out of it? In 1987, local journalists spoke of their excitement at the prospect of reporting the electoral contest. Elections provided local journalists with opportunities to interview senior national politicians and ministers: their enthusiasm for the task occasionally outstripped their readers appetite for political news. By 2001, the editorial group in a leading local newspaper, concerned by consideration of value for money was contemplating whether to offer its readers any election coverage. There is a second consequence of recent changes in local newspaper ownership. Corporate concerns with the bottom line have prompted leaner journalistic staffs, poor wages and conditions which are legendary, along with an increasing reliance on non journalistic sources of news to make good the journalistic shortfall. Resources vary, of course across different newspaper types. Free newspapers are pasted up by a single sub in an afternoon; journalistic resources are very scarce. Paid weekly papers are better resourced and, research reveals, less likely to publish party press releases. Daily (evening or morning) papers enjoy still better journalistic resources which will almost certainly include a specialist correspondent to lead coverage of major political events (Franklin and Murphy 1998 chapter 1). But in 2001, journalists expressed concerns about the number and quality of journalists employed on local papers and consequently the ability of the local press to report political affairs adequately. One group editor expressed a deep concern about the lack of specialist political reporters in local weekly papers. We always had people in journalism, she argued, who came into journalism because they were interested in politics. But now I can have young reporters who after a year still dont know who their local councillor is. The reporters are not specialist enough to write about politics sadly, and we dont cover council meetings now: we aint got the staff. There isnt the money to get senior journalists. I showed one of our senior reporters a picture of Alan Milburn during the election and said its not a bit like him, is it? and I was absolutely shocked because he said I wouldnt know him if I fell over him So youve got an uphill struggle in reporting an election, not only to inform your readers but to inform your colleagues.

Conclusions This paper has argued that local newspapers changing coverage of constituency campaigns during general elections, may be one factor (among many) in explaining the sustained decline in public interest and participation in elections evident since the 1980s (notwithstanding the complex, contradictory and contentious character of the findings of research concerning audience reception of media messages). My suggestion is that journalists and readers are talking past each other and failing to connect in any mutually informing political discourse and dialogue. Each community is preoccupied with distinctive electoral concerns (agendas): moreover, while journalists stress the local implications of this agenda, readers letters signal their preference for national concerns. Journalists attempts in 2001 to lighten their electoral coverage and shift the partisan balance of their reporting, might offer further explanation of diminishing public engagement with electoral politics. The increasing professionalisation of party campaigning in the local setting along with the corporate character of local press ownership might at first glance appear to offer little more than a list of the usual suspects in explaining these developments. But local journalists and editors believe the impact of both phenomena on their ability to report the constituency campaign in their circulation boundary is considerable and worrying. Acknowledgements I would like to record my gratitude to my colleague John Richardson who coded and analysed the newspaper contents for this study and to Peter Cole who read and commented on an earlier draft of the paper. I am indebted to the Nuffield Foundation for its financial support for the studies conducted in 1992, 1997 and most recently in 2001. References Blumler, J. G. and Gurevitch M. (1986) Journalists' orientation to political institutions: the case of parliamentary broadcasting, in P. Golding, G. Murdock and P. Schlesinger (eds.) Communicating Politics, Leicester: Leicester University Press. Carty, R K and Eagles M (2000) Is There A Local Dimension to Modern Election Campaigns? Party Activists Perceptions of the Media and Electoral Coverage in Political Communication Vol 17 no 3 pp279-95 Deacon, D. Golding, P. and Billig M. (2001) Press and Broadcasting: Real Issues and Real Coverage in Norris, P. (Ed) Britain Votes 2001 Oxford: Oxford University Press Deacon, D and Wring, D (2002) Partisan de-alignment and the British Press in Bartle, J Mortimore, R and Atkinson, S (eds) Political Communication: The British General Election of 2001 London: Frank Cass

Denver, D and Hands G (1998) Constituency Campaigning in the 1997 General Election: Party Effort and Electoral Effect in Crewe, I. Gosschalk, B. And Bartle J. (Eds) Political Communications: Why labour Won the General Election of 1997, London: Frank Cass, pp 75-92 Franklin, B. (2004) Packaging Politics; Political Communication in Britain's Media Democracy London: Arnold, Second Edition Franklin, B. (2003) A Good Day To Bury Bad News: Journalists, Sources and the Packaging of Politics in Cottle, S (Ed) News, Power and Public Relations London: Sage Franklin B and Murphy, D (1998) Changing Times: Local newspapers, technology and markets in Franklin and Murphy (Eds) Making the Local News: Local Journalism in Context, London: Routledge, pp7-23 Franklin, B and Parry J (1998) Old Habits Die Hard: Journalisms Changing Professional Commitments and Local Newspaper Reporting of the 1997 General Election In Franklin and Murphy (Eds) Making the Local News: Local Journalism in Context, London: Routledge, pp209-228. Lilleker, D and Negrine R (2003) The Rise of A Proactive Local Media Strategy in British Political Communication: clear continuities and evolutionary change 1966-2001 in Journalism Studies vol 4 no 2 pp199-212 Wring, D (2002) The Tony Press: Media Coverage of the Election Campaign in Geddes, A and J Tongue (Eds) Labours Second Landslide, Manchester: Manchester University Press, pp84-100

Table 1: Local and National Emphases In Election Coverage by Editorial Format Format Article Editorial Letter Total Type of issue reported Local National 646 (69.2%) 288 (30.8%) 22 (34.4%) 42 (65.6%) 65 (25.8%) 187 (74.2%) 733 (58.6%) 517 (41.4%) Total 934 (100%) 64 (100%) 252 (100%) 1250 (100%)

Table 2: Comparison of the Thematic Priorities of Articles and Letters Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Total Article focus Candidate 'Horse Race'/ Poll results Europe Education Crime/ Juvenile Crime Health/ NHS Taxation Welfare/ Social Services Industry Agriculture/ Foot & Mouth Race/ Immigration/ Asylum Economic Management Regional Policy John Prescott and the egg protest Transport Percentage 52.7% 8.5% 7.7% 4.3% 3.8% 3.7% 3.6% 2.8% 2.4% 2.3% 2.1% 1.6% 1.6% 1.6% 1.4% 100% Letter focus Europe Taxation Candidate Welfare/ Social Services Religion Health/ NHS Regional Policy Apathy/Alienation Economic Management Public Expenditure Race/ Immigration/ Asylum Education Crime/ Juvenile Crime John Prescott and the egg protest Industry Percentage 17.0% 13.5% 12.9% 9.9% 8.8% 7.0% 4.7% 4.7% 3.5% 3.5% 3.5% 2.9% 2.9% 2.9% 2.3% 100%

Table 3: Positive and Negative Appraisals of Parties in Local Newspapers

Paper Title Paper Type Conservative Positive Negative Labour Positive Negative Liberal Democrat Positive Negative

Aire Valley Target Bradford Star Calderdale News Huddersfield Weekly News Leeds Skyrack Express Weekly Advertiser (Dewsbury) Wharfe Valley Times Batley News Brighouse Echo Colne Valley Chronicle Dewsbury Reporter Hebden Bridge Times Heckmondwike Herald Holme Valley Express Huddersfield District Chronicle Mirfield Reporter Morley Advertiser Morley Observer Pudsey Times Spenborough Guardian Todmorden News Wakefield Express Halifax Courier Yorkshire Post Total

Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Weekly Weekly Weekly Weekly Weekly Weekly Weekly Weekly Weekly Weekly Weekly Weekly Weekly Weekly Weekly Daily evening Daily regional

0 1 0 0 0 0 6 15 6 10 21 9 23 10 8 8 2 7 6 23 8 6 68 108 345 (45.9%)

0 0 0 0 0 0 3 15 11 10 13 10 26 11 10 7 4 18 2 23 10 7 86 140 406 (54.1%)

0 1 0 0 0 1 7 16 23 8 22 10 29 8 7 8 4 18 7 29 9 14 124 117 462 (37.1%)

0 0 0 0 0 1 8 15 14 8 56 16 41 9 7 30 8 16 3 40 16 20 166 309 783 (62.9%)

0 1 0 0 0 0 5 5 9 3 10 9 16 2 1 7 0 6 2 16 9 10 46 34 191 (71.8%)

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 4 3 2 1 0 4 0 1 0 2 3 0 12 40 75 (28.2%)

Table 4: Local Newspapers Appraisals of Parties 1987 - 2001 Year of Election 1987 1992 1997 2001 Total Conservative Positive 513 (37.9%) 889 (36.8%) 308 (34.6%) 345 (45.9%) 2055 (38.0%) Negative 839 (62.1%) 1524 (63.2%) 581 (65.4%) 406 (54.1%) 3350 (62.0%) Labour Positive 420 (36.8%) 977 (35.8%) 287 (36.4%) 462 (37.1%) 2146 (36.4%) Negative 721 (63.2%) 1750 (64.2%) 502 (63.6%) 783 (62.9%) 3756 (63.6%) Liberal Democrat Positive 276 (57.4%) 601 (61.7%) 122 (53.3%) 191 (71.8%) 1190 (61.0%) Negative 205 (42.6%) 373 (38.3%) 107 (46.7%) 75 (28.2%) 760 (39.0%)