The recent claims by political commentator Peter Oborne that his former employer, the Daily Telegraph, suppressed negative stories about HSBC for fear of the banking giant pulling their advertising from the newspaper have rocked the media world.
But in my small corner of north London, they barely raised an eyebrow. Because I know from first-hand experience that advertisers and newspapers have, at least in recent years, had a “you scratch my back” relationship with each other – and unfortunately the state of the industry means it is almost certainly only going to get worse.
When I was a young reporter at the News of the World, during the early days of the global financial downturn, I got a tip that some Tesco stores were taking steps to protect themselves from potential looters.
I have no idea whether my tip was true or not, particularly as the response I got killed any potential story stone dead. “Forget it,” one of my bosses told me. “We would never do a negative story about Tesco – they are one of our biggest advertisers.”
Yes I was surprised and, being a thrusting young hack who wanted to get his name in the paper every week, naturally pissed off. But I also understood.
Tesco was a huge cash cow for the News of the World; a full-page advert was worth tens of thousands of pounds to its parent company News International, and sponsorship of a pullout, an event, or a campaign even more.
(Admittedly these were in the days before the Milly Dowler voicemail hacking revelations meant a number of big companies withdraw their adverts and the paper close its doors after 167 years.)
While there is no suggestion Tesco put pressure on the News of the World not to run supposedly negative stories about them, such as my tip, it would have been counter-productive to annoy a major advertiser like Tesco for what would have been a back-of-the-book page lead.
More recently, I know of one newspaper being paid several hundred thousand pounds by a high-street chain to sponsor a pullout.
Given the financial difficulties newspapers are operating under, that paper would have to be in possession of a pretty spectacular story about that firm to make its pages, and jeopardise any future big-money tie-ups.
As we all know, newspapers are operating in an age of rapidly declining sales. No longer the mass money generators they once were, particularly from cover-price income, they are increasingly reliant on ad revenue to stay afloat.
More so than ever, through their adverts companies like Tesco – and HSBC, and many other big firms – are paying journalists’ wages and keeping us in jobs where cover sales are less able to do so.
And so, as sales of newspapers continue to dwindle, and the money dries up, the danger is that the practice of appeasing advertisers could become more widespread.
That’s not to say if a story about a firm that advertises in its pages is big enough a paper won’t run it. But that publication would have to be pretty brave – or financially stable – to do so.
For instance, the Sun has done some brilliant work recently exposing the sharp practices going on at the so-called “Big Six” energy firms – who continue to advertise with them. But the Sun is the market leader, and still has a bit of cash about it.
Big advertisers know they have some struggling newspapers over a
barrel. The concern is that the we may see more of what is alleged to have taken place at the Telegraph creeping into other newsrooms.
Oborne was incredibly brave to speak out about what he saw as the HSBC tail wagging the Daily Telegraph dog. His crusading article has been a good thing for the industry as sunlight is the best disinfectant and it makes public the important issue about the balance between advertisers and newspapers.
But, as with everything else, when money is short we must hold papers to scrutiny much like they are expected to hold others to account.
Tom Latchem is a former newspaper journalist and now presents a show on Fubar Radio every Tuesday between 10am and 1pm