Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
I saw these and assumed it was just some sort of reverse psychology shit. I didn't realise it was actually under new ownership.
The new owner is certainly less hysterical than Associated, and has shown that he wants to realign the paper with a less conservative, more cosmopolitan readership. However, I’m not convinced that this won’t play into Boris’ hands. Coupled with the (unfounded, unproven) allegations against Ken Livingstone, the relentless negativity espoused by the paper (it wasn’t as bad as the Daily Mail and its ‘no positive front page’ policy, but it was still pretty shocking) probably helped contribute to Johnson’s election victory. Showing the city in a more positive light, especially now that London seems to be declining economically and culturally in comparison with other world cities at the moment, will probably go against the ideals of the new owner and make the conservative mayor more secure in his position.
Why did they even keep producing it if that was the case? For historical reasons?
I wouldn't be surprised if by the end of the year there are two or three others on the loss-making list.
so it has special consideration. Moreover those two papers fill a niche that isn't represented by any other paper.
The Evening Standard is a London-only paper that only has its late day printing as the 'special' aspect. And given the majority of its readers will have access to news all day now, and given there are two free papers in the evening, it's difficult to see why it wasn't shut down a long time ago.
It's not like the Daily Mail group didn't already cover that demographic perfectly well with the Mail, no?
The London specific thing allows it to be used to help achieve a desired result in the London elections - people are going to take more notice of what it has to say on Londonwide issues than a national paper.
Just guessing mind.
But it took three elections before Ken went and one might well conclude Boris the man did that not the Evening Standard. Still, once they had Boris I'm surprised they didn't just ditch it.
As to politics, the London Lite and Metro are both there to push that political angle so having an extra paper seems redundant to me.
Ken didn't want to renew the licenses for the free Metro newspaper did he? Who were they owned by again...?
I was just talking about that paper.
I don't think it mattered as much as people like to think it did. Most of the reactionary readers didn't get to vote in the election.
is that because it's from Creative Review, the comments section is just full of people having an argument about typefaces.