Camden Council are increasing the number of times they publish their free magazine. As producers of a free online and print publication ourselves, this move interests us.
So we asked Council leader Sarah Hayward what the total budget set aside to produce up to ten editions is. The answer? £165,000, or nearly £17,000 per issue.
Even accounting for the expense of borough-wide distribution, this comes in at several times the cost of each issue of our quality 16 page monthly newspaper.
So what is the attraction to the Council of adding monthly magazine publisher to their already overwhelming array of different hats?
Hayward argues: “Producing a magazine is cost effective and actual helps us reduce our spending on communications with residents as we do not have to print numerous leaflets and booklets when articles can be placed in the publication.
“Each copy of the Camden magazine costs on average 15p to produce and distribute. As this is delivered to every household in the borough, I believe this represents good value for money.” This is itself a reduction on an original quarterly cost of 24p per copy.
Yet despite “more emphasis” being placed on digital ways of working, to promote these digital channels in the short term means production costs for the magazine will increase by another £40,000 in total.
We’re not alone in our surprise at the outlay the magazine project entails. Richard Osley from the Camden New Journal argues that the council’s role is not to see if they can get more hits than, for example, his publication, the Ham & High or the Kentishtowner: “We all would be the first people to complain if the council went ahead with their business without informing us of their plans, so they have to have some way of informing the public.
“Whichever politicians are in opposition often rail about the cost of communications, but when they get into power themselves they do not want to give it up and worry almost obsessively that their messages aren’t getting through.
But Hayward argues: “Our research shows our magazine to be one of the best used sources of information and the most cost effective.”
Yet we wonder why is it necessary to produce ten editions a year? “Each edition will be reviewed,” Hayward promises, “to ensure that it continues to fulfil its requirement in keeping residents informed.”
But Richard Osley maintains that there is no need for the Council at all to expand its publishing operations. “The spin-off website Love Camden, with its entertainment listings, may look shiny but it is unnecessary in areas like Camden and Kentish Town where it is ultimately competing with respected news sources and entertainment websites. Somewhere Camden is paying for that site to be maintained and updated. It may say, “well it gets a lot of hits”, but the council’s role is not to see if they can get more hits that the New Journal or the Kentishtowner. In that sense, the council should not be competing with the organisations that are holding it to account.”
Do you read the Camden magazine? And is the Council right to spend £16,500 on each issue? Would it be better to communicate the same messages via established local media?
What do you think? We look forward to your feedback below.
23 thoughts on “Should Camden Council be producing a regular magazine?”
Be interesting to see how many people do anything with it other than that put it in the recycling.
The Council has an obligation to inform every household in the Borough (who pays the Council money) how that money is being spent, and it’s not good enough to expect everyone to just follow the Council’s activities on twitter or online – the Council needs to be accessible to everyone. But equally, this means that our thriving independent press, that we’re so lucky to enjoy, should commit to holding the Council’s spending to account and subject it to proper scrutiny.
The risk, I think, is that if the Council just spent £200k a year on adverts and paid-for copy in the CNJ, H&H, and Kentishtowner, then those publications might be less inclined to properly bite the hand that feeds them?
What price Love Camden? Is this justified by Sarah Hayward’s argument “We have a duty to keep residents informed about council services”. Or is it an attempt to stifle a free and at times critical press.
It would be interesting to know how Camden measures the effectiveness of its different communication strategies. Happy to accept duty to inform, and also that not everything should be online only, but perhaps there’d be a way to ask residents which method they would prefer to receive this. Distribution costs per printed magazine recipient would of course be much higher, but fairly simple to calculate whether total cost would be lower or not, and hard to believe that impact wouldn’t be higher if everyone’s getting the info in their preferred way.
I read the camden magazine and I find it useful to find out what is happening in the borough for example things to do for family’s etc. Your magazine is great but it’s aimed at the more single young hip skinny jeans wearing man with a high top haircut. I doubt your Magazine is aimed at the average Oap or mother? Islington have their very own magazine so why not camden it shows they care about their residents.
Hi Maria, it’s worth reading the site carefully (if you have time): this week, for example, we’ve carried an interview with Diana Quick, who’s in her 60s; featured a family who lost their youngest son in a tragic accident; and published pictures of Kentish Town West station in the 1970s. So hopefully something for everyone.
Come on the most interesting thing about Diana Quick is not her age – I thought that was a great piece
I still feel your paper is aimed at the middle class there are people who are living on a budget too in camden i hardly see those people being interviewed. We all don’t go pub crawling daily or try the latest rip off bistro restaurant cuisines. Therefore the camden magazine is for everyone in the borough not just for the ones who have lots of money to waste.
As a free title on a shoestring budget we rely on contributions from as many locals as possible so why not get involved and send us some ideas? info@kentishtowner.co.uk
We all have to pay council tax and give our details on the electoral register: why not include an ‘opt in’ box where you add your email address and receive updates that way? Much cheaper and more efficient. £200k is a scandal.
As an aside, a comment left overnight on my own website – westhamspteadlife.com – by someone I know encapsulates the issue: “I didn’t receive any communication from Camden Council about the change of [rubbish] collection days. The first I heard about it was here!”
No doubt in my mind that good, reliable, hyperlocal websites have a role to play alongside printed material for those who still want it. I’m sure it would be possible to come to a viable pricing model that saved taxpayer money and increased awareness of the various topics Camden needs to talk about. It certainly wouldn’t stop me challenging or questioning Camden council in the same way that the local papers don’t give the council an easy ride just because they take some ad revenue from them.
Pickles says they should only do four a year – this is a lively debate isn’t it?
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/councils-say-pickles-newspaper-ban-flies-face-localism
If this is anything like other boroughs’ “magazines” that I have received over my years in London, the purpose of this will be to be a propaganda machine for the local Labour party.
At least it’s an eLetter in Islington!
Tend to agree with Lady Chappers. Whoever controls the Council tens to use the mag to justify their policies and criticise central Government if tgat differs politically from them. If the mag continues the cost should be added to the declared election expenses of whichever party runs the Council
A state-run press worked really well at holding officials to account in Soviet Russia and Communist China, so I think we can totally trust Camden Council journalists to tell us both the good, the bad, and the ugly.
Definitely don’t need money spent on a 10 times a year magazine. What on earth would they need to say in that many magazines? Spend the money on childrens’ facilities for goodness sake.
I’d rather they spend it on a few more nurses or police or put it towards affordable housing for either…
Or maybe put in a proper queuing system in the woeful cashiers office in Camden Town Hall!
A local government act says that local government such as Camden should not publish mags like this more than 4 times a year. (check local government publicity directive) Wasteful Camden spending taxpayers money says it must do it 10 times!!! If it was Sarah Hayward’s own money bet it wouldn’t even be published!!
Camden council spends a lot of money advertising in the local press (planning applications, various campaign etc) so this won’t change – it’s not ‘competition’, as alleged, with local papers. Nor does our existing advertising impinge on editorial freedom at all (although residents asked us to test this in 2008 when the Ham and High started taking paid-for political ads from the BNP).
The reason is more prosaic. The council is undergoing a massive transformation, bring lots of services and information online from 2014, and in order to prepare people who dont use the internet for this some extra information via traditional means is necessary. Through this we plan to save the taxpayer more in the future and offset the cuts.
There is no extra cost to the taxpayer, as this will be covered by the savings made by the department this year.
On the cashier’s point – we are soon to allow people to pay for things face-to-face at local post offices and we will close the Town Hall cashiers desk.
I have never received a copy and I would be interested to know how many other residents in Camden haven’t received a copy either.
Camden need to get the basics right before informing residents of systems that simply do not work at present. Inaccessible switchboard for people with disabilities, NOWHERE to pay rent or CTax in cash that gets credited to account IMMEDIATELY ( Post Ofiice payment takes 10 days to be credited), Contact Camden staff that are simply message takers , an e mail system that takes much more than 10 days for a response, NO effective communication within the housing department leaving vulnerable tenans at risk ( ask the HASC Director/ Meric Apak avout that), contractors who appear to be able to do whatever they want and still get paid, urgent OT referrals not processed……
Why tell us about accessing services and communicating with Camden when you dont know have systems in place to deal with this
No it should not be spending on magazine as there nothing useful in it for residents only helpful for their propaganda ie photos of their little projects that are completely not helpful for the average people of the borough. Money could be sent on making blocks fire proof as most of old ones have no fire certificates in accordance with fire regulation 2005.,