Since newsbooks and other serial news publications were established primarily to make capital: “from the early printing presses, the mass media have developed as commercial concerns organised around capitalist methods, primarily motivated by the making of profit”, it was inevitable that their starting point was the place in the country where the highest profits could be earned. London had the highest literate population, there was a demand from businesses based here for news, and it was the political, religious and legal centre.
London had the highest audience in Britain for newsbooks, and publishers would want to market their publications in the area which had the highest audience, in order to make maximum profits. It was a combination of a high level of literacy and a high population which created a large audience for news publication. Kevin Williams states: “The growth of printed material is closely connected with the level of literacy.” The ability to read did not develop evenly throughout Britain. Literacy grew more quickly in urban areas, particularly in London and South East England. It is estimated that in the 1640s male literacy was 30% nationally, a much higher number about 70 to 80% in London, and about 10% for women nationally, and 20% in London. In the absence of a census, historians disagree about the population of London in the mid-seventeenth century. The consensus is that the city contained around 500,000 people. This population was much higher than anywhere else in Britain, as early industrialisation had driven many people to migrate to London in search of employment.
Assuming that half the adult males could read, there would be a potential metropolitan audience for serial news publications of over 60,000 people or 1/8 of the total population in London.
Joad Raymond argues: “The audience of newsbooks was partly determined by the constraints of distribution.” Therefore, Publishers would have to base their publications in an area served well by transportation, to enable the publications to be distributed to a larger area, thus increasing their audience and profits. London was the obvious choice for this. As the capital city of England, it was the centre of the road network, with highways spreading out in all directions. Publishers based in London could distribute their publications to many areas, including Kent, Yorkshire, Sussex and Buckinghamshire.
London was also the obvious place for the serial press to be based, as it was the area where a majority of newsworthy events occurred. Joseph Frank states: “London was the capital, in every sense of the word, of England’s economic, social, and political life.” The main areas of public interest at this time were: religious, legal and political issues or events. Being based in the country’s political centre was particularly important because many serial news publications solely reported parliamentary proceedings. Examples of these include: ‘A Perfect Divernall’, ‘A continuation of Certain Special and Remarkable Passages’, ‘Special Passages and England’s Memorable Accidents’, ‘Mercurius Aulicus’, ‘Certain Informations’, ‘The Heads of Severall Proceedings in This Present Parliament’, and ‘The Kingdomes Weekly Intelligencer’. In 1640, like today, London was the dominant legal, religious, and political centre of Britain, with the major churches (St Pauls and Westminster Abbey), the major court (the Old Bailey), and the House of Lords and the House of Commons, all based there. Therefore, it was logical that serial news publications were based in London, as ‘journalists’ could hear about important newsworthy events and be able to report them quickly. This was important in a time when communications were slow, because if publications were based outside London, by the time news of important events in London reached publishers and they had reported them, it may not interest or no longer be relevant to their audience. Thus, the audience would not purchase the publications, and profits would be lost.
In London there was also a high demand from businesses based in the city for certain types of news. Businesses, particularly the merchant class, required economic news from both home and abroad. Therefore, if publishers were based in London they knew there would be a constant demand for their publications, and thus, their profits would remain constant too.
Secondly, there were historical reasons why London was the starting point for news publication in serial form. The printing industry and the first printers had been based there since the 15th century: King Henry VIII brought the art and craft of printing to Fleet Street in the 16th century, and William Caxton brought printing to Westminster in 1476, where he produced the first book printed in English. Therefore, the serial publications of the 1640s were just following the tradition, which had lasted for two centuries, of being based in London.
The beginning of the English Civil War also played a part in the beginning of serial news publications in London. The English Civil War impacted news publication due to two factors: the collapse of censorship which occurred at the start of the war, and as it created a demand from the public for information and for an outlet to voice their opinions on the war.
With the outbreak of Civil War censorship was temporarily abandoned: “with the collapse of all censorship on the eve of the civil war, newsbooks began to flourish.” This legally gave publishers the freedom to produce serial news publications. As London was the main political centre in England, it was here publishers and future publishers first recognised the breakdown in press regulation, and thus, the serial press developed here.
The war awakened people’s consciousness to political events, as the gap between the king and parliament widened, the desire of the subjects to participate in governmental naturally increased. This public demand created a wider audience for serial news publications. Therefore, publishers could produce newsbooks as they knew there would be an audience for their publications, and any investments would not be lost.
These factors made it highly likely, not inevitable, for London to be the starting point for the serial press.
However, there was one factor that did make it inevitable the serial press developed in London in the 17th century; this was the legislation passed in 1557. In 1557 Elizabeth I “introduced a system of…licensing of printers, which proved effective for much of the 16th and 17th centuries,” she granted a royal charter to the Stationers Company, to control the number of printers. This had the effect of monopolising and limiting the craft of printing to London. It made it inevitable that serial news publications developed in London, because if publishers produced news documents outside London, they would face prosecution from the government.
In conclusion, there were many factors which led to the emergence of London as the starting point for news publication in serial form. These were economic, political, and historical. These factors alone did not make it inevitable for London to emerge as the dominant centre for news publication in serial form, but in combination they contributed to making London the sensible place for publishers to base their publications if they wanted to maximise their profits, which was their primary concern.
1,495 WORDS
Bibliography:
Joad Raymond, The Invention of the Newspaper – English Newsbooks 1641-1949, Oxford 1996.
Kevin Williams, Get Me a Murder a Day, London, 1998.
Charles Wintour, The Rise and Fall of Fleet Street, London, 1989.
Bell, Fleet Street in Seven Centuries, London, 1912.
Frank, The Beginnings of the English Newspaper 1620-1660, Massachusetts, 1961.
1 Statistics from: The Beginnings of the English Newspaper
Joseph Frank, The Beginning of the English Newspaper 1620-1660
Kevin Williams, Get Me a Murder a Day
Kevin Williams, Get Me a Murder a Day
Statistics from: The Beginnings of the English Newspaper
Figure from: The Beginnings of the English Newspaper
Joad Raymond, The Invention of the Newsbook 1641-1649
Joseph Frank, The Beginning of the English Newspaper 1620-1660
Kevin Williams, Get Me a Murder a Day
Kevin Williams, Get Me a Murder a Day