Lord Northcliffe certainly can be acknowledged as being the founder of the idea in which circulation figures are printed on the cover of the publication. Lord Northcliffe knew that his newspapers were the major players in their respective target markets, and he recognized that if advertisers had a realisation that this was accurate then they would be more inclined to pay his publications for advertising than his competitors, and so front-page circulation statistics were born. Coupled with this new idea of openly printing the newspapers circulation figures was the innovative idea that Northcliffe came up with, which was to charge rates for advertising based on the size of the circulation. Whereas previously the advertisement rates were charged by the amount of space taken up to print that advert (per column inches), Northcliffe charged advertisers for every 1000 readers, and therefore creating a major link between publications and advertising for the present and the inevitably the long term (Williams: 1998: 59).
Through this increase in advertising revenue, Northcliffe was able to increase circulation through the cutting of the cost of the paper and hence came up with the well-remembered slogan of the Daily Mail, “the penny paper for half a penny”. Large-scale advertising led to a major revamp in Northcliffe’s Daily Mail becoming the first to break up the column style of traditional newspaper appearance (Williams: 1998: 59).
Newspaper Composition and Journalistic Techniques
Through Northcliffe’s significant contribution in providing what seems to be an almost eternal link between advertising and newspapers, he also changed the way in which a newspaper is structured, its composition, and the journalistic news values and techniques that were employed by the then present day journalists.
Prior to the beginning of the ‘Northcliffe Revolution’ all newspaper advertisements were of a classified nature and were rigidly placed within columns. Northcliffe saw the possibility of development in this area of newspaper composition and so even though attempts to break up the column format were strongly resisted, his Daily Mail newspaper was the first to allow whole page advertisements, with department store Selfridges being the most notable in 1924 (Murdock & Golding: 1977: 131).
The Daily mail was the first national daily to deviate away from the norm, in terms of content, as he encouraged his paper to become more of a human-interest paper than a political feature. Lord Northcliffe placed huge emphasis on stories that were crime based and more often than not he made crime the staple diet of the reader. Kevin Williams also states that murderers and as well as the police were interviewed for Northcliffe’s paper and so coined the motto, which Williams later wrote a nook with the same title, ‘get me a murder a day!’ (Williams: 1998: 56). It was this adaptation of publication content that caused the Daily Mail’s rivals to follow suit in order to compete on the same level. The Daily News is a prime example of the effect that Lord Northcliffe had on the Press of the period 1890-1930. Its owner George Cadbury, an ardent user of his paper to bellow his Liberal creed, was forced to adapt its content (inserting pictures and reducing the parliamentary and religious sections). Even though he did not want these changes he understood, that for his publication to remain a commercial success, alterations had to be made.
Although one aspect of the newspapers development of that time that is continually linked to more contemporary press was the notion that sensationalism was born during the ‘Northcliffe Revolution’. Lord Northcliffe cannot be accused of this according to Williams as he writes that he prided himself on the fact that his paper was a respectable family publication, and so did not feature much if any sex and scandal. Its substance came more in the nature of being enjoyable, enlightening and intelligent (Williams: 1998: 56). Jean Chalaby though believes that the sensationalism of stories was extremely evident in Lord Northcliffe’s newspapers, claiming that headlines of ‘Fire in Glasgow: Exciting Scenes’ and ‘Germans in Africa: Sensational Story’ are proof positive that sensationalism was, maybe not in the content of the stories themselves then at least in the headlines that accompanied these stories. (Pound & Harmsworth: 1959: 46)
Debates have been raised as to whether Northcliffe can be extremely useful in looking at the developments of journalism in the period 1890-1930, with both Jean Chalaby and Kevin Williams both believing that although he had an effect he more simply applied adapted, improved and developed existing traditionally placed techniques and styles, simply giving them more direction and purpose (Chalaby: 2000: 27, Williams: 1998: 56). Although with orders from Lord Northcliffe to his journalists to ‘touch life at as many points as possible’, the press moguls publications reported upon news that he believed reflected new elements of personal and societal life that had never been so widely described upon in the history of the British press. (H.Fyfe, 1930, 86-87)
Lord Northcliffe was revolutionary in the fact that he recognised the potential of the female market and so introduced the Daily Mirror, which employed a female only staff, as a newspaper for the ‘gentlewoman’. This venture turned out to be a complete failure as the paper simply didn’t sell and was revamped into an illustrated daily. This is proof alone that Lord Northcliffe understood the value of the female market as he saw an indication of what could happen in future years. A few decades down the line the advertisers and newspapers realised collectively that there was an untapped goldmine waiting in the wings through this feminine market, as the industry changed the way it reported on news as to make it more ‘neutral’ and in turn more appealing to both genders. This though is arguably more a factor in terms of the effect that Northcliffe had on the economic revamp to the industry but nonetheless was an important factor in understanding the developments of the industry in terms of journalistic style.
People also believe that as the Daily Mail grew it began articulating popular causes that came to represent suburban, lower middle classes and effectively came to speak for their views and values – “imperialism, jingoism, nationalism” (Jeffery & McCelland: 1987: 9-27). This, many believe, started the trend in the British press of the polarisation that is evident in contemporary press, the massive divide between, in effect, the broadsheet and the tabloid publications.
Press Barons, Concentration of Ownership & Press Power
Some believe that this period, 1890-1930 but more definitively the height of the Northcliffe revolution, is where the birth of the first major press barons originated. This era is vitally important towards the knowledge of the 1890-1930 period of press development.
The ‘Northcliffe Revolution’ was the major turning point in terms of press ownership as major press proprietors dominated the key publications, and effectively wiped out or bought out their competition. The major national papers grew in stature during the Northcliffe period and, with the help of improvements in rail and road transport, they expanded across the country to wider areas at the inevitable expense of the local publications. This though would not have been possible if the economic changes that Northcliffe brought to the press industry had not occurred. These changes allowed press chains to emerge, none more so than Lord Northcliffe’s and his brother’s, Lord Rothermere, collaboration to form the Amalgamated Press, the massive press empire of the Victorian era. (Curran & Seaton: 1991: 51). Although the economic changes that Northcliffe brought to the press industry helped, it is doubtful whether he instigated such a concentration of ownership, as most publications were family owned. It is doubtful whether even the Amalgamated Press would even have existed if it were not for the fact that it was co-owned by his brother.
This became the era in which the owners gained hold of their newspapers and shook them into the 20th century. It had been the editors ‘sovereign right’ to dictate what was to be printed in the newspaper for which they worked. This practice had developed from the early 1800’s, but during the ‘Northcliffe Revolution’ it was conceivable to believe that he ‘blurred the division between the editorial and business aspects of the industry’. During this period, none more so telling than in Lord Northcliffe’s case, came the domineering influence of the press barons as they quickly brought their own interests and viewpoints into the editorial procedure (Williams: 1998: 63-64).
Political influence from the press barons has always been a key issue in the development of the press in the period 1890-1930. Northcliffe understood this, and used his Daily Mail in a series of crusades in order to culminate in governmental reform or change in polices. In terms of crusade, Jean Chalaby defines it well as ‘a campaign launched by a newspaper to call for action or reform’. During this period Northcliffe pioneered the use of three varying types of crusade – social crusade (e.g. issues of poverty), jingo crusade (e.g. problems of national security) and the stunt. (Chalaby: 2000: 36). In the pre war years Lord Northcliffe crusaded about the possible threat that the Germans would eventually pose unless our armed forces were further funded. Due to Lord Northcliffe’s continual crusading for the Daily Mail to become the ‘Voice of the Empire’ he was in some parts, blamed for the outbreak of war between Britain and Germany. Some would argue that he was simply vehemently trying to sustain the Empire’s supremacy and his publications were representing the masses opinions, but the fact has to be noted that the crusading undertaken by Lord Northcliffe, for or against whatever was being debated, helped to increase the circulation of his newspapers dramatically.
Critics, such as Norman Angell, believe that the press barons were manipulating the masses as to use them as a massive tool in political influence. Angell believes in the notion that the public were clearly not provided with all of the facts necessary for collective decisions in such a democratic system (Angell: 1922: 16). Many politicians would also agree with Angell’s theory as for instance Stanley Baldwin once said that press barons exercised ‘power without responsibility’. Such was the influence of this debate that James Curran & Jean Seaton went on to write a book about the press and broadcasting in Britain titled ‘Power without Responsibility’ (Curran & Seaton: 1991). But what has to be noted is that other than at war times, where they were used successfully to pitch the idea of subscription, the press barons seemed to have very little influence. Even the ‘revolutionary’ Northcliffe failed to get himself elected and that was after he bought most of the local Portsmouth newspapers in order to sway the opinion in his favour.
Evaluation
In evaluation of the points and arguments put forward, which are both for and against the possible theorem that Northcliffe was vital to the development of the press in the period 1890-1930, the utilisation of the ‘Northcliffe Revolution’ as a helpful way of understanding press developments of this period, appears justified in regards to certain elements.
When looking at the elements that could be judged as being vital to the ‘Northcliffe Revolution’ it became clear to myself that the elements of importance were Lord Northcliffe’s use of advertising, his adaptation of current newspaper journalism and its structure, and the press baron status that was born through the concentration of ownership and the political influence that they wielded.
Lord Northcliffe’s understanding of the economic change that the press industry needed to undertake was of paramount importance. He was without doubt the instigator of economic change within the press industry. He understood that in order for his publications to be commercially successful then advertising was the key. Lord Northcliffe was the innovator behind the revolutionary way in which advertisers were charged and by printing circulation figures on the cover he was making sure that his larger advertising fee could be justified. This is certainly vital when trying to determine the justification of using the ‘Northcliffe Revolution’ as a basis in analysing the press industry in the period 1890-1930.
Journalism is the much often debated part of the ‘Northcliffe Revolution’. Some believe that he simply adapted upon existing journalistic techniques with others saying that he was the ‘founder of modern journalism’ (English: 1996: 6), especially through the vehicle of sensationalism. Northcliffe did drag the press industry into the 20th century economically, but although he had an effect on the journalism of the time, there doesn’t seem to be a major argument for this case.
This period was definitely the era of the Press Baron. Whereas previously the proprietors of the national dailies had had an influence editorially, there had never been such a blur of the line that separates the owner from the day-to-day editorial decision making of a publication. Northcliffe was the main owner to do this, and it was his interference that often changed the whole point of view for news stories. Also the continual crusading of his newspapers often resulted in governmental reform, none more so at time of war. It is obvious that the press barons had political influence through their connection with the masses, but it is debatable whether they used this power in a detrimental fashion. It was this desire and power to increase circulation and voice his own beliefs that is so important to the development of the press in the period 1890-1930, as it showed the great power that the press had, and could continue to have, over the masses
Conclusion
In conclusion it is my opinion that the ‘Northcliffe Revolution’ is a justified angle to proceed from if there is a need to understand the developments of the British press in the period 1890-1930. Northcliffe’s contribution to the history of the press is not one of journalistic nature. He was the master of forward thinking. His greatest contribution to the press of his period was to finally modernize it economically. He didn’t radically reform journalism; he more simply adapted it to fit in with his designs of a contemporary press industry. Jean Chalaby (Chalaby: 2000: 28) defined his influence well when she described Northcliffe’s contribution as being one that;
“…is not as a journalist but as a press owner who had an extraordinary understanding of the implications of journalism for the daily press. He applied and developed journalistic practices more than he invented them. He brought the daily newspaper into the 20th century and modernised journalism in the process…”
Bibliography
Kevin Williams (1998)
‘Get me a murder a day!: A History of Mass Communications in Britain’
Also cited from Kevin Williams (1998)
‘Get me a murder a day!: A History of Mass Communications in Britain’
-
Norman Angell (1922): p16
‘The Press and the Organisation of Society’
Cited from P. Catterail, C. Seymour-Ure & A. Smith (2000):
‘Northcliffe’s Legacy: Aspects of British Popular Press 1896- 1996’
-
‘Northcliffe: Proprietor as Journalist’ - Jean Chalaby (2000): p27-44
-
‘Northcliffe: an Intimate Biography’ - H. Fyfe (1930)
James Curran & Jean Seaton (1991)
‘Power without Responsibility’
Graham Murdock & Peter Golding (1977)
‘The Structure, Ownership and Control Of the Press 1914-76’
R.Pound & G.Harmsworth (1959)
‘Northcliffe’
Cited from Curran, James, Smith, Pauline, Anthony & Wingate
‘Impacts and Influences’
-
Tom Jeffery & Keith McCelland (1987): p9-27
D. English (1996)
British Journalism Review – ‘Legend of the Chief’
