Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 12.20 PM
Word that a senior executive of SPH Media had been told to leave got out a fortnight ago, but I gathered that the organisation did not want to reply to queries by other media on the 5Ws and 1H. It seems to me that it was relying on the media outside its fold to not publish any report, since nothing had been officially said. It’s a technique that many newsmakers resort to - no comment, therefore no story. So when WakeUp Sg published the news of three senior executives being in hot water, I paid attention. It was source-based. But even so, there must be enough belief to warrant publication.
So number 1 lesson: Journalists should never think that just because they had no response, there is, therefore, no story. If three credible sources, even if unnamed, say the same thing, the story is good to go. Just say that the key player had been given a chance to respond, but declined comment.
It’s a small thing compared to the nub of the news itself - that SPH Media, in its old incarnation as part of the public listed company, had inflated its circulation figures. It’s a big deal because a newspaper lives or dies by its circulation numbers. In this case, multiplying by two would give it readership numbers (it used to be four). This is the basis on which advertising rates are calculated. Advertisers want reliable numbers to know how many people the newspaper is reaching before putting their money down. They pay more for premium placements and even for days which usually lead to higher circulation numbers.
Beyond the possible backlash from advertisers, there is also a reputational dimension.
I wonder how long SPH Media thought that it could keep the investigation or audit under wraps. It’s a media organisation, for goodness sakes! For this same reason, it should have reported the news (its own exclusive) as soon as it was able to, rather than wait to be “outed’’. The new entity could have touted it as a move to “clear the decks’’ or being “a new broom that sweeps clean’’. Perhaps, it could have earned some kudos. Its belated action only makes the case for more alternative media to “watch over’’ the mainstream media.
On the face of it, the news is terrible. That a publishing company could have fudged such critical numbers says much about its lack of integrity and honesty. Especially since it is a duty of news media to keep watch over everybody else’ integrity and honesty.. This isn’t about a journalist who fabricated a report, but a whole company which seemed to have been engaged in perpetuating big lies, or at the very least, not doing due diligence or turning a blind eye to shenanigans.
Sure, no news media likes falling circulation or readership numbers and would go to extreme lengths to keep their numbers up. That’s why you have discounts and freebies with new subscriptions. You have “steroids’’ - selling in bulk to companies and agencies, bundling deals, special discounts and so forth. When I started the news magazines for students, IN and Little Red Dot, more than a decade ago, I was quite clear about how it was not just about getting young readers to see newspapers as a learning tool but getting a copy of the ST out there with each magazine. It’s called a bundle deal.
As far as I know, numbers were approved and calculated on the basis of the Audit Bureau of Circulation’s definition of circulation. It seemed straightforward to me.
Over the years, of course, things got muddier when newspapers went digital. So what is the combined circulation for print and online? Do you only add paid digital subscriptions to hard copy sales or should the calculus be totally changed in favour of “readership’’? I’m afraid that I don’t know much of this and some questions should be asked of SPH Media. But I do know that the popular thing to do now is simply to lump print and online numbers together, without going into detail about the specifics. It makes the numbers nice and vague.
The latest news report is troubling in other respects. The roles that the three senior executives played are unclear. Are they the perpetrators or just the foot soldiers? SPH Media said it only audited for the period between
September 2020 to March 2022. Are we to assume that all the numbers were okay before this? Already, there are whispers about how this inflation of numbers is a long-standing feature. This is not good for the reputation of retired or ex-employees. It is not fair.
Frankly, I cannot believe that numbers have been arbitrarily plucked out of the air. I cannot fathom how unsold copies were counted in circulation and then destroyed. If so, I can’t believe that upper management had no clue. I want to know more, especially how circulation numbers are defined and calculated. Is this dependent on number of copies sold, no matter the discount? Does it matter if they remain unread so long as you can produce an invoice on payment? Or, is this more about how new management defines the numbers as “correct’’?
These matters must be sorted out. SPH Media Trust should set an example of how a company should deliver bad news to the public. Stop pussyfooting about giving specifics and writing euphemisms such as "inconsistencies'' and "issues''. Or you will have no leg to stand on if/when your own journalists start preaching about transparency and accountability from now.
I hope the SMT will do the right thing and respond to the public, not just the Ministry of Communications and Information. That $900 million is not MCI money, it’s OUR money. AND….there are still subscribers among us.