What An Extraordinary Year For the Financial Times: It is Named The World’s Top Newspaper, Four Months Later It Sends Its Editor Packing, and He Then Writes That Working In Print Today Is The Same As a Music Company Selling Vinyl Records!

Philip M. Stone November 17, 2005

They called it “strategic differences.” Translation: Financial Times (FT) Editor Andrew Gowers is unceremoniously dumped – a very un-FT thing to do indicating severe “differences.” But once unshackled from his editor’s chains he then says in a London evening newspaper, “Working in print, pure and simple, is the early 21st century equivalent of running a record company specializing in vinyl.”
Go To Follow Up & Comments

Might there be a hint there that he believes the future is the Internet rather than newspapers? And might that just possibly be part of a financial debate going on within the FT – how do you strengthen the UK edition which is losing readership at rather alarming rates these days, make stronger the international editions that are doing ok but are now competing against relaunches of the European and Asian Wall Street Journals in compact size with their accompanying marketing blitz, and at the same time pour some serious money into the ft.com site that actually does pretty well, and in doing all of that still stem overall losses that have reached £64 million since 2002.

And if that is not all bad enough, other UK nationals like The Times and The Daily Telegraph are said to have more business readers than the FT. And adding to that let’s not forget the new free financial daily, CityAM that is now being distributed in offices and banks in addition to being handed out at City Underground stations. That newspaper may have a more down market appeal than the FT, but is said to be doing quite well since its September launch.

Earlier this year the respected bi-annual Swiss survey by Internationale Medienhilfe across 50 countries named the FT the world’s best newspaper. 

It is astounding for the FT that Gowers was shown the door as he was. Media analysts have all had field days speculating on those “strategic differences”, and most seem to believe it comes down to the FT’s overall profitability, in particular the weakness of the UK edition in which some rather influential City voices may also have been talking to senior people at Pearson, owner of the FT, about the paper’s editorial line of mostly supporting Prime Minister Blair, and that the best financial hope for 2005 is for the newspaper to break even.

But read Gowers’ article in the Evening Standard, and one gets the real feeling it is more complicated. Here is a newspaper editor who is absolutely convinced that the future for print is the Internet, and only the Internet, and yet the Pearson board is absolutely dedicated to improving the quality of the UK print edition, and gaining back lost readership.

If Gowers’ heart lies with the Internet, the board may well have asked if it could rely on him to put in the necessary energies to strengthen the UK print edition. He had already increased general news and sports coverage, but then later eliminated it as a cost savings. The board could well have figured he had four years to fix the UK edition, and in the new world corporate order where senior executives are quickly toppled if the results are not there, he had failed to deliver.

Pearson wants a strong UK FT print product. It is an absolute cash cow when the newspaper runs on full steam, which it will do when the financial and technology advertising blight lifts.

Burt Gowers is really more interested in the Internet. “The future lies with the Internet,” Gowers said. “Those newspapers that survive will be those that produce truly original content and learn fastest how to translate it into the all-encompassing, all-singing, all-dancing new medium of the Web.”

He understood that with those remarks no one would probably offer him another job as a newspaper editor.  “It is, of course, quite unlikely that anyone would be foolish enough to ask me to edit a newspaper again,” he wrote. “But if they did, the answer would be no.”

 While the FT print newspaper has been a financial basket case since 2002 it was that same year that ft.com started to turn a profit, a few months after starting the subscription model. It now has some 80,000 paying subscribers and close to 4 million monthly unique visits. It charges £75 a year for a basic package or £200 for an expanded package.

Gowers leaves no doubt that he is proudest of his work in integrating ft.com and the print edition as much as he could.

“The FT’s rather ahead of the game in the industry. Most old-style print newspapers said, ‘we’d better set up a separate unit to do the Internet – separate people often in separate buildings.’ Under my leadership, we went very far towards integrating the two and making them work together,” he said.

And it is on the Internet that most people access the brand, he noted.  “Far more people access material produced by the FT through the online medium than have ever accessed it in print. Advertising on FT.com is beginning to become a significant factor in the overall business,” he proclaimed.

The print edition had a very poor October, losing an overall 19,259 copies globally over September – a 4.4% drop.  Some media analysts say that its full price circulation sales in the UK has now dropped below 100,000 or is very close to it.  The good news is that advertising is up about 6% this year – mainly for luxury goods.

ftm Follow Up & Comments

There Is Life After the FT - March 20, 2006

Andrew Gowers who swore when he left the Financial Times that he would not undertake another position as a newspaper editor, has landed a real plum of a job instead. He has been named as Lehman Brothers head of corporate communications for Europe. The job includes advertising and brand marketing strategy.

From Bad to Worse At The FT Domestically - January 7, 2006

According to the latest National Readership Survey, the FT has lost about one-third of its UK readership in the six months from April to September, 2005. That doesn’t mean that circulation in the UK has declined that much – the FT was said to have around a 100,000 domestic circulation out of its approximate global circulation of around 430,000 -- but it’s UK readership was thought to be close to 500,000 and it is that number – looked at closely by advertisers – that has taken a sharp drop.

And if that wasn’t bad enough, the new CityAM free tabloid appears to be gaining its toehold within London’s financial centers, claiming a readership approaching 100,000 daily on a print run recently increased to 85,000. It has negotiated distribution deals at major financial offices such as Merrill Lynch and the newspaper is given away in business lounges at Heathrow and Gatwick Airports.

The FT says that its boardroom/senior manager readership is far more up-scale than the down-market readership of CityAM.

Former FT Editor Lands UK Government Job Reviewing Intellectual Property – December 5, 2005

Where do deposed editors of the Financial Times go, especially those who seemed to back the Labor government much more than one might have expected of the FT? They go to a UK government post, of course.

UK Chancellor Gordon Brown has announced he is appointing Andrew Gowers, former editor of the FT, to a 12-month commission to lead an independent review of the UK’s intellectual property rights regulations. Gowers said,” I believe that Intellectual Property is at the heart of Britain’s success in the knowledge economy. This review will ensure that we maintain a world-class environment for creativity, design and innovation.”

A part of the Gowers Review, which is to make its report within 12 months, is to examine whether current copyright protection on sound recordings and performer rights is appropriate.