Home » Posts tagged 'wonga'
Tag Archives: wonga
Chronicle Capitulation to Wonga
A few weeks ago it came to light that the Evening Chronicle, Newcastle’s main local evening paper, had entered into a joint scheme with payday lenders Wonga to provide a £30,000 fund for local sports clubs to apply to for funding. Wonga are Newcastle United’s main sponsors and there’s been some discussion about the rights and wrongs of whether a company with their business model should be sponsoring the club. Even so, the Chronicle seemed to see no conflict of interest in entering such an arrangement with an organisation which was at the centre of controversy about sponsoring an institution so central to the city. That’s a controversy, not to put too fine a point on it, which the Chronicle should be informing and reporting upon to the citizens of Newcastle in a fair, balanced way. That involves examining the issues and providing their readers with the information necessary to understand what’s going on.
The suspicion quickly arose that the Chronicle’s editorial independence may have been compromised, and so it proved. The language used to describe Wonga in the Chronicle’s pages had subtly changed. No more ‘payday lender’, replaced by ‘digital finance company’ in all cases from a few days after the deal, certainly a less harsh description.
Further examination of recent stories provides evidence of the presence of a positive editorial line when printing stories about Wonga. View these two stories covering the same event, a meeting between Wonga PR chiefs, Newcastle United employees and fan representatives on Aug 19th. One is from the Chronicle, one from the Journal.
The Chronicle’s, despite having a picture showing a Citizens Advice Bureau representative and Newcastle Central MP Chi Onwurah, doesn’t mention them or their contribution to the debate in any way. In 3 main sections, we are told firstly that fans are grateful to Wonga for turning up and secondly that the club are very happy to have Wonga as a sponsor. Finally, there are a series of quotes from the Wonga representatives explaining away their controversial image and concerns about their role as sponsor without ever mentioning what that controversy is about, or what the concerns are.
The Journal story is quite a contrast. From the off it has a completely different tone, while also covering the positive angle on the deal which is the only focus of the Chronicle story. We learn about a strongly-worded attack on the company by Chi Onwurah. There are quotes from Newcastle CAB’s Chief Executive expressing worry about the company’s presence in the city. There’s mention of a question from the floor about fan hostility. The reasons for misgivings about the sponsorship deal are explained clearly and at length, and a long list of prominent organisations who share those misgivings is provided, from the Church of England, MPs, Unite the union, Newcastle City Council, and the Citizens Advice Bureau.
The two stories provide a completely different spin on the same event. What is shocking is that the two papers they appear in are sisters, both owned by Trinity Mirror, the Journal being the morning counterpart to the Chronicle in the evening. Not only are the two papers in the same stable, the two stories were written by the same person, reporter Kate Proctor. The only explanation for the differing slant in the two stories is editorial instruction. Why would the Journal be immune from this? Who knows. It appears to be the case however.
In a piece printed in the Chronicle tonight as a reaction to the recent transfer window, the question is asked of Newcastle owner Mike Ashley “how much do you pay the North East Press pack to write nice things about you?” The answer, in Wonga’s case, appears to be £30,000, the amount they provided for the Chronicle’s Wish Sport fund.
Wonga’s easy ride at the Chronicle
Newcastle’s main local evening paper, the Evening Chronicle, have instituted a fund for not-for-profit sports groups to apply for. The money’s being provided by payday lenders Wonga, sponsors of Newcastle United.
I pointed out last week that the controversy around the sponsorship of the football club and stories linked to that meant that the association between the paper and Wonga was unwise. The Chronicle are a major source of news for NUFC fans and when they come to report on these issues, as they must, their impartiality is bound to be questioned as a result of their relationship with Wonga. There are some who have no problem with Wonga’s business model and the exposure they have gained in a city never far from issues of poverty. Even they will surely be able to see that the Chronicle’s editorial standpoint has been compromised over this.
Can we see this beginning to happen already on a small scale? If you run a search for “Wonga” on the Chronicle’s own website, it’s perhaps telling that since just after the Wish Sport fund was set up, there’s been a subtle change in how Wonga are referred to. A post on July 4th was the last time Wonga were referred to as a “payday lender”. Since then they’ve become a “digital finance company”.
Still think the Chronicle will cover United’s sponsorship as they should, providing the reader with all the relevant information and opinion to allow them to make up their own mind? Lets hope this outbreak of politeness towards Wonga is temporary for the duration of the funding scheme.
Local Press Criticism of Wonga Just Got More Unlikely
Newcastle’s Evening Chronicle has just announced a new fund it’s running which will give local not-for-profit sports clubs the chance of gaining a share of £30000. In these straitened times, with government funding disappearing and FA grass-roots funding being frozen, access to even a small portion of the fund could be the difference between folding and not for many organizations. The whole point of sport surely has to be promoting health, fitness and ultimately the enjoyment of exercise. Super fit millionaires on the telly should really be a sideshow compared to this main event. On that front this is a very good initiative as the help this cash would give could be invaluable in persuading people to carry on what they are doing.
The £30,000 has been provided by Wonga, payday lenders and sponsors for the new season of Newcastle United. You can see why all parties involved are doing this. Each club’s share of the pot is determined by the number of tokens collected from the newspaper by that club. So the Chronicle gets a circulation boost for free. Wonga, whose sponsorship of Newcastle has come under fire, gain both local exposure and further legitimacy reflected from the institutions they are associated with. This initiative is a clear extension of their original strategy of sponsoring the football club. Everyone’s happy.
But there’s a catch. Possibly the Chronicle’s main method of persuading people to buy the paper is their reporting of the day-to-events at Newcastle United. As often as not, if you look on the sandwich boards outside of newsagents in the city, the lead story they trumpet is club-related. As the season gets started, the story of Wonga’s sponsorship is not going to go away. More than one of the club’s players are rumoured to have misgivings about playing in a strip with the company’s name on, for reasons which include the religious doctrine they adhere to. A section of the club’s fans also have misgivings, mainly based on the fear that Wonga’s products and services will gain traction in the city due to the prominence and respectability loaned by sponsorship of the club. A credit union is a better choice for a short-term loan, not carrying with them such a risk of the sum owed spiralling out of control should repayments not be made in time, but they don’t get their name on every Newcastle United shirt sold over the next few years.
What will the Chronicle do the next time it is natural for them to cover these stories? Have they decided on our behalf that Wonga’s sponsorship is no longer an issue? If that’s the case Wonga can expect a pretty favourable slant to the copy, if the stories see the light of day at all. If they haven’t then surely the paper can see that associating themselves with a company so central to much controversy around their main daily subject of discussion puts their impartiality in question.
Maybe the Chronicle value that vital grassroots funding above all else, and are so confident that they’ll cover the stories on this subject completely impartially that they are prepared to go ahead and expose themselves to whatever scrutiny may result. But by implication, if they’ve chosen to do this they obviously see nothing wrong in associating themselves with Wonga. It would be a shame if this funding were to disappear, that’s clear. Unfortunately by the very act of Wonga’s name appearing next to the Chronicle’s on this fund, they have chosen their side.
Mark Brophy 