1 hour timed essay on whether local papers fulfill a more important social fuction than national papers.

The local press is at the grassroots and closer to the people it's reporting about. The content is much more relevant to the audience. The social value of locally relevant news is higher than that of national, generally relevant news. This is because people need to know what's happening around them. The events occurring nationally or overseas may not be as important.

The relationship with the community is shown by the usage of local papers as an advertising platform for local businesses. The adverts are well targeted as they're relevant to local people (because both the thing being advertised and the people being advertised to exist in the same area). They effectively create a no-fail situation: the local people see relevant advertisements, the paper gets advertising revenue and the local businesses are promoted. Promotion of local businesses stimulates the local economy which eventually feeds money back into the community. You can see how this cycle repeats itself. The role of local papers in the process is useful to society.

The small readership of local newspapers often means that they need to rely on this advertising revenue (in some cases advertising revenue overtakes sales revenue). This means the papers are reliant on advertisers more than their readers. This begs the question: are local papers serving the people... or are they serving their advertisers?

New journalists can use the local press as a step on to working for a national paper. Local papers educate new journalists and give them the skills and experience needed to develop and carry on their career.

But underneath this there's the counter-argument that because local papers use new journalists they're often underpaid and overworked. These junior journalists have less time to research sources and facts, their output is generally poor and lacking in depth - it's bad journalism.

My last argument for local papers is that they have less of a political bias than national papers. National papers deal with general issues and events that can be seen from multiple viewpoints. The national papers try to cater individually for each of these viewpoints. The local papers have a much more localised political agenda, they deal with local issues, and they tend to represent a range of viewpoints in their reporting.

Now for the social functions of national papers. For a start they have a higher readership and more money behind them. They can command more influence and have a bigger impact when they break stories. They're brilliantly efficient at disseminating information and exist as a useful tool for society. National papers also elevate local events to national conscience.

In conclusion I think the national press fulfils a more important social function than the local press.

Done in under 1 hour.

For anyone wanting to read more, here's a pretty good article by George Monbiot on local newspapers.