er S

lOCAl NEWS AND A SySTEMICAlly UNFAIR DIGITAl MARKETPlACE

DEAR STEPHEN CRABB & SIMON HART

As you know The Pembrokeshire Herald is now a well-established news outlet in your constituency, and I write first to thank you for all the support you have given to us so far, since we started in 2013.

As we move to becoming an e-edition newspaper, I am writing because independent, local news providers like ours are bearing the brunt of a systemically unfair digital marketplace. Consequently, over the past few years, it has become nearly impossible for us to raise and hold onto the resources required to keep providing our communities with the news they need. I think you can help.

The Pembrokeshire Herald is an integral part of

, our community. Residents turn to our coverage, produced by reporters they know, recognise and trust, for all types of crucial information about their lives and livelihoods. We tell them about the decisions made by the politicians who represent them, the struggles faced by their local businesses, what public services are available and not available to them, and what they can do to entertain themselves and their families over the weekend. We often carry stories that others shy away from, and this has led us to build up a following of tens of thousands of online readers.

In short, we help our readers feel like they belong to their community, and facilitate their engagement in the social, economic and democratic processes that impact their lives in very real ways. We work diligently to provide them with accurate news that shapes their experiences, and we need help to be able to keep doing that.

Big tech platforms have become an unavoidable part of our business. These companies dictate how we present and share our news, how we reach our readers, and whether we are able to generate the revenue we so desperately need to keep our newsrooms afloat. Instead of being accountable to our readers, as we should be, we are beholden to the whims of multibillionaires in Silicon Valley.

We need meaningful change in the digital marketplace, and we need action from you and your fellow policymakers to bring that change about. The Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers bill, currently in Parliament, is one part of a range of policy options to help publishers like myself run sustainable, independent outlets. But our needs must be considered in the bill.

I am therefore asking you to introduce, or support already introduced, measures to the legislation when it returns to Parliament that:

Confirm that small publishers are permitted to engage in collective bargaining with platforms at all stages of negotiations.

Reduce opportunities for platforms to frustrate and delay the process.

Allow the regulator to use the final offer mechanism more flexibly, to protect the interests of small publishers.

Redirect oversight powers from the Secretary of State.

Retain Judicial Review and reject the introduction of a merits review.

Ground the bill in the interests of citizens as well as consumers.

The Public Interest News Foundation (PINF) would be happy to provide further information about the above points, which they outlined in their submission to the Public Bill Committee. I would also like to request a meeting with you, attended by PINF, so we can discuss why those measures are needed if this bill is going to achieve its competition goals, in addition to other types of support Westminster can provide publishers.

Please outline the ways you intend to address this issue on my and my community’s behalf. If you’re unable to address this personally, please escalate my letter to the relevant colleague or department.

Please do keep me informed of any progress made.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Tom Sinclair,

MAKING No APPARENT SENS

When you consider the policies of recent Conservative Governments, concerning migrants in small boats, which is to refuse to interview them, so that their numbers multiply here, wasting their lives for two years minimum, and also wasting British £billions of public money, for no benefit for anyone on Earth, does it not strike you that these politicians, and the billionaire donors whom they obey, must have other, different purposes, which they conceal from you? This makes no apparent sense.

If you examine what Conservative policies have been for years, progressively making everything worse, are you not forced to conclude that you must be at fault to have believed them? You were being led up garden paths, by those Moguls who control all forms of Conservative Media, Press, Private TV, Online Corporations, and so, indisputably control the emotions and thinking of millions.

There was a different, hidden motivation for this insane, self-defeating policy, which offends intelligent voters. Is it fact, that die-hard Tory voters can still be led like illiterate peasants of old?

These Government policies were designed to play on the hate-filled emotions of Populist voters, adults who oppose the progressive educated knowledge of centuries, entrusted to Universities and Hospitals. Populists rely only upon their savage emotions and uninformed personal opinions.

Conservatism has declared war on Education, to scorn degrees, especially about Humanities, from Philosophy to Literature or Ethics.

Common folk must know their traditional, subservient place, and never unite in Trade Unions.

These policies had only one intention, to spread Hatred, an emotion more easily aroused than Love, and that alone explains Conservative policies, so that common folk adore the privileged and hate the humble, proud of their malice towards the helpless, desecrating their own votes and lives.

DEAR SIR

I write to express my deep concern over the prevailing media bias against certain political parties, particularly the conservative bias that seems to overshadow fair and unbiased reporting. As a concerned citizen, I believe it is essential for the media to uphold its responsibility in providing accurate and impartial information to the public, enabling voters to make informed decisions during elections.

In recent times, I have observed the gross bigotry demonstrated by some media outlets, showing a clear inclination towards specific political parties while unjustly undermining others. One such example involves the recent challenges faced by Sir Keir Starmer, the leader of the Labour Party, regarding future spending on projects. Whilst he has effectively communicated his party’s beliefs and policies related to social justice, some journalists appear dissatisfied and demand specific figures for potential future spending.

It is important to recognise that forecasting future expenditure accurately is inherently challenging for any political leader, regardless of party affiliation. Sir Keir Starmer, in response to the media’s pressure, provided an estimated figure of 28 billion pounds. However, as events evolve, unforeseen changes, such as adjustments in the Bank of England’s lending rates, can necessitate modifications to these projections. This is a rational and responsible approach, reflecting an awareness of economic fluctuations and a commitment to honesty with the public.

Unfortunately, instead of acknowledging these realities, some members of the media have opted to unfairly label Sir Keir Starmer as a liar for revising his estimate. This type of unwarranted criticism not only undermines the democratic process but also perpetuates the divisive atmosphere in our nation’s politics. It is crucial for media outlets to report responsibly, highlighting the complexities and uncertainties of economic matters rather than resorting to baseless accusations.

As citizens of this great nation, we rely on the media to keep us well-informed, holding the government and politicians accountable.

To achieve this, we must demand that our media organisations prioritise objective reporting, free from partisan bias. By fostering a more balanced and constructive discourse, we can collectively work towards creating a well-informed and engaged populace. Let us remember that Britain’s strength lies in its diversity and pluralism. We must respect the differences in political ideologies and engage in constructive debates that promote progress rather than division. It is high time that media organisations recognise their role as the fourth estate and commit to upholding journalistic integrity. Only through responsible reporting can we foster a well-informed society capable of making sound decisions that benefit our nation’s future.

Name and address supplied ,