RUTHLESS RUPERT STRIKES AGAIN
The press: Paul Johnson
hails Murdoch the monopoly-buster
WHICH is the public's best defence against monopoly? Is it government, pas- sing a law through Parliament and then enforcing it? Or is it the competitive power of private enterprise itself? Of course the best answer is a bit of both. But the experience of the newspaper industry over the past five years show clearly that, if one has to choose between the two, competi- tion is a much better bet than legislation.
In the pre-Wapping era, newspaper readers were victimised by a number of monopolies, most of them labour ones. The absolutism of the closed-shop mono- polies maintained in Fleet Street by the NGA and Sogat meant not only steady rises in cover-prices (and high costs for advertisers), a decline in editorial quality, as more and more revenue went on exorbi- tant wages and restrictive practices of the print unions, but actual censorship of copy, late delivery, shortfalls and, worst of all, a growing number of occasions when news- papers simply did not appear at all. This primary level of monopoly of the print unions was reinforced at a secondary level. Even if an owner could get his paper printed, he could not get it distributed since British Rail and its special newspaper trains had a virtual monopoly there, mean- ing in practice that the NUR had a veto over any paper which the print unions had declared 'black'. This use of union power was completely untouched by the monopo- ly legislation, which specifically excludes labour from its mandate.
Now when Rupert Murdoch began to build up his British newspaper empire, and especially when he added the Times and Sunday Times to the Sun and News of the World, there were howls of rage and alarm about his 'monopolistic tendencies', not least from those who operated or benefited from the labour monopolies. But of course Murdoch never was, and is never likely to be, a true monopolist since he operates in a highly competitive market, without benefit of any legal or de facto stranglehold. And, that being so, there was and is a lot to be said for one dynamic figure having a big share of the market since it gives him the power and confidence to challenge the genuine monopolies. That is precisely what Murdoch was able to do when the Thatcher union reforms created the legal climate, and the Eddie Shah adventure the psychological climate, which made Wapping possible. Even so, what enabled it to succeed was, in part at least, the sheer size of the Murdoch opera- tion: with four titles, he was able to justify his own road-distribution system. This enabled him to bypass the BR newspaper trains and so the NUR veto. Getting his papers out and on the streets made it possible, in turn, for him to defy the print unions and break their labour monopoly. The BR-NUR monopoly is now per- manently broken, for the Mirror group is following in Murdoch's footsteps and BR is at last where the public interest demands it should be — merely one element in a competitive long-distance delivery system. The print union monopoly has also been destroyed, at any rate so far as the Mur- doch papers are concerned. Other groups continue to operate with closed-shop agreements but they now have the option of 'doing a Wapping' in extremis, and this means the print unions have had to aban- don in practice most of the anti-social uses
'1 don't know what you're complaining about. I can hear the sea when I put it to my ear.'
of their monopoly power.
Hence newspapers are no longer cen- sored by the unions, they are printed on time (except for mechanical failures) and, most of all, they appear every day accord- ing to schedule. That is progress. Indeed, the nationals, again led by the Murdoch papers, are beginning to tackle one of the worst abuses of recent years, the wage- blackmail over public holidays, especially during the long Christmas-New Year period, which led to the nationals abdicat- ing from their primary responsibility to provide a news service and simply not publishing at all. The demoralising appeasement of recent years is now being reversed and the coming Christmas holiday will see a decisive improvement. Indeed I look forward to the day when newspapers, like television stations, will simply defy these Bank Holiday taboos and maintain a year-round service without interruption.
So here we have a case of a supposedly monopolistic firm heading a movement which has broken the real monopolies and benefited ordinary people in consequence. The Monopolies Commission had nothing to do with it. The only action required from government was to free industry from the restraints imposed by certain union privileges, and enterprise did the rest. Moreover, the revolution against monopo- ly is continuing. On Saturday, Murdoch's empire provided a further shock to entren- ched interests by announcing a new system of wholesale distribution, for all its existing newspaper and magazine titles and for an expanding range of products, including videotapes. It is dividing England into 182 wholesale areas and inviting competitive tenders not only from existing firms but from new ones.
There is no actual monopoly in newspap- er wholesaling, but there is a market dominated by three big firms, W. H. Smith, Menzies and Surridge Dawson, who control nearly two-thirds of it. In some areas there are quasi-monopolies and the whole system, which has distinct networks for Sunday and daily nationals, for inst- ance, is marred by historical anomalies and inefficiencies of every kind. Only Mur- doch, with his multiple titles and own road delivery system, now called TNT Newsfast, has the sheer power to drive a hole through this fence of established interests. But, as in the printing field, others will be happy to scramble through in his wake. The result will be a shake-up from which Britain's 30,000 newsagents, as well as readers, will benefit, and opportunities will be created for aggressive newcomers to enter a hither- to sheltered trade. That is excellent news, for the printed word, in order to remain competitive with the electronic image, must improve its ability to distribute itself quickly and cheaply. The move confirms my long-held view that Rupert Murdoch, with all his faults, is on balance a huge and growing asset to the British newspaper industry and its public.
Previous page
