BryanDicker wrote:weggis wrote:Hmmmm, that would deal with the cost to taxpayer issue. But, what added value would such a publication provide? What would be it’s journalistic edge and how would it differentiate itself from existing publications – Yellow Advertiser, Redbridge Post, Ilford Recorder and Wanstead & Woodford Guardian?
Items not reported by the papers you have quoted, and further publish consultations etc etc!
To take this point first, exactly the reverse is true, Redbridge Life has failed to report, exactly the many things that the local papers DO report, i.e the allotments problem, Jaguars, Swimming Pools, the possible problem with Hainault Youth Centre, etc etc. Oh and not to forget the £70million difference between the paper and online version of "You Choose". As we know from a previous post 74% of Households i.e some 85 to 90% of people have internet access so any consultations can be done on line as was most of "You Choose" it would cost almost nothing to use local noticeboards and once people know they are regularly
updated would look to see what is going on, perhaps they should be electronic with continuous updates. Perhaps consider advertising on all the Screens in shopping malls, post offices etc. but only when there is something to say.
The point about advertising, Redbridge Life was originally meant to cost a net £38,000 per year, according to Officers Reports to Cabinet, Officers have completely failed to live up to their own forecasts of advertising revenue, and over the period of Redbridge Life have cost Redbridge Council tax payers over £0.5 million pounds, The Cabinet and sucessive members for Communications have completely failed to exercise their management and policy functions to rectify or impose some semblance of control on this monster, which is more akin to a Mills and Boon novel, where everything in the garden is rosy and the hero and heroine walk arm in arm into the sunset.
Clear the streets and recycling bins of Redbridge Life (with thanks to Newbie for the plagarism)
