In 1994, it was possible – though challenging – to launch a monthly print magazine. Market-led politics were already eroding the welfare state but it still offered sufficient security for people to have time to volunteer as editors and writers. We could keep printing costs low by using a supplier associated with a sympathetic foundation. Moreover, an accessible, attractive, non-sectarian left publication independent of the Labour Party had an almost unique appeal at that time – and received significant publicity as an almost lone voice making a sustained challenge to New Labour.
Then, when local managers took stocking decisions, you could find Red Pepper at major branches of W H Smith – Euston, Manchester Piccadilly – but when the company centralised and sold on profitability alone, or publisher-funded displays, we lost visibility and sales. We campaigned in vain for Italian-style legislation that required newsagents to sell whatever was printed, which has enabled left journals like Il Manifesto to survive.
We have never had a single financial backer, relying almost entirely on thousands of subscribers, hundreds of donors (especially socialist lawyers and playwrights), occasional grants for one-off projects (never general running costs) and advertising sales (willingly limited by a strict ethical policy). Maintaining financial independence has enabled us to report, argue and debate without deference or timidity.
Ethos over profit
Since the 2010s, as would-be readers have looked online for analysis and debate, our business model faltered. We refused a paywall in the interest of our socialist and internationalist politics reaching the biggest possible audience, continuing to make print content freely available online over the months following a new issue.
We wrongly assumed that the website would be a gateway to subscribers – and did not encourage readers enough to make that shift. Our ‘pay what- you-want’ subscription offer has reflected our socialist ethos – and proven crucial to retain subscribers needing to drop down a tier (or two) rather than cancel subscriptions.
We should have named it ‘pay-what-you-can’, however – with uplifts encouraged whenever possible. Most subscribers have been paying the same rate for over a decade, as costs and inflation continued to rise, setting us on an unsustainable path.
To cover costs, we estimate that an annual print subscription would cost £50 – £4.20 per month. Currently, two thirds of our subscribers pay just £3 per month or less.
Production and distribution costs have skyrocketed as subscribers have felt the squeeze on their own monthly outgoings
The coronavirus pandemic in some ways disguised operational realities. Our late-2019 recruitment drive brought in an excellent team of new editors – varied in age, experience and political opinion. In a paradoxical twist of history, they faced lockdown during their first year in post. We all suddenly had more time for training, practice and meeting online, while covering world events felt more pressing than ever. Writers felt likewise and flocked to us with their analyses – frontline workers, experienced academics and young people alike.
Following the gloom of the 2019 election, readers also found time and energy to reengage, leading to a subscriber base boost. It could not last. While we called for ‘No return to normal’ (issue 229), capital ‘snapped back’. As editors moved on – to better paying posts, parenthood and new political projects – we were unable to replenish the supply.
Rising pressures
In 2025, work does not pay enough. Neither does universal credit, and ‘free time’ (and affordable childcare) is scarce. Like many other publications of the left, historically Red Pepper has survived through volunteers’ enormous goodwill. While an occasional unpaid contribution can be absorbed as a political, not professional, act, the labour of running a magazine is huge.
Over recent years, an extremely small team has been responsible for (deep breath): planning; reviewing pitches; commissioning; editing; fact checking; designing; proofing; research; managing inboxes; updating subscriber databases; overseeing payments and accounts; supplier relations; social media; marketing; events; distribution; supplier review; and more. The team has moved from low paid, to underpaid, to almost entirely unpaid.
An overstretched, burned-out team cannot sustain the high standards required in an era of media sensationalism, silos and fake news
Meanwhile, external production and distribution costs – eco-friendly ink, paper, packaging, postage, labour, overheads – have skyrocketed, just as readers and subscribers have felt the squeeze on their own monthly outgoings. Many of you nonetheless contributed to recent crowdfunding campaigns, allowing us to redevelop the website and create a truly impressive online archive (in turn boosting institutional subscription revenue).
We are extremely grateful for that support – and proud of the work we have done together, producing often beautiful magazines to an exceptional standard of quality, variety, accuracy and accountability. That, too, has masked our realities – and become unworkable on practical, ethical and political levels.
An overstretched, burned-out team cannot sustain the high standards expected and sorely required – not least in the current era of media sensationalism, silos, fake news and no fact checks.
Where next?
Our bumper final print edition does not mean goodbye. Rather, it is an invitation to you – the readers who have always sustained this political project – to guide where we go next. We hope all of you will contribute to our consultation – and that some of you will even join the team and take active roles in plotting our new journey.
To spark inspirations, in our last issue we survey the left media landscape in its vibrant and varied forms. Our aim is to be realistic about left media more broadly – with the goal of identifying how Red Pepper might continue to make an important, accessible contribution to internationalist socialist debate and action.
This is not the end.
