Call me cynical, but...

Newspaper sales have been in decline for a number of years due to the changing media consumption patterns of the population. We've seen massive growth on the web, plus in the UK's major cities we now have free morning and evening newspapers.

The double whammy for traditional media owners has come in the form of the current recession and the corresponding drop in marketing budgets and therefore media spend.

So, basically traditional media owners are hurting...badly. They need a solution and fast!

Now let's turn to Mr Brown. He may lack the balls of Mrs Thatcher and the charisma and spin of Mr Blair, but overall I don't think he's done too bad a job during what has been a rather tricky time. So why do the press seem hell bent on forcing an election? Could this be the solution they've been looking for?

Surely journalistic integrity would prevent the press from embarking on a campaign to oust a British Prime Minister purely for economic reasons? Well, the ABC figures show that the quality dailies saw a boost in circulation during the US presidential campaign and a UK election would almost certainly benefit the red tops too, with headlines like 'Come on Camer-On' and 'He's Brown and out'. Plus, of course during an election campaign the political parties open their wallets and spend a huge amount on advertising campaigns. Now that would be a really welcome boost for the poor old newspapers.

With a large proportion of the UK press in the hands of foreign owners, what interest do they have in supporting and enhancing the democratic process when they can manipulate it for their own benefit instead.

It's great that our democratic system has the safeguards in place to ensure that a leader can be removed if he or she is failing to deliver. It's a sad day when that same process can be manipulated to sell a few more papers and therefore line the pockets of the media owners.