What is a newspaper for?

I am puzzling over this again today. Our local newspaper ("The Advertiser" should you be interested) is a decidedly parochial affair which takes more interest in who kicked the goals in the local (AFL) footy match and what was served for afternoon tea. I do not exaggerate.
Even during an election campaign sport has taken precedence - in the form of a car race held on a street circuit which causes major disruption and inconvenience.
The extra-marital affairs of the Premier (he was not married at the time but the female was) and the mental health of his deputy have been given a good airing. The Premier has been portrayed as both villian and victim and his deputy sympathised with but criticised for airing the problem.
The lack of experience of the Opposition leader has been minutely examined and not too gentle hints that she does not have the support of the party have also been made. The absence (through illness serious enough to hospitalise) of the shadow minister for health has been commented upon in negative rather than positive manner.
And so it goes on. Much of the debate has been about whether a hospital should be built on an entirely new site or rebuilt on the old one. The debate has not moved anywhere for months but has nevertheless been passionate. A desalination plant and a tramline to nowhere have also caused debate. Land tax has caused a minor earthquake but the media quickly papered it over.
What has been lacking is any really serious debate about the future direction of the state. Apparently we do not need it. We know where we are going. There is no need to plan. Providing we leave the current government in power - and this morning's editorial makes it quite clear that we must do that - all will be well.
There really is no need at all for an election. Why are we spending the money on one? Why did the newspaper not tell us all this weeks ago. We could have gone back to who kicked the footy through the goal posts and what flavour jam was available with the scones.