Archive for the ‘Journalism’ Category
Ill considered words and gestures ramping up repression
It’s OK talking and acting tough if you are getting results that matter to the rest of us, but David Cameron’s performance in the House of Commons yesterday, whilst good for his own authority as PM, does not portend well if he actually means what he says.
The overall impression that Cameron saved the country from burning down by returning from holiday early might look great to some but there is a lot of discomfort behind the headlines. Talking of tracking down and punishing the rioters would be fine if that is what he actually meant, the courts so far have sent out very mixed signals with some lenient sentences and some heavier sentences, but what is apparent is the lust of ordinary people up and down the country to lock young people away and throw away the key. Cameron latched on to this as he abandoned his “hug a hoodie” attitude promising jail terms for those convicted of involvement in the riots and looting, yet surely what we really need to see is armies of strictly supervised young people working at least 40 hours per week in their communities putting right the damage that they have caused. Surely this will have more productive long term benefits than locking them away for foolishly stealing bottled water, in six months some of them may even be on their way towards learning a skill or a trade!
Cameron talked of legislating to increase the sentences available to magistrates, instead of thinking about toughening up referral orders where offenders may only be required to work a few hours per week in the community, and what did he mean by a review of dispersal rules to give a “wider power of curfew”? Something which perhaps might be a terrible burden on the innocent and unaffected. He made pretty overt and open criticism of the Met Police’s failure to deal with the initial outbreak of violence in Tottenham, perhaps unfairly without first praising the bravery of the individual officers who faced that first unruly mob, and it is already coming back to bite him as sections of the police feel rather slighted and Sir Hugh Orde rounded on politicians and the Home Secretary in particular.
On taking office as Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher immediately had the police on side with a 40% pay increase, David Cameron does not have that advantage, he faced increasing frustration in the House of Commons yesterday over future police budgets and this argument is now spreading into the wider public forum, his only counter balance is to offer more powers to the police which always carries the risk of repressive policy which does not convey the “consensual policing” that many regard as the cornerstone of British law enforcement. Talking of closing down or restricting the services of certain social networking sites is dangerous and unnecessary, it is not the services at fault it is the users. Conservative MP Louise Mensch has waded in with this:
“Common sense. If riot info and fear is spreading by Facebook & Twitter, shut them off for an hour or two, then restore. World won’t implode,”
Yet we baulk at the suggestions that other countries such as Burma, Saudi Arabia, Iran, or China take such oppressive action to censor the internet, those few small hours certainly would represent the thin end of the wedge and lead us down a darker path! Paradoxically it might even prevent the emergence of real community spirit evidence by the “broom army” in London. The whole concept of censorship and the choking of information is not something that I welcome, it is inherently not the British way and will damage good journalism (and yes we have to acknowledge that some of the news coverage fed the ambitions of the rioting crowds for a couple of days) resourceful journalist made very good use of Twitter to get around London, Manchester, and Birmingham to cover events and some of their stories and pictures have led to the identification of suspects and consequent arrests.
So we heard a few knee jerk reactions yesterday, the dust is settling, the politicians can resume their holidays, the magistrates will continue to confound, but has this emergency session of Parliament really changed the game? Well, yes it did a little, but not for the common good.
PM emerges bruised from the debate but not battered.
Haven’t done a “pea roast” for a while so I thought I’d throw a couple in today.
Apologies for the lack of posts recently, I’ve been doing a gargantuan research into the analytics of this blog which has now been running for six and a half years, a lot has changed over that time in terms of readership and demographics along with a huge increase in the amount of blogging, micro blogging, social networking, and the platforms which carry such content. Suffice to say that this blog either needs to keep up with the pace of change or close completely in advance of a new offering. There certainly will be changes over the coming months, the first of which will be a total overhaul of the sidebar links, many of which are now dead, followed by a complete alteration to the style sheet and template. Sorry it has taken so much of my time but it has been a necessary journey.
I managed to catch the first hour and a half of yesterdays debate in the House of Commons and the Prime Minister’s statement about the phone hacking affair, a debate in which he was seen to come out fighting and defended himself reasonably well against MPs lined up to beat him into submission. This was no “humble pie” moment, but a tough fight, Cameron had his back against the ropes and had to take on all comers, he was expecting a heavyweight onslaught from Ed Miliband but the Opposition Leader appeared to have lost some weight, or focus, and only managed to pepper “Call me Dave” with middleweight shots to the midriff, however it was enough to strengthen the nerve of his corner who sent in wave after wave of bruisers to rough up the PM. Cameron didn’t hide away, he stood in the ring for what seemed like 38 rounds and after the fight was roundly applauded by his supporters, including what looked like a 13 year old schoolboy journalist Daniel Knowles.
So a success for David Cameron, but Ed Miliband is not too unhappy either. The Parliamentary Labour Party seems satisfied enough with the few hits he has landed over the past fortnight. In fact, I just spotted him in Strangers’ Bar with (I think) David Miliband with a broad grin on his face. So both leaders are going into recess as secure as they could reasonably hope to be. Everyone’s a winner – everyone but Rupert Murdoch anyway.
The South Shields MP David Miliband must have been pleased, nobody mentioned his partying with the Murdochs!
The party, held two weekends ago, reveals the extent of the couple’s connections on both sides of the Commons.
As a jazz band played in the landscaped gardens of the £6 million property, Mr Freud, who was wearing leather trousers, greeted guests, including Education Secretary Michael Gove and Culture Minister Ed Vaizey. They drank champagne in the company of former Labour Cabinet Ministers Peter Mandelson, David Miliband, James Purnell and Douglas Alexander.
He’d also be pleased in knowing that news of his other work for US corporations was well and truly buried by yesterday’s
cream pie bun fight as he continues treading the path created by his mentor Tony Blair.
However it was good to be reminded by the PM that the vast majority of the phone hacking outrages happened some years ago whilst Blair, Brown, and Miliband were running the ship on to the rocks, as we recalled Rebekah Brooks statement the previous day that she’d been invited to Downing Street about six times a year by the last Prime Minister but so far not once by Cameron. The PM also got in a great right hook at Ed Miliband by reminding him that since Coulson is no longer in government employ, the only person with an ex News International hack working for them is the Leader of the Opposition!
As a “judgement day” fight it lived up to it’s billing, the referee had a great deal of work to do much of it in keeping the baying hoards quiet, some just wished that Bercow could manage to be a little more even handed and hush the Labour benches too. Miliband the middleweight could be judged to be both effective and dangerous in the opening rounds but he soon ran out of steam, the fact that he still has a former News International employee working in his corner will not have helped, but fortunately his troops ensured that Cameron took a number of body blows particularly about those conversations hinged around the BSkyB takeover, he kept ducking and diving to evade the shots whether they were “inappropriate” or not! One wonders why his corner men did not give him a better briefing on Labour’s tactic for this manoeuvre, surely it would have been far better for him to tell the ringside spectators that yes it was inevitable that people came to him and discussed the proposed deal, that’s just what we expect major companies to do with Prime Ministers, but actually I listened and fobbed them off, I told them I have no say in the matter, go and see Jeremy Hunt instead! Instead he stood there trying to parry the blows to the ribs round after round after round until with the final shot he just let out an anguished sigh! It was an unedifying end to a long fight.
Many will judge this fight as a draw and look forward to a rematch after the summer recess, Cameron’s judgement is still under question today and he needs to reveal the name of the company employed to vet Coulson on behalf of the Conservative Party when in Opposition, Miliband needs to get on with publishing the long list of contacts between himself and executives on News Corporation and News International, he also needs to consider if he should continue employing former Times man Tom Baldwin. Cameron scored his best shots by reminding the House that the priority now is to clean up the mess and revarnish the reputation of British journalism (for surely the phone hacking scandal can not be exclusive to News International), and to weed out those corrupt police officers who have been allegedly prepared to take bribes in return for information. He was adamant that the police investigation and the judicial enquiry must be allowed to go wherever the evidence leads them.
Miliband may think his summer holiday will be a cool breeze but he needs to ensure that Labour’s time in The Sun doesn’t leave him with nasty burn marks, whilst Prime Minister Cameron will head off to the coast still in a sweat, but with a dark cloud continuing to hang over him.
Was the Security Service involved in the hacking scandal?
As the story about Rupert Murdoch’s News International continues to evolve with more resignations and revelations one small written piece in Iain Dale’s latest platform seems to have evaded Fleet Street (for now) and it involves Gordon Brown’s lieutenant Tom Watson with his cleverly worded question to the Prime Minister earlier in the week. Former Tribune editor Mark Seddon writes:
So when earlier in the week, Watson asked the Prime Minister if the terms of the Inquiry into the Press would also include “rogue elements in the security services”, my ears pricked up. I have been wondering for some time how this level of serial criminality, this bugging and hacking from the Windsors to the Dowlers had seeming failed to register with our rather expensive intelligence services in MI5 and MI6. It seemed astonishing to me for instance that an officer in the Royal Protection Squad could happily flog private Royal contacts without anyone knowing. It also seemed surprising that no one seemed to know of the repeated attempts to access intensely private information on Gordon Brown. Some 4,000 people – probably far more – had their phones hacked, and no one knew what was going over in MI5?
So, apart from asking the Murdochs, Rebekah Brooks, Andy Coulson, various other journalists et al, perhaps the Commons Select Committee for Culture Media and Sport ought to request that Tom Watson appears before them next week. It would seem that he may have important information to share with them. If it is possible that members of MI5 or MI6 had helped journalists in their search for information to get a story at any cost then surely if it were proven, News International and News Corporation could not possibly pass any test that verifies them as a fit and proper organisation to hold a broadcast licence either here or abroad! They certainly ought not to be though of as fit and proper to take over BSkyB at any time in the future, irrespective of all the apologies offered this weekend.
If the Select Committee and the Judicial Enquiry find that this organisation has wormed its way into both the police forces of the UK and its Security Services, along with using its influence to manipulate politicians of all parties, then I’m pretty sure that public opprobrium would be so intense that shareholders might move to break up the company.
Although many will see Tom Watson’s moves as little more than “the revenge of Brown”, ultimately he may have done his country a great service.
“To listen to your messages press 1
To listen to your messages again press 2
To save your messages press 3
To delete your messages press 4
To allow an investigator to delete your message press 5
To send your messages to a newspaper press 6”
It should not take you long to decide NOT to have this newspaper in your home this weekend!
John Hemming MP challenges super injunction by naming Ryan Giggs in House of Commons
How does the government really intend to deal with the issues that these super injunctions have thrown up?
With “contempt” being shown by many thousands across the UK and the rest of the world, The Scottish Sunday Herald publishing Gigg’s picture on its front page yesterday, and now every newspaper, the BBC and other media outlets rightly reporting the proceedings in Parliament, the law has really been made to look an “ass”. Any law which does not have the popular consent required to legitimise it, or which fails to be adjusted in line with the national character, must be seen as a bad law. Let us be clear, nobody is denying that there are good uses for injunctions which prevent certain actions, but there must be clarity, openness, honesty and transparency, the courts must be open in the majority of cases for the press to report freely. A “super injunction” is little more than a gagging order sought by those with very deep pockets, who now look increasingly silly as they enrich certain legal firms in the sure knowledge that they and the courts have no power at all to stop people openly gossiping. Our journalists, newspapers and broadcast media deserve to be able to report freely, we are NOT supposedly living in state controlled conditions just yet!
Dominic Grieve’s response to John Hemming’s question was as flaccid and powerless as the decisions made in the High Court, the government’s Law Officers need to find a far more responsive approach which fits with what a modern society requires.
Telegraph associate editor moving on, calls for a general election.
Simon Heffer is a highly opinionated journalist of the old school, a man of letters and eloquence, he carried his pen like a sword at the Daily Telegraph where he flew the standard on behalf of its recently bewildered traditional readership. He shall be a bit of a miss to those who sought some inspiration and “attitude” from the voices of the centre right , I guess that leaves us just a handful of politicians espousing the “right” messages such as John Redwood, the ageing Lord Tebbit, and the rising stars Dan Hannan and Douglas Carswell, and the occasional offerings from Fraser Nelson writing as editor of The Spectator and Jeff Randall at Sky. Heffer has announced that he is leaving his post at The Telegraph, after 25 years, to “complete a major literary project”, in an internal email to colleagues he added:
“I’ve decided not to talk to anyone about my decision, except to say it is entirely amicable and it was time I moved on. And I shan’t, I think, be entirely outside the confines of Fleet Street.”
Heffer never hid his disdain for the soft centrist policies of David Cameron either as Leader of the Opposition or as Prime Minister, he mirrored the views of his readers over the direction and strategies chosen by the new “modern” Conservative leader and was suspicious about the coalition agreement from the very start raising concerns over its ability to deliver on its promise to eradicate the structural deficit by the end of this Parliament. He was also a robust defender of the English language and its use and nuances in journalism, he rigidly stuck to a style which was never quite “florid” or colourful in the manner of Littlejohn, but certainly plain, direct, and fastidiously correct. His style notes were so good the The Telegraph published them regularly either as reminders to their own journalists or as inspirational short essays to other aspiring writers. Perhaps he was wanting to be seen as walking in the footsteps of the great W.F. Deedes, I think his Lordship would have admired the contribution that Heffer made to political journalism and commentary in these Isles during his long tenure at The Telegraph.
One of his final articles lambasted the performance in government of Nick Clegg and his fellow Liberal Democrats and called upon the Prime Minister to consider metaphorically a quicky divorce to seek a new mandate from the country in a general election, Heffer considers that the time is about right with a number of factors that I see coming into the equation: Liberal Democrat fortunes are at an all time low they have lost their mandate, the new Labour leader Ed Miliband has spectacularly failed to spark interest amongst the electorate generally in England, more so in Wales, and disastrously so in Scotland, the effect of the reductions in planned departmental budgets will not begin to be felt until later this year and into next year, and the planned legislation for a five year fixed term Parliament would fail (for the moment) too.
I believe more strongly than ever that Dave should call a general election. His partners have lost the confidence of the country. There is open dissent in his Cabinet. Collective responsibility is breaking down. The Lib Dems seem on the verge of civil war. The Tories would win many Lib Dem seats if they went to the country now. Ed Miliband is damaged by his support for AV. He lacks the wholehearted support of his party. Labour has been badly wounded in Scotland. There simply won’t be a better chance of a Conservative victory than now.
The Right of the Tory party must mobilise and assert itself now, for I fear Dave is more minded to make concessions to his partners than to follow the instincts of his own people. After all, he plainly dislikes most of his notional supporters, and the Lib Dems serve the useful purpose of protecting him from them. But he should learn from Nick Clegg what happens when a leader chooses to fall out of step with his party. Dave is on a perilous course if he does not work out why his party’s own vote held up so well, and seek to take his party further in that direction
Having unexpectedly gained 81 council seats in the local government elections last week as the Liberal Democrats were almost decimated, it must be a tempting thought to those of a more traditional Conservative instinct to agree with Heffer, even in South Shields I met Tory supporters who were less than enthusiastic about the coalition agreement and quite a few who were angry at the government’s apparent acquiescence to the general drift of European policies. On the other hand, I did not find anyone in South Shields who were thirsting for another general election.
So how do readers vote?
Would you favour a quick ruthless general election decision to determine if one or the other of the major parties might secure a working majority, or would you view such a strategy as a terrible breach of trust between David Cameron and his deputy Nick Clegg?