« June 2011 | Main | August 2011 »
Peta Buscombe, the chair of the Press Complaints Commission which has come in for heavy criticism in recent months is to step down, it was revealed today. Which is all very interesting but it tells us nothing of what she's like as a neighbour. For that we need pop star George Michael, who today offered up the following tweets:
Still, it's nice to know the PCC took some complaints seriously.
The cover of the latest edition of the New Statesman (right) is certainly an eye-catching affair with rampant swastikas marching on a map of Europe.
It's a dark and deeply disturbing image, underpinning some powerful and thought-provoking editorial.
But is it just me, or when coupled with the strapline flagging David Blanchflower's entirely unrelated George Osborne article along the bottom of the page, does the whole thing start to feel a little bit 'Dad's Army'.
All together now: "Who do you think you are kidding Mr Osborne..."
Leicester City footballer Paul Gallagher is clearly making good use of the closed season. Yesterday he signed up to Twitter, joining the likes of fellow professionals Rio Ferdinand and Wayne Rooney.
For those footballers who have grown distrustful of the media, Twitter is a great channel to communicate directly with fans and show them the true personality behind professional football's tarnished facade. So what insight into the life of the modern footballer did Gallagher choose to share first with his followers?
And they say all the romance has gone out of the game. Understandably the aforementioned Mrs Gallagher was a little shocked:
(We should probably assume she is talking about Twitter.) But if she was at all worried about what her Mum thought, she needn't have fretted, because her mother - also on Twitter it would seem - found it so funny she retweeted it:
Following the attrocities in Norway, the media went into speculation overdrive. Armed with very few facts but clearly fearful of silence in a time of breaking news, and keen to get something up - whether true or not - many began to flood Twitter and 24 hour rolling news channels with unconfirmed reports and speculation.
The Sun's first edition yesterday saw the paper brand the awful events an "Al-Qaeda Massacre" and liken it to the attacks in the US on the World Trade Centre.
Importantly, at the time The Sun went to the presses there was no confirmation that Al-Qaeda or any Islamist group was responsible - nor was there any evidence to support the connection The Sun was making. And now, with a suspect under arrest who has reportedly admitted carrying out the attacks, it appears this knee-jerk tendency in some quarters of the UK media to stoke anti-Islamic fears at every opportunity may have been well wide of the mark.
The Independent
It perhaps speaks volumes too of how quickly the Independent even jumped to its own conclusions that it chose to deploy its religious affairs correspondent within minutes of the explosion in Oslo to produce an "analysis" (a word which might normally signal an expectation of some facts).
That paper's article began:
"As of yet there has been no claim of responsibility as to who might have carried out today’s bomb blast... but suspicions will inevitably fall on Islamist militants..."
Such a sentiment very quickly proved to be a self-fulfilling prophecy as what followed was a string of facts, coincidences and opinions unrelated to events in Norway packaged up with some rent-a-quote "expert" comment and positioned as encouragement to Independent readers to consider Islamists the likeliest perpetrators.
Defending his article on Twitter, the journalist behind the Independent's hasty analysis admitted "it is speculation but legitimate" before adding: "The public want to know who might be behind an attack, so we give them our best educated guess."
I honestly have no idea how the public's hunger for facts can ever be well-served by an "educated guess" but sadly the belief that speculation can substitute for fact in such cirumstances is clearly widely held as these were not the only examples.
Hat tip to everybody who flagged this typo from the BBC (screengrab via Tim Allen):
The website of the Rupert Murdoch-owned tabloid The Sun has been hacked.
For a brief time on Monday evening visitors to the website were redirected to a lookalike website, www.new-times.co.uk, which carried a bogus report on the death of the under-fire media tycoon.
Demand to see the hack (screenshot captured right) soon brought the website crashing down.
The hack has been claimed by the LulzSec group (Wikipedia entry) and to prove their point they subsequently began redirecting The Sun's website to their own Twitter account:
Regular observers of the Daily Mail's love/hate relationship with cancer scare stories may have been surprised to see a headline on the paper's website this week promising to unravel "cancer myths".
The article duly set about all manner of strange notions about what might cause cancer, such as antiperspirants:
"An e-mail made the rounds a couple of years ago falsely linking antiperspirant with an increased risk of breast cancer. Cancer Research UK and the American Cancer Society have rubbished the claim, saying it is simply not true."
So there you go. Ignore anybody who tries to scare you with stories about antiperspirants causing cancer. Such as the Daily Mail for example:
Some of the other cancer causing myths exploded by the article which appeared on Thursday included "wearing tight bras":
"All cancer experts say that even if wearing a tight bra somehow reduces blood supply around your breasts there wouldn't be any increased 'toxicity' and nor would normal cells suddenly become cancerous."
Well that's reassuring.
But who's been going around saying tight bras cause cancer? That would probably be the Daily Mail in articles such as 'Is your bra bad for you?', published today - just three days after the Mail unravelled the myth, didn't like the look of it all unravelled, and promptly ravelled it back up again.
I could continue...
Anybody watching ITV last night, can't have failed to notice the amount of television advertising bought up by the Mail on Sunday and The Daily Star Sunday.
The Mail's "upgrade to the Mail on Sunday" line and the Star's rather unconvincing "a newspaper you can trust" reminded us these ad campaigns were booked with the sole intention of targeting News Of The World readers looking for a replacement Sunday tabloid. But other than buying up advertising and cutting their cover prices, what have these tabloids really done to win new readers:
The Mirror has perhaps come closest to replicating the News Of The World's stock in trade, claiming an alleged sex scandal involving a rather old hat Premiership "love rat". The Daily Star Sunday meanwhile has drawn on its sister publication OK! to offer former News Of The World readers their weekly dose of low grade celebrity tittle-tattle and The People offers up a half-hearted royal non-story and claims a Coronation Street storyline as "exclusive" news.
It's not a great showing from the red tops.
Elsewhere, The Mail On Sunday leads on price above a 'Clare's Law' headline which echoes the News Of The World's 'Sarah's Law' campaign of more than a decade ago. And it's business as usual at The Sunday Express, its headline proclaiming fresh injustices against the good honest, British-born taxpayers - as it does most weeks - while its freebies (vegetable seeds and porridge oats) are hardly going to stop anybody in their tracks.
In truth it looks as though the papers campaigning to claim the News Of The World's crown spent time and money on their TV adverts without giving much thought to content over the past nine days since the closure of their largest rival was announced.
Of course in its final years the News Of The World became stuck in its own rut of kiss and tells and occasional hidden camera stings, all washed down with a sea of commoditised celebrity gossip. But its rivals' inability to react to opportunity makes me think it's more likely the News Of The World's demise - and the ill-will it has generated towards the tabloid press - will now simply expedite the loss of all Sunday tabloids rather than provide a meaningful boost for any other publisher.
I wonder if Rebekah Brooks agreed to front these new adverts for budget airline RyanAir? The answer is almost certainly 'no'. Brooks of course would never wittingly promote something cheap and tacky...
Back in 2009 a dark and deeply strange story crossed the wires: it detailed the arrest of a Russian criminal who broke into a hair salon in the town of Meshchovsk. The attempted burglary went horribly wrong for him though when he was beaten, tied up and kept as a "sex slave" for three days by the salon owner, reportedly fed on nothing but Viagra for the duration of his ordeal.
This sorry and sordid saga ended with the would-be burglar and his captor both being arrested, drawing this bizarre quote from the salon owner, angered that her victim had reported her to the police:
"What a bastard. Yes, we had sex a couple of times. But I've bought him new jeans, gave him food and even gave him 1,000 roubles when he left."
A strange tale got stranger this week though when a host of UK tabloids excitedly ran the story as 'news' more than two years after it had happened. One after the other, starting with The Mail they blindly cut and paste the names and the quotes without thinking to check when the story happened, or presumably whether it was even true or not:
Here is the final front and back page of The News Of The World:
Dan Wootton, showbiz editor at the News Of The World, and Times columnist Caitlin Moran had a bit of a public spat on Twitter this morning, below (read from the bottom up). It seems to have died down now - or maybe they just took it 'outside' and settled it that way, toe-to-toe in the Wapping car park:
Graphic: bettween.com
Fearing an escalating crisis that would, unchecked, have infected the entire Murdoch empire, James Murdoch has announced the News Of The World is to print its last edition this Sunday.
After 168 years the paper is closing - sacrificed in an attempt to save the wider organisation and key individuals within.
Staff who have never hacked a phone in their lives are losing their jobs.
Forget for a minute the fact The Sun may go seven days-a-week, or the notion this might be the quickest way to get Rupert Murdoch's acquisition of BSkyB back on track. Whatever the other outcomes the UK's most powerful Sunday newspaper is closing.
It is closing because it wasn't as powerful as the massed anger of a public sickened by the gross negligence of its management. Yet it is also closing in an attempt to save the self same management team and the parent company who presided over the paper's darkest days.
The closure follows a week of public outrage over phone hacking and alleged bribery which lead advertisers to pull their support for the paper and saw newsagents refusing to stock it on their shelves. There will now be job losses - sadly, almost certainly not the right ones - as Murdoch's two red tops become one.
James Murdoch delivered the news to staff this afternoon. Here is his statement in full:
"I have important things to say about the News of the World and the steps we are taking to address the very serious problems that have occurred.
It is only right that you as colleagues at News International are first to hear what I have to say and that you hear it directly from me. So thank you very much for coming here and listening.
You do not need to be told that The News of the World is 168 years old. That it is read by more people than any other English language newspaper. That it has enjoyed support from Britain’s largest advertisers. And that it has a proud history of fighting crime, exposing wrong-doing and regularly setting the news agenda for the nation.
When I tell people why I am proud to be part of News Corporation, I say that our commitment to journalism and a free press is one of the things that sets us apart. Your work is a credit to this.
The good things the News of the World does, however, have been sullied by behaviour that was wrong. Indeed, if recent allegations are true, it was inhuman and has no place in our Company.
The News of the World is in the business of holding others to account. But it failed when it came to itself.
In 2006, the police focused their investigations on two men. Both went to jail. But the News of the World and News International failed to get to the bottom of repeated wrongdoing that occurred without conscience or legitimate purpose.
Wrongdoers turned a good newsroom bad and this was not fully understood or adequately pursued.
As a result, the News of the World and News International wrongly maintained that these issues were confined to one reporter. We now have voluntarily given evidence to the police that I believe will prove that this was untrue and those who acted wrongly will have to face the consequences.
This was not the only fault.
The paper made statements to Parliament without being in the full possession of the facts. This was wrong.
The Company paid out-of-court settlements approved by me. I now know that I did not have a complete picture when I did so. This was wrong and is a matter of serious regret.
Currently, there are two major and ongoing police investigations. We are cooperating fully and actively with both. You know that it was News International who voluntarily brought evidence that led to opening Operation Weeting and Operation Elveden. This full cooperation will continue until the Police’s work is done.
We have also admitted liability in civil cases. Already, we have settled a number of prominent cases and set up a Compensation Scheme, with cases to be adjudicated by former High Court judge Sir Charles Gray. Apologising and making amends is the right thing to do.
Inside the Company, we set up a Management and Standards Committee that is working on these issues and that has hired Olswang to examine past failings and recommend systems and practices that over time should become standards for the industry. We have committed to publishing Olswang’s terms of reference and eventual recommendations in a way that is open and transparent.
We have welcomed broad public inquiries into press standards and police practices and will cooperate with them fully.
So, just as I acknowledge we have made mistakes, I hope you and everyone inside and outside the Company will acknowledge that we are doing our utmost to fix them, atone for them, and make sure they never happen again.
Having consulted senior colleagues, I have decided that we must take further decisive action with respect to the paper.
This Sunday will be the last issue of the News of the World.
Colin Myler will edit the final edition of the paper.
In addition, I have decided that all of the News of the World’s revenue this weekend will go to good causes.
While we may never be able to make up for distress that has been caused, the right thing to do is for every penny of the circulation revenue we receive this weekend to go to organisations – many of whom are long-term friends and partners – that improve life in Britain and are devoted to treating others with dignity.
We will run no commercial advertisements this weekend. Any advertising space in this last edition will be donated to causes and charities that wish to expose their good works to our millions of readers.
These are strong measures. They are made humbly and out of respect. I am convinced they are the right thing to do.
Many of you, if not the vast majority of you, are either new to the Company or have had no connection to the News of the World during the years when egregious behaviour occurred.
I can understand how unfair these decisions may feel. Particularly, for colleagues who will leave the Company. Of course, we will communicate next steps in detail and begin appropriate consultations.
You may see these changes as a price loyal staff at the News of the World are paying for the transgressions of others. So please hear me when I say that your good work is a credit to journalism. I do not want the legitimacy of what you do to be compromised by acts of others.
I want all journalism at News International to be beyond reproach. I insist that this organisation lives up to the standard of behaviour we expect of others. And, finally, I want you all to know that it is critical that the integrity of every journalist who has played fairly is restored."
Here's a photo taken at last night's Huffington Post launch event, where the Twitterwall was undoubtedly the star of the panel debate:
