The Media Blog

This is news...?

This is an actual news story from today's Telegraph:

"The 'pristine' appearance of the Duchess of Cambridge and her sister Pippa Middleton when they were schoolgirls made other families feel 'rather hopeless', a mother whose daughter was at the same school as the sisters has revealed."

Did I mention the Telegraph put this story on the front page?

"The mother, whose child was in the same house as the Duchess at Marlborough College, said every item of clothing belonging to the Middletons would have "a beautifully sewn-in name tape"."

It seems strange that somebody would know such a detail, let alone remember it for perhaps 15 years or more and still be talking about it to this day. But not as odd as a newspaper considering these strange rememberings from the dim and distant past to be worthy of front page news.

It's not like the story gets any better:

"She said the pair also had the "smartest" tennis rackets and had enormous picnics on school sports' days."

"Enormous picnics". That may be the detail that clinched the front page spot. Though for the enormity of a picnic - that happened well over a decade ago - to be newsworthy I'm imagining a picnic blanket of at least half a mile long boasting a feast of such Epicurean splendour that the £10,000 per term Marlborough College had never seen its like before or since: a flock of roast swans, a solid silver paddling pool full of caviar and a life size marble rendering of the Trevi fountain, spewing Veuve Clicquot into crystal champagne flutes (for the parents, obviously).

"There was always something slightly galling about having your child at school with the Middletons."

...added the mother who may well have not stopped talking about it ever since.

"It made other families feel rather hopeless."

How empty must somebody's life be for them to be laid low with feelings of hopelessness over another family's picnic or the spiffingness of their daughters' tennis rackets?

And how empty must somebody's news list be to put that on the front page?

How the papers marked Thatcher's death

Unsurprisingly Margaret Thatcher, who died yesterday, featured on the front of every newspaper today. Also unsurprisingly, there is no concensus on the controversial politician.

The more balanced of the coverage opts to declare, with no risk of contradiction, that Thatcher divided the country. The i's "As divisive in death as she was in life" is probably the most honest and accurate of the front page depictions:

Like her or loathe her: A number of papers have reported that Thatcher left the country fiercely divided.

Not all of the papers present this reality, however. The Mail and The Telegraph set the tone of their reverential coverage with the same haloed photo of the former prime minister.

The Mail and The Telegraph aimed for 'halo' but ended up a little bit 'Liberace'. Times columnist Caitlin Moran said it looked like the album cover of "Thatcher Sings Mellow Melodies".

Not content with publishing airbrushed pictures of models, it seems some corners of the media are now attempting to airbrush a woman's whole career.

But such an approach does nobody much credit, especially not those newspapers holding themselves up as the guardians of free speech and openness while whitewashing the career of one of our most controversial prime ministers. You will find some newspapers have completely overlooked Thatcher's relationship with General Pinochet, for example. Others present smiling pictures of Thatcher with Mandela but make little mention of her branding him a terrorist, or her tacit support for Apartheid.

Of course, the likes of The Daily Mail and The Telegraph were always going to fondly remember Thatcher. Throughout the eighties she was the standard bearer for many of the political views they hold sacred and the parts of the country where she did the greatest damage were hardly the Telegraph or the Mail's traditional heartland. The fact is, many of their readers will have been among those who profited at the expense of so many under Thatcher. They won't care about those who got left behind.

But there is taking a narrow, partisan view and there is trying to rewrite history:

Thatcher spent her final days as a guest at The Ritz hotel, owned by The Telegraph's proprietors, David and Frederick Barclay. Their newspaper fondly remembers her today.

Recently The Telegraph wrote of a left wing conspiracy to "force the press to serve defined social and political objectives – at the expense, if necessary, of the right to free expression". Yesterday the paper turned off reader comments on its Thatcher stories because the public's opinions were starkly at odds with its own.

It is not surprising that readers took it upon themselves to attempt to redress the balance of The Telegraph's coverage. And we shouldn't be surprised that in doing so, some will have taken that to extremes.

An element of this criticism could of course be filed under 'right wing paper in right wing, shocker' but even for such a conservative and infamously right wing paper as The Telegraph, there is a wide and capacious line which can be walked between speaking ill of a deceased Tory Prime Minister and being factually accurate as a matter of historical record. 

The line-up of commentators it wheeled out lacked any semblance of balance. There was a solitary nod to the left with Telegraph blogger Dan Hodges though all he could muster was 124 words urging Thatcher's critics to "set aside... our political differences and acknowledge...the achievements of the first women [sic] to hold the highest office in our land".

The likes of The Mirror and more so The Guardian have openly conceded that Thatcher divided people and have shown a fairly professional level of respect for views on both sides of this political, social and cultural rift.

Meanwhile it is surely no coincidence that the most clicked article on The Telegraph's website this morning was a piece about how other newspapers covered Thatcher's death. Perhaps even Telegraph readers expect some balance.

While all this was going on, The Sun offered up the most perplexing front page of the day. Perhaps unusually fearful of a backlash, The Sun chose not to try to even tackle the balancing act between the rights and undeniable wrongs of Thatcher's career, instead focussing on where the body was found:

'Old lady dies in bed': It looks like The Sun was trying almost too hard to say nothing of interest.

Down with this sort of thing...

The Telegraph and The Daily Mail have expressed shock today that the BBC marked the closure of Television Centre with a party for staff.

Readers of a gentle disposition might want to sit down for this next bit.

Apparently there was drinking. And dancing. Somebody may or may not have smoked indoors and there may even have been some sex - either in a studio or an office, The Telegraph isn't quite sure because it's pretty much cobbled together its entire report based on a couple of tweets and an article on the Daily Mail's website:

The Telegraph reports:

"The farewell gathering, held in three recording studios, was a raucous affair at which BBC employees drank and danced until the early hours."

The Heathens!

Helen Williamson, a producer, wrote: "At the BBC's 'goodbye TVC party'...did a nostalgic walk of the donut & heard someone s------- in one of the offices. Sackable offence?

Now, I REALLY hope the word The Telegraph has timidly censored there is "shagging".

If it is "shitting" I don't even want to know.

But if two consenting adults had sex at a staff party is this really news?

There's part of me that hopes that they were also dressed as Pudsey the bear and a Cyberman, doing it against the TARDIS. But it still wouldn't be news.

The Telegraph continues:

"Just days earlier, the BBC was accused of "over indulgence" after broadcasting extensive coverage of its lat [sic] days at Television Centre... Viewers branded the coverage "self congratulatory claptrap" and pointed out that it was not a story for anyone who did not work for the BBC."

Among the many things The Telegraph doesn't quite find room to mention in its article - such as the fact BBC staff had to buy tickets for their party which had a cash bar - is the fact that a great many viewers enjoyed the coverage. A survey of Media Blog readers found the majority supported the amount of coverage dedicated to Television Centre by the BBC.

Funnily enough, The Mail also overlooked the detail of the party being self-funded by BBC staff and the similarities between the two articles don't end there or with the use of exactly the same tweets...

The Mail: However, presenter Vernon Kay – married to Strictly Come Dancing host Tess Daly – was reportedly stopped by security as he left the building with a dressing room sign.

The Telegraph: Presenter Vernon Kay, who is married to Strictly Come Dancing host Tess Daly, was reportedly stopped by security as he left the building with a dressing room sign.

The Mail: In a second evening of celebrations on Friday, Madness performed live outside the building. Journalist Julia Raeside said: 'Drunk watching Madness. Might smoke indoors. It's that kind of night.'

The Telegraph: The following evening, last Friday, Madness performed live outside the building. Journalist Julia Raeside wrote on Twitter: "Drunk watching Madness. Might smoke indoors. It's that kind of night."

The Mail: Presenter Dave Berry added: 'Off to ghost town BBC television centre to work a stunning TV show project and also to pinch some stuff.' The day after the farewell party, photographer Ray Burmiston said: 'Feels like a ghostown [sic]...

The Telegraph: Presenter Dave Berry wrote online: "Off to ghost town BBC television centre to work a stunning TV show project and also to pinch some stuff." The day after the farewell party, photographer Ray Burmiston said: "Feels like a ghostown (sic)...

The Mail: Although most of the interior had been stripped of furniture and equipment...

The Telegraph: Although much of the building, in White City, west London, had been stripped of furniture and equipment...

Perhaps when it comes to giving the BBC a kicking the two newspapers are happy to share the workload.

See also:
BBC TV Centre remembered
Has the BBC been self Centred?

Now it's front page news...

The Times has decided the arrest of Tina Weaver, former Sunday Mirror editor, as part of the ongoing Operation Weeting investigation into phone hacking is front page news today:

What a difference a year makes. Exactly 12 months ago, when Rebekah Brooks, former News Of The World and Sun editor and CEO of News International, was arrested The Times just didn't see such arrests as being worthy of the front page: 

Funny that.

Telegraph criticises man for "doing his job"

The papers may be more accustomed to criticising members of the public for not working, but today The Telegraph seems intent on going after a man for doing the job he's paid to do:

The Telegraph reports:

"The Princess Royal's daughter was left unimpressed by the actions of overzealous security who appeared not to recognise her on the opening day of the [Cheltenham Festival]."

Of course, there is every chance the security guard did recognise her, but that wouldn't change the fact his job is to stop people walking across the Parade Ring as the horses are coming in.

"The 31 year-old... was prevented from crossing the parade ring after one race...and was seen in animated discussion with the guard, who refused to budge."

And the kids in Africa think they've got it tough.

Fortunately this non-story had a happy ending for all concerned:

"She was eventually let through..."

...presumably once the horses had passed.

However, that didn't stop The Telegraph contacting the security guard's employers:

"Organisers tonight backed the unnamed guard who was "doing his job" by keeping the safety of guests paramount."

By the way, it seems very unlikely the man is actually "unnamed". He is probably not a latter day version of Clint Eastwood's Man With No Name, wandering the Wolds of Gloucestershire looking for horseracing meetings to steward. Rather, it seems more likely The Telegraph wanted a name and the event's organisers quite rightly declined to provide it.

"A Cheltenham Festival spokesman said: "After each race we have a line of security guards in the middle of the parade ring, whose job it is to stop people walking from one side to the other in front of the horses... That is what happened in this case. We would support the actions of the stewards 100 per cent."

"He was doing his job and looking after the safety of the public, which at that point she is a member of."

Nobody likes over-officious security guards or stewards who make you walk the long way around because "rules is rules" but stopping people walking out in front of horses seems a reasonable rule to enforce, as these things go.

When print deadlines attack...

Spare a thought for football writer Rory Smith who went to bed last night knowing an article he'd written about the tight-lipped diplomacy of Chelsea manager Rafa Benitez was due to appear in The Times today: 

Within minutes of Smith hitting save on that article, Benitez had launched into a rant during a post match interview, firing off shots at whole sections of the Chelsea fan base and criticising the bosses who had hired him. That left Smith hastily writing an article for The Times website headlined: "Unhappy at players, fans, his title: then Chelsea manager Rafael Benítez snaps".

And all of this before Smith's article about Benitez's quiet diplomacy had even been read in the morning paper.

Newspapers light ironic fire under Mantel

The papers today are full of outrage about author Hilary Mantel savaging Kate Middleton in a lecture at the British Museum. The Standard claims Mantel "launched a tirade" against the pregnant Duchess. The Telegraph called it a "character assassination". The Daily Mail called it "an astonishing and venomous attack" and gave it the whole front page (right).

According to The Telegraph:

"[Mantel] who won Man Booker Prizes for Wolf Hall and Bring Up the Bodies, said in a lecture that the Duchess had been perceived as having "no personality of her own, entirely defined by what she wore".

Mantel said, the Duchess of Cambridge had been seen as "a jointed doll on which certain rags are hung". These days, she was seen as "a mother-to-be, and draped in another set of threadbare attributions".

Mantel was undoubtedly making some strong points about Kate Middleton and the royal family but there was a clear theme throughout her lecture which has been removed altogether by many newspapers, taking with it some important context.

For example, The Telegraph reported:

"...the author argued the Duchess's life so far would be viewed as "nothing": "her only point and purpose being to give birth"."

The full quote was:

"Once she gets over being sick, the press will find that she is radiant. They will find that this young woman's life until now was nothing, her only point and purpose being to give birth."

Of course, it's no surprise the likes of The Telegraph and The Mail have edited out Mantel's suggestions that it is the media who have contributed to this perception of Kate as either an expensive clothes horse or a mother-in-waiting. Because that is exactly how the young Duchess has been portrayed in the media; her clothes commented upon and her behaviour scrutinised for signs of pregnancy.

After all, The Telegraph, so outraged by Mantel's suggestion that Kate has been objectified, is the paper which brought us the Duchess of Cambridge Style Watch... 

This section of its website includes news of Kate's £35,000 wardrobe and a like-for-like comparison of her bottom (no really) versus that of her sister:

Hilary Mantel suggested Kate is portrayed as a glorified mannequin.

In fact, over the past few years The Telegraph has busied itself with everything from stories about what wellies Kate wears... 

...er, probably not.

...to the time she wore the same dress as her mother (she was also making her first public speech... but never mind that, what was she wearing?)

Mantel had the audacity to claim the Duchess was "defined by what she wore".

Then, at the first whiff of baby news The Telegraph was a frontrunner in speculating about the contents of Kate's womb alongside the Daily Mail.

Mantel even flagged one occasion when the media were able to combine Kate's ability to wear clothes with her ability to get pregnant: 

"When her pregnancy became public she had been visiting her old school, and had picked up a hockey stick and run a few paces for the camera. BBC News devoted a discussion to whether a pregnant woman could safely put on a turn of speed while wearing high heels. It is sad to think that intelligent people could devote themselves to this topic..."

None of the media criticising Mantel have picked out that quote. And if there was any doubt that much of Mantel's criticism was aimed at the media portrayal of royalty her closing plea seems to put the matter to rest:

"We are happy to allow monarchy to be an entertainment...Adulation can swing to persecution, within hours, within the same press report. Diana was spared, at least, the prospect of growing old under the flashbulbs, a crime for which the media would have made her suffer.

"It may be that the whole phenomenon of monarchy is irrational, but that doesn't mean that when we look at it we should behave like spectators at Bedlam. Cheerful curiosity can easily become cruelty. It can easily become fatal. We don't cut off the heads of royal ladies these days, but we do sacrifice them, and we did memorably drive one to destruction a scant generation ago.

"I'm not asking for censorship. I'm not asking for pious humbug and smarmy reverence. I'm asking us to back off and not be brutes."

Again. You won't see those quotes in too many newspapers.

The Telegraph is clearly 'hacked off' at Hugh Grant

The Telegraph seems to have taken Hugh Grant's calls for press regulation far more personally than some other papers.

Yesterday The Telegraph's Mandrake column ran an article about Hugh Grant which was utterly lacking in any kind of news or public interest. Today Mandrake is again concerning itself with the Hollywood actor and Hacked Off campaigner:

"Hugh Grant was so angered by the tabloids' alleged intrusion into his private life that he became a campaigner for state regulation of the press. On Saturday, however, the foppish actor used a social-networking website to disclose that Tinglan Hong, the mother of his daughter, Tabitha, had given birth to their second child.

"Am thrilled my daughter now has a brother," he announced to his 77,000 followers on Twitter.

The Telegraph is being deliberately misleading here - and more than a little disingenuous - in suggesting some kind of hypocrisy on the part of Grant. Somebody choosing to share personal details on their own Twitter account is very different to somebody having no choice what personal details are shared by the media.

But more importantly, Mandrake has chosen to carefully edit Grant's tweets and ignore his claim that he was only sharing this personal information on Twitter because of questions from the media:

The Telegraph also suggests Grant has announced this news in order to create publicity for a forthcoming movie:

"Grant's announcement is...conveniently timed. On Monday, he is due at the gala screening of Cloud Atlas, the first film in which he has appeared on screen for three years."

Mandrake may have decided to ignore this Tweet from Grant which explained the timing: 

(Hat tip @DrEvanHarris) 

The Telegraph's 'six degrees of Hugh Grant'

The Telegraph's Mandrake column has a piece of gossip it thinks is worth sharing today:

"The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge's holiday in Mustique has attracted much attention... Mandrake is, however, much more interested in Mark Cecil, the hedge fund tycoon, who... hosted the Middleton family ...on the Caribbean island in [January 2012]"

At this point it is only fair to say that if you are expecting something newsworthy you might want to look away now...

"The tycoon's wife, Katie Cecil, is a close friend of Hugh Grant, the foppish actor."

And that's all we're told. 

Really.

Leaving me to wonder if this is perhaps a new kind of puzzle. Perhaps The Telegraph will from now on publish an apparently irrelevant fact each week related to something which happened over a year ago, giving us only the crumb of a celebrity name to work with and we then have to work out why it might possibly be interesting.

Let's call it 'Six Degrees of Hugh Grant'.

I'll give this first one a go:

1) Hugh Grant is a privacy campaigner against press intrusion; 2) Somebody Hugh Grant knows owns a holiday villa where the Middletons stayed in 2012; 3) Kate Middleton has been the focus of much press intrusion; 4) the UK media are generally all for a bit of intrusion and as such are a bit down on Hugh Grant at the moment; 5) The Telegraph is letting Hugh Grant know that it's been researching his friends via an otherwise inexplicable mention of his name... 

But that's where I run out of steam. I really don't think I've cracked this at all.

Who knows, maybe The Telegraph just wanted to give its readers a treat by finding a tenuous reason to run with a big photo of Hugh Grant because they think he's yummy. And it is the weekend:

Filed rather ambitiously under Royal News...

 

Lazy racism or lazy satire?

Those of us of a certain age will remember when television writers would build a whole sitcom, such as 'Mind Your Language', around the idea that 'foreign man he no speak good English'.

Thirty years on this tired joke seems to have found a new lease of joyless tedium on the pages of broadsheet newspapers.

Of course it's all done in the name of irony now.

Matthew Norman writing in The Telegraph recently brought this joke out of retirement and spread it across a whole 1,000 word article about jobs being outsourced to China:

"In decadent imperialist Western powers like America and our own United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northerly Ireland, tale of US software writer who delegate all duties to Chinese lackey for small fraction of own pay and sat in office idling whole time caused laughter..."

It went on.

And on.

And on.

By the time Norman confirmed his laboured set-up was a joke within a joke about lazy racism, any joke there had ever been had long since curled up and died, urging its readers to go on and save themselves.

Officially, the medical report will say the joke died of old age, but its friends will always suspect it died of boredom.

However, it seems Giles Coren over at The Times liked what he saw, writing a piece in broken English for this Saturday's paper about Polish becoming 'the second language' in the UK.

The opening paragraph tells us: 

"Many of you is no doubt read in famous Times newspaper, yesterday before yesterday, how "Polish is now England's second language". This very interesting small information piece. For what is probable esteemed Times readership not aware: your columnist actual Polski man. Is come in boat from small willage..."

Textbook stuff. Assuming the textbook is 'How To Write Like a Twat'.

It went on:

"...today I am celebrate Polish is become number two language entire of England not count Wales by write whole opinion column topical observation of week's news for first time in actual Polish language." 

Some critics, such as Hanna Kozlowska, associate editor of Poland Today, took to Twitter to brand Coren's piece racist:

It certainly isn't the first time Coren has angered sections of the Polish community with his writing.

In defence of Coren, others suggested it was just a staggeringly unfunny piece.

But whether lazy racism or just very lazy satire, it seems remarkable The Times hit publish on Coren's offering. It's possible to imagine even the Daily Mail's Richard Littlejohn - a master of both lazy racism and lazy satire - might have thought twice about putting his name to such a piece of writing.

And Littlejohn probably loved 'Mind Your Language'.

January's top 10 Media Blog posts

1. The Daily Mail turns the creepiness up a notch
2. The Daily Mail limps on with 'Big Fat' campaign
3. Haven't ice seen you somewhere before?
4. Newspaper apology of the week
5. Why Ofcom should now ignore 'Big Fat' complaints
6. Piers Morgan's car crash interview with US gun nut
7. Mail blames Whitehall "outrage" on porn and 'drunk girls in short skirts'
8. Mail follows "leggy beauty" with "all grown up" teen
9. Journalists: How to spot the 'blue tick' trick on Twitter
10. Kate Middleton hands the Mail another story

Harry turns his guns on newspapers

All of the newspapers today have run versions of the same Prince Harry interview, despite one area covered in detail being the intrusive way he believes the UK press still behave towards him and his family.

As a result some have had to pick their quotes very carefully.

There is clearly no love lost. The animosity was obvious from the moment the Prince explained to ITV why he was doing interviews this week:

"I never wanted you guys to be out here but there was an agreement made to invite you out on the deal that the media didn't speculate before my deployment. That's the only reason you lot are out here."

Welcome to Afghanistan!

The Sun's decision to run a naked photo of the Prince cavorting in Las Vegas was clearly still a particularly sore point.

The Prince said:

"I probably let myself down, I let my family down, I let other people down. But at the end of the day I was in a private area and there should have been a certain amount of privacy that one should expect... the way I was treated [by newspapers], I don't think is acceptable."

The Sun has used parts of this quote but edited it carefully to include a further detail about the party guests in Las Vegas which makes it look as though the Prince's ire was aimed at the people who took the photo, rather than the newspaper which put it on the front page:

"Harry ...said he wished that what happened in Vegas had stayed in Vegas.

"Strangers he invited to his Sin City VIP suite last August told how no attempt was made to confiscate their cameraphones.

"But Harry insisted: "I was in a private area and there should be a certain amount of privacy that one should expect."

Readers of almost all papers will have missed out on the Prince discussing the upset and anger newspapers can stir in him:

"If there's a story and something's been written about me, I want to know what's being said. But all it does is just upset me and anger me that people can get away with writing the stuff they do. Not just about me... My father always says, 'Don't read it'. Everyone says, 'Don't read it, because it's always rubbish'."

"I'm surprised how many in the UK actually read it.

"Everyone's guilty for buying the newspapers, I guess, but hopefully nobody actually believes what they read. I certainly don't."

One example the Prince gave of media intrusion was the pressure and press speculation which he says forced the early announcement of William and Kate's pregnancy.

"I think it's very unfair that they were forced to publicise it when they were. But that's just the media for you."

The majority of papers seem to have missed that quote too. And a crack about phone hacking at News International didn't make the cut for many editors. 

It's probably safe to say he's not a fan. It will be interesting to see how the media now responds. 

Who just got 'owned'...?

The Guardian and The Observer have unveiled a marketing video, claiming - with tongue firmly in cheek we should assume - "the weekend just got owned" by the sister papers:

 

It's really very good. Great production values, nice bit of humour and a cameo by Hugh Grant.

What more could you want?

Cake, you say?

Well the Guardian and Observer even sent out cakes to appreciative ad agencies and the like celebrating their ownership of the weekend:

The weekend is now "owned" by The Guardian and The Observer. Apparently.

But it hasn't taken long for online troublemakers to have some fun with this campaign. One pedant sent the Media Blog the below chart which appears to be questioning what - or who - is really getting 'owned' come the weekend:

 

Details, details...

Tomato "wonderpill" repeats on UK newspaper editors

It seems a few newpapers, including the Daily Mail, Telegraph, Express and Metro have discovered a miracle pill to take away the pain of a January slow news day.

The Daily Mail today tells us…

"No one would much like the idea of eating 6lb of tomatoes a day. But if their goodness was popped in an easy-to-swallow pill that you were told might prevent strokes and heart attacks you would probably be putting in an order tomorrow. Researchers believe they may have come up with just that after trials on the supplement Ateronon."

According to the Mail today this pill is the "first time the key health benefit of [a] Mediterranean diet has been pin-pointed".

Remember that.

Elsewhere The Express was so bowled over by this medical breakthrough it put it on its front page today, claiming an incredible list of health benefits, far beyond the Mail's mere claims about strokes and heart attacks:

"A SUPER pill made out of tomatoes could hold the key to beating arthritis, diabetes, heart disease and even cancer. British scientists believe the tablet harnesses the health-boosting properties of the Mediterranean diet."

"The wonderpill, called Ateronon..."

I wonder if this wonderpill might also do anything for the memory?

Because, here is the Daily Mail back in 2009:

"Baked, sun-dried, turned into relish or fresh in salads, tomatoes are one of our favourite foods. And last week, when a dietary supplement containing condensed tomato extract was launched, it was hailed by the medical world as a heart medicine.

"The pills, named Ateronon..."

Not only did the Express also cover the story back in 2009 but it also had it on the front page again:

"The wonderpill, called Ateronon, could save hundreds of thousands of lives, heart experts revealed yesterday. British scientists have found a way to put all the antioxidant goodness in the skin of ripe tomatoes in a pill."

What's more, the Express - all the way back in 2009 - even told us...

"The tablets [are] a kind of 'Mediterranean diet in a pill'..."

So even that bit wasn't really all that new.

The Metro has also found the "tomato wonderpill" repeating on them, as has The Telegraph, having originally written about it in 2009. 

Whatever the truth about this "SUPER" "WONDER" pill and its health benefits it seems one thing is for certain - this is not the first time it has been sold in to newsdesks.

Back in 2009, the NHS responded to news of this "wonderpill":

"To date, no studies have assessed the long-term health effects of this pill. Ultimately, only long-term clinical trials will be able to establish if Ateronon has long-term health benefits and whether these outweigh the benefits of a diet rich in tomatoes."

Has that research now happened? Is that the element of this three-year-old story which has moved on significantly?

To quote the Express:

"Ian Wilkinson, director of [Cambridge] university's clinical trials unit, said: "...we need more trials..."

"Peter Kirkpatrick, a Cambridge neuro­surgeon and medical adviser to CamNutra, which has developed Ateronon, said...: "It is too early to come to any firm conclusions..."

"Mike Knapton, associate medical director at the British Heart Foundation... warned: "We still say the best way to get the benefits of a Mediterranean diet is to eat plenty of fresh fruit and vegetables."

It seems the story hasn't really moved on that much. 

2012: The Year in front pages

2012 has been an eventful year in news and media and one captured brilliantly by some inspiring, provocative and hard-hitting front-pages. 

The most visually stunning front pages of the year were produced by The Times during the Olympics with a series of wraparound front and back pages, the first of which was this shot on the very first morning of the Games. 

Once the Games began all eyes were on Team GB and once the gold medals started flowing, Bradley Wiggins provided The Times with an image worthy of its golden masthead:

The highlight of the Olympics for many was 'Super Saturday' when Mo Farah, Greg Rutherford and the face of the London games, Jessica Ennis struck gold in the Olympic stadium. The Independent on Sunday perfectly captured the iconic nature of Ennis's triumph: 

Mo Farah also won gold on Super Saturday and when he completed his incredible double of the 5,000m and 10,000m the Sunday Times rose to the occasion, aided as in all these cases by stunning photography:

The Olympic Games were followed by the most successful Paralympic Games ever which started with a jaw-dropping opening ceremony and delivered some of the most inspiring performances of an unrivalled sporting year. Across the board the newspapers all gave the Paralympics pride of place on their front pages:

One of the most poignant front pages of the year was produced by The Mirror following the publication of the Hillsborough Report on 12 September. The report confirmed a major police cover-up had attempted to falsely blame the victims for the stadium disaster and The Sun newspaper had played a major part in spreading malicious lies. The Mirror on 13 September referenced The Sun's infamous and entirely false 'The Truth' headline for its own front page:

It has not been a good year for public inquiries or the strained relationships between the media, the police and the government. At the heart of that love-hate-triangle was the Leveson Report which finally published its recommendations, only for David Cameron to reject them before he had even had time to read them. The Independent made clear its thoughts on the ultimate futility of Leveson's efforts:

The need for the Leveson Inquiry was cited often and vociferously during some of the year's more controversial media stories, including when The Sun decided to publish naked pictures of Prince Harry cavorting behind closed doors in a Las Vegas hotel suite. The publication of the actual photos followed a front page recreation of Harry's naked cavorting by The Sun using a reporter and an intern.

The papers were united in their over-the-top coverage of news that Kate Middleton was pregnant. It brought to an end months of intrusive speculation by the papers (see: Press speculation, a royal baby and a link to Leveson). The Sun marked the occasion with a trademark pun:

A major story throughout 2012 was the issue of tax avoidance - from multinational companies such as Starbucks to individuals such as Jimmy Carr who The Times exposed in June:
Another far more grave story throughout the year has been the harrowing conflict and killing in Syria. The Independent on Sunday's stark front page warned readers of the gruesome images inside the paper while spelling out the horror of the Houla massacre: 
The year also saw the victory of President Barack Obama in the US election, seeing off the challenge of Mitt Romney to secure four more years in the White House. The Times marked the occasion with a return of the wraparound front page:

A tragic story at the end of the year saw the latest gun massacre in a US school. The Independent on Sunday again ran a very stark, sombre front page, telling the heartbreaking story of a heroic teacher who gave her life to protect her students: 

A question of trust

Trust among the British public in the media and politicians has tumbled over the past decade. Statistics released by YouGov suggest ITV, the BBC, the Liberal Democrats and midmarket newspapers such as the Daily Mail are the biggest fallers in terms of overall public trust. ITV leads the way in losing the faith of the public but the BBC is not far behind in terms of lost trust. However, the BBC is also the most trusted today, with ITV second, ahead of broadsheet newspapers. The research, which was commissioned by The Sun, found red top tabloids were least trusted in 2003 and remain so today:

(Source: YouGov)

Dropped so quickly?

Like most people working in and around the media the Independent on Sunday editorial team will have been glued to BBC Radio 4, 5Live and BBC Breakfast this morning as George Enwistle the BBC's Director General went from studio to studio on what soon became clear was likely to be his farewell tour. 

Perhaps anticipating Entwistle may not even last the weekend the Independent on Sunday gave itself the best possible chance of updating its front page with the minimum of fuss as its first and second editions clearly show: 

The question mark in the headline didn't last long. But then, nor did Entwistle.

An excellent Times reader letter

John Scrivens, we salute you...

(Hat tip JonHill).

The Sun cries foul over BBC's Guardian subscriptions

The Sun has complained this week that "lefty BBC bosses" order more copies of the traditional broadsheet newspapers than red tops and mid-market tabloids.

Most alarming to The Sun is the fact The Guardian tops the list, despite its relatively low circulation.

Between 1 April 2010 and 28 February 2011 the BBC bought 59,829 copies of The Guardian. Second was The Times (51,384), third was The Telegraph (48,968) and fourth was the Daily Mail (45,553). Fifth on the list is The Independent (43,709), sixth is The Sun (42,905), followed by The Mirror (35,756).

That's an average of 249 copies of The Guardian per day (Monday to Friday) across the BBC, versus 214 copies of The Times, 204 copies of The Telegraph and 190 copies of The Daily Mail and 178 copies of The Sun.

The numbers are being presented as proof of the BBC's left-wing bias and The Sun has wheeled out Tory MP Philip Davies to complain.

"It seems that the BBC is almost keeping The Guardian afloat," said Davies, who has subtracted the BBC's 249 copies from The Guardian's circulation of 210,000 and managed to come up with the idea The Guardian would sell "hardly any copies at all" without the BBC.

"It goes to show that the BBC does have an inherent left-wing bias in its attitude," he added.

Left wing media

But if this exercise is about proving BBC staff are exposed to a disproportionate volume of left-wing media in the workplace then the numbers are hardly supportive.

The BBC bought 227,614 copies of right-leaning newspapers, versus 140,780 left-leaning newspapers. So there were 60 per cent more right-leaning papers being passed around the BBC's corridors of power than left-leaning papers. What's more, the number of copies of the right-wing Sun bought by the BBC outnumber copies of its direct left-wing competitor The Mirror by more than 7,000 copies.

The Sun's argument is that the number of papers the BBC buys should reflect each paper's market share. But the BBC knows better than anybody that the value of the media lies in more than pure numbers. Strictly Come Dancing may draw a bigger audience than the BBC News, but the BBC invests more in news than celebrity dancing competitions.

Content and relevance are important.

For example, it is easy to believe The Guardian on a Monday, which for the duration of the period stated had a standalone media section (subsequently rolled into the main paper) is more relevant to more departments within the BBC than The Sun.

Leveson Inquiry

To pick a random example, when Andy Coulson resigned as David Cameron's communications chief in early 2011 it would have been a story of considerable internal interest right across the BBC and all other media companies, from news desks to legal teams and board rooms.

The Guardian's coverage of phone hacking and the subsequent Leveson Inquiry has arguably been more in-depth than The Sun's.

Looking just at the total numbers gives us no idea as to whether they fluctuated over the course of a week, month or year or which departments the papers went to or what the reasoning was behind that allocation. So some important context is almost certainly lost.

We don't know for example whether the BBC took a bulk delivery of The Guardian during the MediaGuardian Edinburgh International Television Festival in 2010. It would make sense if they had given the subject matter and the fact the Corporation's Director General Mark Thompson delivered the prestigious MacTaggart lecture that year.

To be fair, The Sun did cover the MacTaggart lecture in 2009 when James Murdoch was laying into the BBC, but I've struggled to find any mention of Thompson's 2010 speech.

Given The Guardian's greater focus on the television industry, the media and the arts, it seems natural a major broadcaster would invest in more copies of the paper year round.

The fact the BBC still bought more than 160,000 copies of the UK's tabloid papers during this period, suggests any departments where they would be relevant are more than amply catered for. 

So all these stats really tell us about the BBC is that it buys a lot of newspapers, which you'd think even The Sun would agree is a good thing for all concerned.

Meet the team behind those Times Olympic wraps

Here's the team from The Times discussing their hugely successful Olympic wraparound covers. I think we can all allow them to be a little pleased with themselves...