It was painful to watch a professional journalist degenerate into the pub bore on the Daily Politics show.

I refer of course to the once respected Andrew Neil, for many years the Editor of the Sunday Times.

That was in his glory days, now he is reduced to acting the part of ‘shock jock’ titillating the jaded public appetite for politics, by sensationalising those who he can afford to offend. He picks his targets carefully.

This week he picked on Chris Mounsey, current leader of the Libertarian Party.

Mounsey was never going to get an easy ride from an interviewer who emerged from the sewer of Glaswegian political interests – Neil’s Editorship of the Sunday Times was one of marked opposition to anyone Oxbridge educated; so within seconds we had been reminded that Chris was educated ‘at Eton’ in dismissive tones.

An unwise crack for the current state of corrupt and intimidatory politics in Glasgow is such that I would not have thought anyone who acquired their political education in Glasgow would want to be defined on the basis of where they were educated; so be it Andrew, If Chris is defined by Eton’s reputation, then yours is defined by Paisley Grammar School’s.

Neil carried on bludgeoning Mounsey in Paisley intimidatory fashion by saying that the Libertarian Party was a ‘one man band’ – and then played to the gallery with a cheap joke about it being a ‘five man band’ – told that there were 450 members Neil said that amounted to ‘nothing then’ – if that is the BBCs idea of balanced air time for all political parties then it is little wonder the public have lost their appetite for politics.

His next line of attack was to say that ‘if’ the Libertarian Party ‘had pretensions to be a proper party’ – it is a proper party Neil, and as such should have been accorded the same respect as any other political party – then ‘do you think you should blog in the way that you do’ and proceeded to rake up comments Mounsey had made on his Devil’s Kitchen blog long before he became a political leader.

Oh dear! Was this Andrew Neil, the man who has pretensions to be a proper journalist? The man who the BBC had to pull an entire edition of This Week from their archives after he called Diane Abbott a ‘chocolate hobnob’? The man who famously said that some of our most senior and respected judges had ‘gone collectively bonkers’ when they upheld the right of the Daily Mirror to spoil a Sunday Times exclusive ‘in the public interest’. Was this that Andrew Neil now hauling Chris Mounsey over the coals for things he had written long before he became a political leader?

Indeed it was; not only unbalanced interviewing of a political leader but crass hypocrisy on display here.

Andrew Neil was always an ‘alternative journalist’. He came up through the hard school of Glaswegian politics and broke into main stream journalism at a time when it was dominated by old school types such as Sir Peregrine Worsthorne. The chip on his shoulder was always understandable. What is less explicable is the antipathy he showed towards an ‘alternative politician’, apparently believing that you have no right to break into this ‘market’ unless you follow the mores and norms of those already in the profession. Neil certainly didn’t do that – why should he ridicule Mounsey for founding a ‘different’ type of political party?

I am no fan of the foul mouthed rant, it tends to turn me off reading some of the blogs that may indeed be full of wisdom – I will never know. So, unlike some of the other Libertarian bloggers today who have been saddened by the quite understandable loss of the Devil’s Kitchen blog because it had started to impinge on Mounsey’s ‘day job’, I am not writing in support of that particular type of blog, but rather in criticism of a very poor standard of impartial journalism on Neil’s part which has had the consequence of forcing Chris Mounsey to close down his original Devil’s Kitchen blog.

There is currently a fashion, started by Nick Hellen of the Sunday Times, who outed ‘Belle de Jour’, and continued since by other faux journalists who vent their jealousy of the community spirit on the Internet by confining their investigative journalism to the easy task of ‘outing’ bloggers and attempting to trash their reputation – there have been a string of such posts recently rehashing readily available information on Guido Fawkes as though it was some sort of revelation. It is the worst kind of gutter journalism, on a par with the NOW and their ‘vicar’ revelations. How sad to see the BBC descend to that level.

Classic Andrew Neil T-Shirts available HERE for the Libertarian minded.

Letters From A Tory » First Class posts on Thursday

April 15, 2010 at 20:23

1
Saul April 15, 2010 at 18:40

Absolutely hilarious, just like a naughty little schoolboy squirming in his seat being admonished by the headmaster for calling Tomkins Minor a stinker and a swot. Mighty blogger indeed.

2
Fred Thrung April 15, 2010 at 19:01

Fair comment, Saul. But he wasn’t there as a blogger as Ms Raccoon’s piece made clear. He was there as leader of LPUK and had a reasonable expectation of being questioned accordingly. Yes, he needs more training and experience in the TV medium. As a cub reporter yourself I would have expected you to show more fellow feeling.

3
Saul April 15, 2010 at 19:18

If you put your head above the parapet in the political world, then there will not be a shortage of people queuing up to cut it off. My feelings on the foul mouthed bloggers are well known on here, perhaps he will now concentrate on putting his views across in a reasoned and respectable manner. Nobody likes foul and offensive language.
With regard to showing more feeling, he was hardly carried off on his shield was he.

As the saying goes, all publicity is good publicity.

As for Andrew Neill, if he is thrown Scooby snacks, then he can hardly be blamed for gobbling them up.

4
lenko April 15, 2010 at 19:31

It gets worse than that. All my life, all I have ever wanted to be is a competant blues guitar player. Sadly, I am all ambition and zero talent. When I play, strong men pale visibly and make excuses to leave.

So it is with Andrew Neil. He wishes desperately to be funny. His script is peppered with little oddments and asides, intended to have us in stitches. You can hear these jokes thudding as they hit the deck. The only mildly funny thing about him is the wig, and even this joke becomes sadder with passing time.

He always reminds me of those hippo’s in Fantasia… the ones in pink tutu’s.

5
Gloria Smudd April 15, 2010 at 19:34

I don’t think it IS a wig. I think it’s a bit of badly cut and glued carpet-tile.

6
Alan April 15, 2010 at 20:39

” Neil certainly didn’t do that – why should he ridicule Mounsey for founding a ‘different’ type of political party?”

Should he have afforded DK an easy ride? Neil tends to be robust with everyone.

The Brillo-pad is out there. He can’t be bargained with. He can’t be reasoned with. He doesn’t feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And He absolutely will not stop, ever, until you look a bit of a prat.

Haven’t watched the piece. Can’t really be arsed. Not sure what DK has to apologise for. Sounds to me like he was caught with his pants down – attacking his blogging was always going to happen but at least he is out there getting attention for his party.

DK’s verbal slurry strewn rhetoric has been considered and well aimed at people who generally spend their entire careers shitting in the faces of taxpayers and demanding more taxes, less liberty and more stamping on faces. We have a weighty and detached bureaucracy that isn’t even the tyranny of the majority – more people voted for some other bugger than voted for the representatives that formed the Government. DK’s potty mouth was a welcome contribution to the spectrum of political blogging for many reasons, not least because he didn’t mince his words but also because it is a vastly different approach to the mainstream who are huddled around the left but think they are the centre.

As a libertarian did he leap to his own defence to be offensive? Did he point out that attempting to control the language of politics (on such things as immigration, the EU, liberty etc) is one of the first jackboots to kick out at the rest of us from the Fabianist scum in Westminster and there is Brillo et al merrily lending a foot to maintain the status quo?

7
a n other April 15, 2010 at 20:58

“…before he became a political leader” – so everyone gets a free pass until the become a political leader? How come political leaders are different to anyone else?

8
JohnRS April 15, 2010 at 21:03

I wonder how “Wiggy” behaves in his non-professional life? Is he exactly as he appears on the box or does he “eff and blind” when he’s not on TV?

Chris M was there as a political figure not a blogger. The treatment he received, focussed on his non-LPUK activities, was disgraceful. He was there to talk about his party and was ambushed. I used to have a measure of respect for “Wiggy” and thought he was a professional ethical journo…no more. I thought the treament he received was disgraceful and will not be taking much notice of “Wiggy” in the future.

9
Saul April 15, 2010 at 21:54

It doesn’t really matter how Andrew Neil conducts himself in his private life.

Mr Mounsey’s words were out there for public consumption, he really can’t expect them not to be referred to. In my opinion he was brought to task for his offensive and juvenile posts. I’m sure he has his fans, as do many of his fellow bloggers, a quick look in the comments section of most blogs, will show as much and in many cases, much more vitriol. It seems to be a competition who can be the most offensive. If they want to be taken seriously then I suggest they clean up their acts.

10
Sarbanes Oxley April 15, 2010 at 23:01

It was a fit up, and as such is one that the Libertarian Party is extremely grateful for. Thanks for the new members and donations Andrew, much appreciated.

A tin of supa-glue and new door mat is winging its way to you

11
Bugger (the Panda) April 16, 2010 at 06:33

He is from Paisley Anna, not Glasgow.

12
Anna Raccoon April 16, 2010 at 07:43

Yeah, but he went to Glasgow University to study politics…….

13
Grumpy Old Man April 16, 2010 at 11:25

DK was invariably brilliant analysis obscured by Tourette’s syndrome by proxy. Now that Mr. Mounsey has gone legit, he perforce must polish the rough diamond with Fowler’s, Chamber’s and Roget. I suggest that he will be a far more effective communicator when he masters these tools.

14
Woman on a Raft April 16, 2010 at 11:39

Late last night Sarah Teather was doing Andrew Neil a favour by hanging on to the end and effectively filling-in as a guest on the dead spot, giving him a political guest to go with Ulrika Johnson. Nobody was expecting her to say much; she just filled up her dress and dutifully supplied him with a touch of glamour for his aging-playboy cabaret.

Neil suddenly zoomed out in drunken Scotchman mode and started to attack her, but it wasn’t very coherent. I’ve no idea what political point he thought he was making, but he’d made it clear earlier that he wanted to try to be hip and witty, so she was playing along for the benefit of his career rather than hers.

Teather blinked those big eyes, looking puzzled, as he’d given no previous indication of wanting to play rough. She’s not afraid of political argy-bargy and will happily take being sneared at by Paxman, but Neil had given not the slightest indication of wanting to do that kind of interview. She thought he was joking for a moment, like when you meet a pissed guest at a wedding and they say things they really don’t mean, but Neil kept on at it as if he was suddenly trying to do the interview of his life in the dying minutes of the irrelevant programme.

Teather looked really shocked, almost tearful, because the ambush was so unexpected. It is fair that as a politician she should be expected to fight her corner robustly (and I disagree with most of what she says and believes) but Neil suddenly growling about in drunken thug mode just made him look like an old guy who wasn’t the fighter he used to be, picking on the nearest person who off their guard.

15
Paul April 16, 2010 at 14:09

Neil has a reputation for being robust with everyone but its not so, I agree with Anna, he picks the easy targets to boost his reputation as a bruiser. His performance while interviewing Monbiot and Dellingpole on Climate change proved that. Monbiot was given free reign to run the party line while Neil sat on his hands, this despite him having written several blogs question AGW.

It only goes to prove what little respect there is at the BBC for non-Fabian views of the world.

16
Dick Puddlecote April 16, 2010 at 21:40

“Nobody likes foul and offensive language”

Yep, that’s why he is currently #14 in Wikio rankings after 4 years of blogging. They’ve turned away from him in droves, so they have.

Good grief.

17
Saul April 16, 2010 at 22:07

So that’s a great claim to fame then eh? My fans love foul and offensive language.

Yep.

TopTV rankings..Jeremy Kyle
Top Media star.. Katie Price
Top Magazine ….Nuts
Top Newspaper…The Sun

Who knows, now he has cleaned up his act he may move down a bit.