Unless you have a poorly canary, or some other obscure use for recycled dead trees – it is officially a waste of money relying on newspapers  for factual and balanced reporting during this election period.

Following on from my article on Friday regarding local newspaper coverage of candidates standing for election on May 6^th, I have been continuing my trawl round the local papers.

Eventually I arrived at the Sutton and Cheam Guardian which is part of the South London Guardian and Surry Comet group.

They had a two page spread in their paper edition, containing 8 potted biographies with photographs of the likely local candidates in Paul Burstow’s constituency.

As you might imagine since he has been the MP for the area since 1997, Paul Burstow’s biography appeared first.

The usual blub; a quote to establish his political views, a run down of his successes and failures as an MP, and an allusion to his hobbies including his ability to beget children with someone he was legally married to.

In general, the type of information you would expect from your local paper to help you to make an informed choice in the voting booth.

This was followed by a similar piece on the Green candidate, Peter Hickson; the BNP candidate John Clarke; and the Labour candidate Kathy Allen. All four had been asked to provide a biography detailing their education and general good works, and this had been padded out in some cases by information trawled from the newspaper library or Internet.

Next up was Martin Cullip, a candidate for the Libertarian Party.  As a fellow member of the Libertarian party I was interested to learn of his views.

Martin’s ‘biography’ was unusual to say the least. It gave no personal details nor quoted any political beliefs, in fact it appeared to be positively frivolous.

Martin Cullip, Libertarian

Plays with Surrey Darts team and helps maintain their Toe the Oche website.

The website cites his hobbies as The Cranberries, AFC Wimbledon and “running across all eight lanes of the M25 at junction eight dressed only in a basque and a pair of Pretty Polly 15 denier stockings”.

Martin was not hard to track down, he is a well known local business man, and was listed in the phone book.  It took me all of five minutes, from another country, and I’m a non-fact checking, non-professional  journalist. I called him.

Why, I asked, would you give such a frivolous interview to the local paper; your habit of running across the M.25 in 15 denier stockings is hardly likely to encourage your chances of being elected, why not take the opportunity to put forward your Libertarian beliefs?

Mr Cullip exploded. His wife, he told me, had been in tears all night.  He said:

“I knew politics was dirty, but I wasn’t expecting the local press to join in! My wife went from being immensely proud to almost in tears in a couple of hours. I’m more thick-skinned, but not happy.”

The story he had to tell was quite riveting. He forwarded to me the e-mail which he had sent the Sutton and Cheam Guardian in response to their standard enquiry to all candidates for a biography. It read as follows:

Age: 42

Where I live: Gillian Park Road, Sutton

Job & Career History: I run a business in partnership with my family. It was started in 1995 by myself and my Father and now comprises four partners (the other two are my sisters). We employ 95 people and operate a fleet of 55 passenger transport vehicles, specialising in wheelchair accessible transport for children with special needs and vulnerable adults. Prior to setting up the business, I worked in a variety of local private businesses as a part-qualified accountant.

Hobbies: I enjoy recreational writing and have previously written regular monthly columns for a magazine for nearly a decade. I also love to cook. I watch cricket with my 9 year old son and am a fan of AFC Wimbledon, who I have supported since formation – I was previously a fan of Wimbledon FC since 1976. I have also been involved in administering local darts since the early 1990s. I was Chairman of the Surrey Darts Organisation until business commitments became too onerous to continue last summer.

Any other interesting facts: I have a black fluffy cat called Bisto.

Election before?: No

Campaign slogan: I haven’t really got one, except the libertarian belief in individual liberty, personal responsibility, and freedom from government as long as one doesn’t initiate force or fraud against the life, liberty, or property, of others.

I’ve attached a photo, it’s rather large but having written for magazines, I know you appreciate highish resolution pics. Hope that’s OK.

I have a business and home land line but am always busy and out and about, so best number for contact is 07947-********* (Ed. number deleted by AR)

If you’d like anything else, of course I’d be very happy to help so please don’t hesitate to get in contact.

All the above information was totally ignored by Julia Kennard, the reporter who had contacted him –with the notable, and damning, exception of the photograph.

You might think that the journalist had retreated into satire and sarcasm only when describing the candidates of the smaller parties, but straight after Martin Cullip’s entry was the one for Phillipa Stroud, Conservative, David Pickles UKIP, and Brian Hammond, Jury Team – and in each case Ms Kennard had returned to her previously fair and balanced mixture of information gleaned from the candidate and her own research.

So Martin Cullip is a sizeable local employer, in a highly specialised and laudable enterprise, happily married with children. Why would the local paper not want their readers to know that? And where did they get the extraordinary quote regarding the 15 denier stockings.

A little more digging and I discovered that the quote came from an obviously satirical piece written some eight years ago, and reproduced without permission from a copyrighted web site.

The owner of that web site was amongst the many people distressed by this attempt to ridicule a local business man who had paid his own deposit to stand in the election. The web site owner had complained to the newspaper editor:

I was bitterly disappointed yesterday to find that material from my web site has been used, in my view, to completely discredit an election candidate for the parliamentary seat for Sutton and Cheam.

At first I thought there may have been an honest mistake, as the article was on our web site listed as “About Me”. I have been running the web site for a year now, and I had quite forgotten that it was still there.  However, after re-reading the entire page it is absolutely clear to anyone over the age of ten that it is nothing more than tongue-in-cheek.  This leads me on to believe that you have published material that is inaccurate and distorted which, in the run-up to a general election, is both shameful and a breach of the PCC Code of Practice.

Local newspapers across the country are having a hard time financially; many are in danger of folding altogether. Roy Greenslade has said that “two assumptions needed to be made: that journalism is good for society and democracy, and that newspapers are worth preserving”

He has commented before on the way in which newspapers taunt Bloggers.

“No army of bloggers, no TV or radio station, no non-profit journalism collective, no foundation-supported task force of political and government reporters will ever do the job so well.”

It is the common refrain of the newspaper industry – society needs them, they are the professionals and the systematic fact checkers, unlike the army of citizen Bloggers.

It seemed only fair to give Ms Kennard’s editor the chance to comment, I told him that I was writing an article on his coverage of the electoral candidates.

Mathew Knowles, Editor of the Surrey and Cheam Guardian, committed professional  journalist and fact checker came out of his bunker and down the telephone line like a Panzer tank with the accelerator jammed on. Not at his best first thing on a Monday morning, obviously. Hopefully. Maybe that is his best. Sadly.

‘Are you saying that what was printed wasn’t true’?

‘Yes. I am’. I went on to ask what he intended to do about it.

‘Are you accusing me of having an agenda?’

I very pointedly said that far from accusing him of having an agenda, I hadn’t so much as guessed at his possible motives, I was merely interested in what he intended to do to redress the balance.

Yes, you are you’re accusing me of having an agenda – ‘It doesn’t have to be in purdah’ quoth he.

‘In purdah’, saith I? ‘I don’t understand the sense in which you are saying purdah’.

‘You know what Purdah means’.  We don’t have to do ‘balanced reporting’.

Beg pardon? You don’t think you are under any obligation to show balance in your reporting? I was near speechless by now.

I asked the Local Newspaper Association:

Anna,

In response to your query this morning, statutory impartiality requirements apply only to broadcasters.

Best wishes, Paul

I turned to Roy Greenslade, the Ex-Editor of the Daily Mirror and current Professor of Journalism and Blogger extraordinaire at the Guardian.

Is this true? I asked him, that a newspaper is under no obligation to employ balanced reporting when describing parliamentary candidates during a General election – indeed it is, the Electoral Commission say there is no obligation on newspapers (as distinct from broadcasters) to be fair and balanced in their election coverage!  However, Mr Greenslade also had this to say:

“It’s a disgraceful piece of journalism to lampoon a serious general election candidate on the basis of an unverified source. Once again, it underlines the dangers of reporters working online and then failing to check the truth of the content, especially when the website material is controversial.

“Rather than defend the obvious slur on the candidate, the editor should be asking himself some searching questions about the quality of his reporting team, his own editing skills and, in fairness, whether he has adequate staffing. Editorial budget cuts have reduced the amount of time reporters can spend on stories, encouraging sloppy journalism.”

Quite so Mr Greenslade, and thank-you for replying so promptly – when you wrote that neither you nor I knew the end of this saga – for this afternoon the web site was updated, and Mr Cullip received the following e-mail from Ms Kennard, fact checker and professional journalist, a follow-up to her earlier e-mail where she had claimed that she did not receive Mr Cullip’s biography in time – a blatant lie, for she had used the photograph which was attached to it, and was not available from anywhere else, remember?

From: Julia Kennard [mailto:jkennard@london.newsquest.co.uk]
Sent:19 April 2010 12:57
To:Martin Cullip
Subject:Re: Website

Dear Martin,

Thank you for your email. Let me reassure you that this was a genuine mistake and does re-emphasise the danger of trusting web content.  My group editor is aware of the situation and my deputy editor has already discussed this with the Libertarian Party and we will be running a correction and a piece on your real achievements in this week’s paper.

Best wishes

Julia Kennard

Now that I have finished laughing at this admission that professional journalists rely on the blogosphere for their information – and my sides are still aching, I can continue writing.

Dear Ms Kennard, this doesn’t re-emphasise the danger of trusting web content at all. It emphasises the danger of relying on your local newspaper for factual and informed news – if you want to read satirical nonsense written eight years ago, you can do so for free on the web. There you will see it in context and understand it for what was – a satirical piece.

Why spend money on ‘sloppy journalism’? Now that we know that your paper defends itself on the basis that it does not ‘have to’ employ balanced reporting – unless you have a canary cage that needs re-lining, I can think of no good reason to invest in a copy of the Sutton and Cheam Guardian.

My good wishes to Mr Cullip – I hope he does well in the election. He deserves to.

UPDATE: Oh Dear, oh dear, I do hope the reporter concerned wasn’t this Julia Kennard –

http://www.facebook.com/julia.kennard

– supporter and cheer leader for Brian Hammond, the independant candidate standing for Sutton and Cheam under the Jury Team banner.

Tell me it isn’t so? Whoops!

UPDATE TWO: Looks like the same person who claims to be a Sutton Guardian reporter to me. H/t OH.

http://twitter.com/JuliaKennard

anonApril 29, 2010 at 16:06

This blog in my opinion is written by a journalist (that’s you Anna) who
has far too much time on her hands. a completely one sided view and also is
encouraging a online bullying by posting the facebook profile! It is a very
serious matter called victimisation.

Anna
RaccoonApril 29, 2010 at 16:38

As opposed to Ms Kennard of course…….

The UK
LibertarianApril 29, 2010 at 13:21

Fantastic Journalism Anna, makes up for the atrocious work you so
diligently set about correcting. The universe is back at peace.

lordsomberApril
23, 2010 at 19:25

And I thought American journalism was bad.
Almost embarrassed to admit I
went to J-School. (in advertising — don’t shoot me.)

Alan Thrower
April 22, 2010 at 17:06

Anon:

“I have been running the web site for a year now, and I had quite forgotten
that it was still there”

If even the owner of the site had forgotten about it, is it any wonder?

Besides, who would truly believe that someone can be abhorrent enough to
purposely twist a satirical article to imply sexual deviancy?

AnonApril 22, 2010 at 12:03

Whether or not the journalist is right, shouldn’t a person who is standing
as a parliamentary candidate be a little more careful about what is published
about them on the internet? As soon as you put yourself in the ring you can
expect greater public scrutiny and as such any skeletons in the closet (or
easily misinterpreted satrirical pieces on motorway running in tights) should
be swiftly hidden from view. Not great work from the paper maybe, but
carelessness from the candidate and betraying a lack of forethought and
knowledge of how to play the politics game.

GregsterApril 22, 2010 at 10:18

And, error or not, the ‘correction’ really should be a prominent grovelling
apology.

GregsterApril 22, 2010 at 10:16

“Subbing error”? If, as Anna says, the M25 sentence comes from an obviously
non-serious article, it’s misrepresentation. What ‘great journalist’ could
possibly defend using such a thing in a serious election article?

BobApril 22, 2010 at 08:48

It seems that you have taken a, albeit very unfortunate, subbing error and
turned it into some kind of loony conspiracy, naming and shaming a journalist
and trying to out her as some kind of monster.

I am a journalist, I know the local press and I know the pressure
sub-editing operations are under.

Matthew Knowles is a great journalist and I think you probably caught him
at a bad moment. The paper has said it will publish a correction so what’s the
problem here?

Judging by the length and details of your blog post Anna, I would politely
suggest you have a bit too much freetime on her hands.

CharlesApril 22, 2010 at 08:06

How ironic. I would have thought that the Libertarian position would be
that a newspaper is free to print what it wants.

Anna
RaccoonApril 22, 2010 at 08:23

You misunderstand Libertarianism Charles.

2MacApril 22, 2010 at 00:01

Regardless of whether she is a fan of the Jury Party or not. The article
was written in such a way to riducle a candidate.

I hope the advertisers in the local area distance themselves from such a
rag. The journalist is a fault but the editor carries the can for the
publication.

Utterly disgracefull. If the Libertarian Party candidate was from a
minority he would be able to sue for all sorts of reasons. If he is just an
ordinary working man he will have to just make do.

Screaming Banshee
April 21, 2010 at 23:28

You can join Martin Cullip’s Facebook page here. Don’t forget to invite
lots of people.

MayweedApril 21, 2010 at 19:29

Anna, I completely agree that this is shocking, and lazy and all those
things.

But in the interests of fairness (as posted over at OJB) I’d like to say
that Julia Kennard is (probably) only a fan of Brian Hammond on Facebook
because she needed to leave him this message: (click Just Others on his page
and you’ll see it)

Dear Brian,
Would you please contact me this morning regarding election
coverage. I need some more details urgently and am struggling to make contact
with you via telephone.
My number is 0208 330 9541
Julia Kennard, Sutton
Guardian newspaper.

That doesn’t sound like someone who’s a supporter or who knows him well,
does it?

And as he doesn’t appear to have a Facebook profile, only a fan page – and
as if you’re not a fan, you can’t leave a message on his wall – she couldn’t
have left him that message without becoming a fan.

I’m a journalist and I’ve “fanned” people on Facebook that I don’t agree
with at all specifically to leave them messages. So don’t jump to conclusions.
It may be lazy and sloppy and inexcusable but I doubt it was maliciously
motivated.

Anna
RaccoonApril 21, 2010 at 20:22

That’s fair comment Mayweed.
I can’t say that I’ve ever made myself a
fan of someone just to leave them a message – if I wasn’t a fan of theirs I
wouldn’t be wanting to leave them a message!
I hadn’t seen the message,
just had my attention drawn to the fact that she was listed as a fan of his
– and not being a prolific facebook user myself, I wouldn’t know what to
click on to see his messages.
Anna

Anna
RaccoonApril 22, 2010 at 02:17

Mayweed,
I am indebted to you for your comment both here and on the
‘professional’ on-line journalist’s blog.
Having now been given an emergency lesson in the
journalistic art of facebook research courtesy of one of my readers,
something sadly lacking from my expertise as an amateur, I have now
‘cracked’ Ms Kennard’s message to Mr Hammond.
It is a most useful
resource isn

joApril 20, 2010 at 20:06

Brilliant piece of real journalism. Well done for naming , shaming and
investigating, maybe some will learn… But I won’t hold my breath.

SabotApril 20, 2010 at 19:50

I am gobsmacked. And I marvel at your self control, Anna.

Sarbanes Oxley
April 20, 2010 at 18:00

Just listened Radio 4′s ‘balanced’ report from Sutton & Cheam,
apparently only a Conservative and Liberal Democrat are standing in this seat
!

RonniesoakApril 20, 2010 at 17:05

The same comment here as I put on Al Johom’s report of the story: The power
of the Media is very scary, able to reduce a candidate that they don

anybodyApril 20, 2010 at 15:42

Truly outstanding piece of work, we are bound to see more of this sort of
junk in the next two weeks! – It should be broadcast nationally by the BBC
.

di gestiveApril 20, 2010 at 14:35

What Ms Kennard did defies belief, I am heartily glad that she has been
uncovered as a silly and unethical hack.

Screaming BansheeApril 20, 2010 at 13:30

Put Julia Kennard into this anagram website
and you get ANAL, DIRE JUNK

Uncanny.

Anna
RaccoonApril 20, 2010 at 14:09

Dire Anal Junk – Well done Screaming Banshee!

London
LoverApril 20, 2010 at 12:29

Good site, well done!

Alan Thrower
April 20, 2010 at 11:27

I take it someone has e-mailed Julia Kennard with this story? Perhaps she’d
like to come clean.

Woman on a Raft
April 20, 2010 at 10:55

If it is any comfort to Martin Cullip, he’s made 4Chan, which the resident
dude tells me makes him Cool-ish, and even they are annoyed, commenting:

recently the sutton gaurdian had this listed for their candidate taken
from some website, with nothing about the policies at all or any of the
information he gave them in an interview.

The bad news is that the original dismissive entry was syndicated across
the Newsquest papers, which has implications for LPUK as a search on Cullip
would not necessarily pull-up the corrected entry.

Newsquest is held by Gannet, a US operator. Cullip might consider taking
this up with Roger Green (ex-EMAP) who is Newsquest’s head of digital media,
to make sure that the corrected entry gets propagated across the Newsquest
Group.

http://www.newsquest.co.uk/people/

(Scroll down, Green is the last entry).

It is not so much about Cullip himself as the responsibility of a paper to
make sure it gets relevant information about a party out there, particularly
when it seems to have been affected by the personal agenda of the reporter. If
it wanted to run a silly old joke, it could have, but it ought to have
included the relevant material as well.

No wonder the editor was fretting. He’s in line for a little talk with
Green about the mission statement of the NewsQuest group:

Newsquest’s objective is to have market-leading brands disseminating
local information in a number of different and simultaneous ways, which
reflect the views and aspirations of the communities they serve. Our
multi-media brands must be the authoritative source of information that
customers can trust; being willing to listen but not afraid to question.
Newsquest is market-led and technology-driven and with all its products – both
print and electronic – the company’s aim is always to provide optimum
service to customers.

LPUK deserves the same as every other party; to be investigated and pulled
up when it is talking rubbish or behaving hypocritically. It doesn’t deserve
to be ridiculed merely because the reporter is already bezzie mates with
another candidate.

VetnurseApril 20,
2010 at 10:51

I never read local papers now l have an extra reason not to. What a lowlife
bit of scummy work.

TimOfEngland
April 20, 2010 at 10:27

Juila’s tweets have gone private too

But we have her email address….

GregsterApril 20, 2010 at 10:05

This link works when logged in to Facebook

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/julia.kennard

Old handApril 20, 2010 at 09:32

http://www.facebook.com/julia.kennard
“The page you
requested was not found.”

Ho, the nutter is running scared, well done AR.
Writing as a journo
trained in the old school, said JK would have been on her bike in my day.

Its all part of Liebour’s “prizes for all” ethos. Failure must be rewarded
and applauded.

I’ve shagged Darling’s
eyebrowsApril 20, 2010 at 09:25

Oh my! Perhaps her route through journalism will take her via Johnston
Press. She certainly has the qualifications. Then on, of course, to a nice
cushy spinning job with whoever else loves to tweet and tell the world about
herself but then protects her tweets.

Well done Anna and well done Iain Dale for giving this more Google
juice.

Um ErApril 20, 2010 at 09:05

facebook link produced “page not found”

Old
HolbornApril 20, 2010 at 07:56

http://twitter.com/JuliaKennard

Anna
RaccoonApril 20, 2010 at 08:09

Thanks OH, you posted that whilst I was updating the site to include her
Facebook page – a Brian Hammond supporter it seems, the independant
candidate standing in Sutton and Cheam under the Jury Team banner!
Yes,
that is her, same picture, well done.

Alan Douglas
April 20, 2010 at 07:04

AR says : “Eventually I arrived at the Sutton and Cheam Guardian which is
part of the South London Guardian and Surry Comet group.”

So was that a typo for SurrEy, or sLurry ? I vote for slurry, based on
their quality of research.

Alan Douglas

Anna
RaccoonApril 20, 2010 at 07:14

Alan Douglas,

Nice one – this illustrates the dangers of writing without an experienced
team of sub editors and fact checkers behind you!

Furor Teutonicus
April 20, 2010 at 06:56

XX Bill Sticker April 20, 2010 at 03:35

Good work. I occasionally wonder how some so called

Old Slaughter
April 20, 2010 at 06:54

“I’ve been Raccooned. And it hurt!”

Bill
StickerApril 20, 2010 at 03:35

Good work. I occasionally wonder how some so called ‘reporters’ have the
nerve to cash their paychecks.

Lawson
NarseApril 20, 2010 at 03:03

Well done Anna and my sympathies to the Cullips.

Isn’t it a shame, that the other prospective candidates, didn’t feel the
need to complain to the editor and demand fair treatment for Martin.

Martin and the Libertarians, can take comfort in the fact that they have
had such a worrying effect on the incumbent encumberence. Long may they do
so.

SubrosaApril 19,
2010 at 23:28

Anna, how lucky you were not to be dealing with a Scottish paper. Doubt if
you’d manage further than the switchboard. Super sleuthing.

David BeanApril 19, 2010 at 23:11

Just wanted to add some congratulations on an excellent, and important,
piece of work. In the name of fairness this would have been important whatever
the political affiliations of the candidate you went out to bat for, but as a
classical liberal-inclined member of the Conservative Party I have particular
sympathy for this gentleman’s plight, as doubtless like you I’m only too aware
of the entrenched biases faced by those of our bent, whichever political party
we call home.

simontm
April 19, 2010 at 22:40

Interesting that the editor calls purdah. He is quite right that newspapers
don’t have to show balance in their publications but purdah?

Purdah is what civil servants call this time. Essentially all political
activities cease (meant to cease but that’s my bias). All that is meant to
happen is just the day-to-day running of the country, ticking over so to
speak, until the next government comes in.

Usually, at least in Westminster, it means they are mostly in the Wessie
Arms, the Chairmen, Red Lion or Sanctuary from around 4pm!

That’s
NewsApril 19, 2010 at 22:33

I would guess that she wrote that piece as a joke and that this, instead of
the right version, was accidentally sent for publication.

Rather than putting their hands up to this stupidity they tried to defend
an indefensible position and made matter much worse for themselves.

Both the editor and the journalist are now damaged goods.

Dick
PuddlecoteApril 19, 2010 at 22:03

Simon Gibbs: I can see your approach here, a libertarian ideal would be
that rules should not be necessary, but it’s clear from this example that harm
has been caused to the family entirely because of irresponsible reporting.

Perhaps there shouldn’t be rules, but the reporter is still guilty of
causing harm. I’m wondering if the kids will suffer too now they are back at
school after holidays.

Quite unforgiveable for the sake of a journo’s joke. If it were me, I’d be
tempted to lodge a PCC complaint irrespective of any retraction. The genie
can’t be put back into the bottle in this instance.

Simon
GibbsApril 19, 2010 at 21:50

Can I assume that although the law is bizarre you would be in favour of
dropping the requirement on broadcasters, or would you extend it to
newspapers?

passat21April 19, 2010 at 21:22

Please don’t make the mistake of believing that Newspapers write stories
for the benefit of the readers or for the good of the country or to ‘tell the
truth’ they write stories to sell Newspapers and NOTHING else. I bet the
retraction is small and hidden away on some inside page.

wullieApril 19, 2010 at 21:15

the Electoral Commission say there is no obligation on newspapers (as
distinct from broadcasters)

The Scottish disease has spread to England, except in Scotland broadcasters
do not obey the distinction

T. P. Fuller
April 19, 2010 at 21:14

Good work! I never read my local paper as it’s boring, badly written, and
appears to be entirely dependent on local government (police, councils) for
its news stories. This last of course means it never fulfils any journalistic
function worthy of the name.

Even more than the national press, local papers are just a vehicle for
advertising. It’s no use expecting anything from them.

Daniel1979April
19, 2010 at 20:47

Good job Anna!

grahamApril 19, 2010 at 20:44

You don’t really believe in anything that a journalist can get a grip of.
These people are not caring intellectuals , they have ajob, ‘find out what
this bloke is about, and write it down so readers can
understand’.
Libertarian is just good people hanging together with a bunch
of latterday commandments, appealing to that small percentage of a small
percentage that would bother to find out what it means.
Thankyou and have a
good day.

Ancient and Tattered
AirmanApril 19, 2010 at 20:25

Gloria said a pterodactyl perhaps?
It was the Chinese who first observed
“It is the correct naming of things that marks the beginning of wisdom” so we
can safely assume that our glorious Gloria is wise.
Ha, bet you all knew
that already!

TomApril 19, 2010 at 19:57

My local rag can’t even copy n paste and use a spell checker proply….
Gannet Group AKA Newsquest – absolutely awful bunch of either NOTW or Guardian
wannabees.

They haven’t got the hang of the web either – mind you, I tend to keep
score with stories deleted versus indentities deleted and I’m 3-nil up.

Absolute bunch of arseholes – I have to say when you rub their noses in
their own shit they wriggle a bit.

Mond you – the one that takes the biscuit is AlBeeb whose local station
policy is that a story can’t be aired unless all parties mentioned explicitly
sanction it. Editorial guidlines I was told.

Gloria Smudd
April 19, 2010 at 19:40

a pterodactyl perhaps, Ancient.

Ancient and Tattered
AirmanApril 19, 2010 at 19:32

Only those with an IQ beginning with a decimal point can possibly think our
media to be impartial and even-handed. It is increasingly surreal to live in
this overcrowded and dumbed down ‘diversity experiment’ in what was once our
own country. But then, I’m clearly a malcontent, and dinosaur to boot.

S FeeneyApril 19, 2010 at 19:16

Excellent work. Worthy of an award. (Nick Davies). Remember him? This type
of behaviour does not just exist in the media it occurs throughout “British
industry”.

berenikeApril 19, 2010 at 19:11

It’s nice to see that it’s not just BBC “Catholic”
stories that are entirely fabricated.

Well, actually, it’s not nice, but you know what I mean

Dick
PuddlecoteApril 19, 2010 at 19:05

Great article, Anna, and top work. Sounds like missy got caught having a
bit of fun at someone else’s expense and doesn’t want to admit it.

Don’t Give Up The Day
JobApril 19, 2010 at 19:03

Everything that I’ve just read and have previously been led to believe,
instructs me to think that whilst newspapers can get away with one sided
political bias toward a candidate of beliefs system of their own personal
choosing, the official State broadcaster of the BBC must remain entirely
neutral at all times, in the run up to a General election…..<a href=” “>REALLY?

Charlotte
GoreApril 19, 2010 at 18:57

Wow, absolutely fantastic. Spot on too – the danger is in trusting local
rags who do seem to enjoy taking the piss.

AnonymousApril 19, 2010 at 18:45

Just to say that the writ will be coming. And kindly ask OH to desist
before he gets a writ aswell.

See you all in court.

Anna
RaccoonApril 19, 2010 at 20:48

Anonymous @ 6.45
A bit of an own goal don’t you think, threatening me
as Anonymous, with Henry North London’s avatar?
What a dickhead you are –
the WordPress software knows who you are, even when you are in fifteen
different minds.
Physician, do go heal thyself. You need help.

Gloria Smudd
April 19, 2010 at 18:28

An impressive day’s work Ms Raccoon. Thank goodness you’re “a non-fact
checking, non-professional journalist”.

PericlesApril 19, 2010 at 18:18

This story reflects something very sad about modern Britain : 
the standard of education, yes, but more than anything else her near moral
bankruptcy.

All this has been achieved in little more than my own lifetime.

My good wishes also to Mr. Cullip.

~

Ghost of the
MahatmaApril 19, 2010 at 18:02

Yep. Definitely at the “then they ridicule you” stage.

AntisthenesApril 19, 2010 at 17:53

It only confirms my belief that the media today are just corrupt and
incompetent a culture that has been fostered by the most corrupt and
incompetent government of recent times. From one example of course that is not
a conclusion that should be jumped at. However my observations of institutions
like the BBC amongst many others have also lead me to this belief.

I remember an article written about me some time ago by the Observer and as
it happened one was also written about me by a trade magazine. In the trade
magazine one would have wondered if I was waiting to be canonized by the
Vatican however the Observer painted me as being the son of Satin. Not quite
the same thing I know but an object lesson all the same.

BobskiApril 19,
2010 at 17:53

Brava!

How do you always know just the right person to talk to, to get these sorts
of errors sorted?

SadButMadLad
April 19, 2010 at 17:49

Don’t forget that employers tend to google the name when they look into
prospective candidates for a job. So Julia Kennard basically has a marked card
now so if she starts looking for a new job she better explain herself fully.
Either that or the editor who hires here is just as corrupt and lax about his
journalistic skills.

Fred ThrungApril 19, 2010 at 17:41

And you did all that in less than a day!

JuliaMApril 19,
2010 at 17:20

Outstanding!