Wednesday, July 09, 2014

Guardian News and Media Final Results - Chief Executive gets £1.4m bonus while papers lose £30.6m

This post has been cross-posted at Harry's Place  
The Guardian's results for last year are out :
Guardian chief executive Andrew Miller saw his annual pay treble to nearly £2.2 million as the media group rewarded him for selling its stake in car website Auto Trader, even though the core newspaper business remained heavily loss-making.
Guardian News and Media, publisher of The Guardian and The Observer, lost £30.6 million in the year to March against a £33.8 million loss a year earlier.
However, turnover climbed 7% to £210.2 million, thanks to digital growing by a quarter to £69.5 million, while print revenues stayed “broadly flat”.
Parent company Guardian Media Group swung to a pre-tax profit of £549.2 million as it banked a huge windfall of £619 million from selling its 50% stake in Trader Media Group, owner of Auto Trader, to Apax Partners.
GMG paid only £1.4 million in corporation tax but Miller insisted the profits from Trader were not liable for tax under the Substantial Shareholdings Exemption rule.
He got a £1.4 million “long-term” bonus, on top of his salary of £696,000, plus benefits.
The GMG boss said he deserved the bonus, which was  “contractual”, because he has overseen Trader for 12 years, including as finance director, and “relinquished my equity” when he joined GMG in 2009. “That’s the bulk of my award,” he said.
GMG also gave Miller a short-term bonus of £226,000, which would have taken his package to £2.4 million, but he deferred it until next year. He acknowledged his pay was high but pointed out he has waived nearly £500,000 in past bonuses. Editor Alan Rusbridger’s pay was flat at £491,000.
Do the phrases "corporate greed", "fat cats" and "growing inequality" mean anything to the hypocrites that run this paper ? 

I really wonder how the dwindling readership (down c3% in the last year) stomach the paradox between the simplistic unreconstructed "soak the rich" economics they read on a daily basis and the way the paper is run.

As for the fact GMG paid so little tax on its windfall from the Trader Media group, there's no doubt its all above board but in the past the paper has had the temerity to question other companies such as Barclays that also use such allowances (see here).

Why is it that the most influential Left of Centre paper in the UK is such a hive of hypocrisy ?

Thursday, May 01, 2014

Stalinist Far Left still a disgrace at London May Day

This post has been cross-posted at Harry's Place

James Bloodworth has tweeted today about the Stalinist and Maoist banners that are still allowed to feature at the London May Day parade. These are the same or similar to the ones I blogged about at Harrys Place 5 years ago.

To allow Stalinists and Maoists to march with others of the mainstream Left including trade unionists is revolting. I just wonder on the mentality of the other marchers and such speakers as eg John Hendy from the Campaign for Trade Union Freedom (see flyer here). How can they march with people carrying posters of Stalin. Its almost mind boggling.

I'm very glad James Bloodworth has picked up on this. Its great to see a journalist of mainstream Left views taking this up and I hope others do too. Extreme outliers of the Left have been given a free pass for far too long by the rest of the Left. 

Tuesday, July 24, 2012

Nick says "We are all Sun journalists now." Err - what ?

This post has been cross-posted at Harry's Place

Nick Cohen had a strange article in last Sunday's Observer, complaining that the British press is now under terrible pressure:
Rhodri Phillips was the 21st journalist arrested as part of the Elveden bribes enquiry. If it had happened in Russia, Iran or an African dictatorship, readers of the Observer would know what to expect. Amnesty International and Index on Censorship would scream their heads off about the need for a free press to scrutinise power. Intellectuals would send a round robin to the liberal press. There would be questions in Parliament, perhaps a Radio 4 documentary.
Hold on. Just because journalists are being arrested does not mean those arrests are not justified, indeed today we have found 8 out of 13 NI journos in the Glenn Mulcaire case have been charged with a variety of phone hacking charges. Also, arresting people for hacking celebrities phones where there is no public interest defence is very unlike arresting them for threatening political or corporate vested interests, which is what proper investigative journalists should be doing.

Nick also complains :
Detectives are not now targeting phone-hackers, whom even liberal countries would arrest. They are punishing journalists for doing what they have always done – talking to cops, standing a round, pumping officials for information.
Is that really what is being targeted ? Yesterday we had more info from Sue Akers about what is being alleged in another case involving the Mirror and Express as well as NI :
Two officers at high-security prisons allegedly took illegal payments from Mirror, Express and News International journalists, a senior police officer has told the Leveson Inquiry.

Metropolitan Police Deputy Assistant Commissioner Sue Akers said one officer had allegedly received £35,000.

But she said stories possibly linked to the payments revealed "very limited material of genuine public interest".

Trinity Mirror said it was co-operating with the police on the matter.
This is the kind of thing that is being investigated at long last, and as is continually being repeated at Leveson it is tabloid practices and crimes with no public interest defence that is the area that requires inquiry and that the police are targeting.

Nick I'm sure understandably has a lot of fellow felling for tabloid journos who he sees as colleagues, however surely it is time that the quality press started realising that the contemptible prurient and intrusive practices of the tabloids are not something that any journalist should be proud of and that the public really has had enough of it.

Monday, March 12, 2012

We haven't heard much about this in the papers

This post has been cross-posted at Harry's Place

Operation Motorman was an inquiry in 2003 when the UK information Commissioner looked into breaches of the Data Protection Act by the British Press.

An piece from the Indy here gives some of the details :
Operation Motorman was set up by the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) to look into widespread breaches of data protection laws by the media. In a signed witness statement given to The Independent, Motorman's original lead investigator, a retired police inspector with 30 years' experience, accuses the authorities of serious failings, and of being too "frightened" to question journalists.

"I feel the investigation should have been conducted a lot more vigorously, a lot more thoroughly and it may have revealed a lot more information," he said. "I was disappointed and somewhat disillusioned with the senior management because I felt as though they were burying their heads in the sand. It was like being on an ostrich farm."

He claimed that had investigators been allowed to interview journalists at the time, the phone-hacking scandal and other serious breaches of privacy by the media may have been uncovered years earlier. "The biggest question that needed answering was, why did the reporters want all these numbers and what were they doing with them?" His comments reflect badly on the ICO, and the Press Complaints Commission, which was given early notification of the evidence in the Motorman files. "We weren't allowed to talk to journalists," he said. "It was fear – they were frightened."

The PCC said last night that it had never been given sight of the Motorman evidence but had strengthened its code and issued industry guidelines which had led to an improvement in standards. All the information has been in the hands of the authorities since 2003, when a team from the ICO seized the material from the home of private detective Stephen Whittamore. Whittamore and three other members of his private investigation network were given conditional discharges when Motorman came to court in 2005. No journalists were charged, although the files contain prima facie evidence of thousands of criminal offences. Thousands of victims disclosed in the paperwork have never even been told they were targeted.
Now the Leveson inquiry has seen all the files from Operator Motorman, but as detailed here on the Hacked off campaign site they have not been made public. Today however there has been an application to make them public :
Lord Justice Leveson has recognised a request from the Hacked Off campaign for the Operation Motorman database to be published.

The judge said David Sherborne, barrister for the core participant victims, was welcome to formally submit the request if he thought it would highlight the culture and practice of the press rather than “who did what to whom”
A lot of journos would appear to have been in the frame after the Whittamore inquiry, see here :
The ICO later obtained search warrants for the Hampshire office of a private detective Steve Whittamore.[5] A huge cache of documents revealed, in precise detail, a network of police and public employees illegally selling personal information obtained from government computer systems. The personal information that Whittamore obtained from his network was passed on to journalists working for various newspapers including the News of the World, the Sunday Times, the Observer, the Daily Mail and the Daily Mirror.[5] At least 305 different reporters have been identified as customers of the network.[6]
Mmm - I wonder if the cops are going to start going after the 305 journalists named in this investigation ? And if they don't what will that mean to the trials (if they ever happen) of the journos who are presently in the frame ?

Wednesday, February 08, 2012

Why don't we deport Abu Qatada to Belgium ?

This post has been cross-posted at Harry's Place

The Abu Qatada case rumbles on interminably. One of the odd aspects I've read is the fact that he is apparently wanted on a warrant from other countries such as the US, Germany and Belgium. Now, it seems the problem with deporting him to Jordan is that he may be up against a trial with witnesses against him that MAY have been tortured.

But if there is a warrant against him from Belgium why don't we just send him there ? I presume the ECHR doesn't think they torture witnesses. I've looked on the web for the possible reasons for this but apart from conspiracy theorists types saying that a trial there as opposed to one in the UK would bring out stuff that our security services might not like, can't find anything to solve the mystery.

I am not a lawyer, so this is mystifying me quite a lot, is there any one out there with more knowledge who can shed light on this issue ?

Monday, December 12, 2011

Was the Milly Dowler voicemail deletion story dodgy ?

This post has been cross-posted at Harry's Place

Oops - looks like the Guardian might have got rather an important story a bit wrong, see here from the Leveson enquiry today :
3.17pm: Garnham says it does not know how the Guardian came to report in July that "Met officers have approached Surrey police and taken formal statements from some of those involved in the original inquiry, who were concerned about how News of the World journalists intercepted – and deleted – the voicemail messages of Milly Dowler".
3.06pm: Neil Garnham QC, for the Metropolitan police, is now reading a statement about the latest evidence concerning the hacking of Milly Dowler's phone.
 So the police have basically denied most of the story that started this whole media frenzy.

Meanwhile Nick Davies has got in his mea culpa (sort of) here. But the Telegraph has a different view on that :
 But it emerged at the weekend that Surrey Police now believe that Glenn Mulcaire, the private detective used by the tabloid, could not have deleted the messages as he was only commissioned later.
The new disclosure was reported in The Guardian on Saturday and online late on Friday evening.
But the headline and opening paragraph made no mention of the climb-down.
It reported instead that “fresh details” had emerged and confirmed that the voicemail was hacked.
The fact that the deletion which gave the family false hope – and ultimately caused a national scandal – might not have been the fault of the News of the World did not appear until the third paragraph.
Critics accused The Guardian of burying the story.
Oh dear. I bet Nick Davies won't be getting many Christmas cards from NI folk this year.

Monday, November 28, 2011

More Wikileaks "collateral damage"

This post has been cross-posted at Harry's Place

There was a shocking story on BBC Radio 4 this morning about Wikileaks and the last remaining Jews of Baghdad (you can listen to it here).

Some more background here :
BAGHDAD — An Anglican priest here says he's working with the U.S. Embassy to persuade the handful of Jews who still live in Baghdad to leave because their names have appeared in cables published last month by WikiLeaks.
The Rev. Canon Andrew White said he first approached members of the Jewish community about what he felt was the danger they faced after a news story was published last month that made reference to the cables.
What has Wikileaks to say about it all ? Well according to this :
One of the 215,287 unredacted cables published by WikiLeaks (The site says it only published the cables after an encryption code for the complete archive was leaked by a journalist from the Guardian) provides biographical sketches of the 9 remaining Jews in Baghdad. In total, only 35 Jews remain of a community that dates back to 721 B.C. 
Yes its all the fault of the Guardian ! That would be the same Guardian that was allegedly part of a "Jewish conspiracy" to discredit Wikileaks.

What a royal mess Wikileaks has turned out to be.