Leader: The false choice on press reform

The underlying principles of this fight have too often been forgotten in a round of score-settling and protection of vested interests.

The British press is having one of its periodic spasms of infighting and navel-gazing – the Telegraph claims the BBC has spent too long on the Daily Mail’s row with Ed Miliband; meanwhile, the Sun’s inaccurate front page about crimes committed by “mental patients” is roundly denounced; two days later, three right-wing papers devote their front pages to the MI5 claim that the Guardian has “helped terrorists” by publishing leaked files from the US National Security Agency.

The backdrop to this outbreak of inky trench warfare is the continuing fight over press reform. Now, the Privy Council has rejected the industry’s plan to be allowed another chance at self-regulation and David Cameron is left hoping that his hastily concocted fudge – a royal charter – will be passed, allowing some measure of statutory underpinning.

The underlying principles of this fight have too often been forgotten in a round of score-settling and protection of vested interests. In March, we said we felt our interests as a political and cultural magazine and website were represented neither by a regulator created by politicians, nor one stuffed with placemen from the right-wing press. (The right-wing press was keen to report our stance on the former, but not the latter, proposition.) Six months later, our position has not changed.

The New Statesman position on the regulation of the press has not changed. Photo: Getty

This article first appeared in the 11 October 2013 issue of the New Statesman, Iran vs Israel

Show Hide image

No, David Cameron’s speech was not “left wing”

Come on, guys.

There is a strange journalistic phenomenon that occurs when a party leader makes a speech. It is a blend of groupthink, relief, utter certainty, and online backslapping. It happened particularly quickly after David Cameron’s speech to Tory party conference today. A few pundits decided that – because he mentioned, like, diversity and social mobility – this was a centre-left speech. A leftwing speech, even. Or at least a clear grab for the liberal centre ground. And so that’s what everyone now believes. The analysis is decided. The commentary is written. Thank God for that.

Really? It’s quite easy, even as one of those nasty, wicked Tories, to mention that you actually don’t much like racism, and point out that you’d quite like poor children to get jobs, without moving onto Labour's "territory". Which normal person is in favour of discriminating against someone on the basis of race, or blocking opportunity on the basis of class? Of course he’s against that. He’s a politician operating in a liberal democracy. And this isn’t Ukip conference.

Looking at the whole package, it was actually quite a rightwing speech. It was a paean to defence – championing drones, protecting Britain from the evils of the world, and getting all excited about “launching the biggest aircraft carriers in our history”.

It was a festival of flagwaving guff about the British “character”, a celebration of shoehorning our history chronologically onto the curriculum, looking towards a “Greater Britain”, asking for more “national pride”. There was even a Bake Off pun.

He also deployed the illiberal device of inculcating a divide-and-rule fear of the “shadow of extremism – hanging over every single one of us”, informing us that children in UK madrassas are having their “heads filled with poison and their hearts filled with hate”, and saying Britain shouldn’t be “overwhelmed” with refugees, before quickly changing the subject to ousting Assad. How unashamedly centrist, of you, Mr Prime Minister.

Benefit cuts and a reduction of tax credits will mean the Prime Minister’s enthusiasm for “equality of opportunity, as opposed to equality of outcome” will be just that – with the outcome pretty bleak for those who end up losing any opportunity that comes with state support. And his excitement about diversity in his cabinet rings a little hollow the day following a tubthumping anti-immigration speech from his Home Secretary.

If this year's Tory conference wins the party votes, it’ll be because of its conservative commitment – not lefty love bombing.

Anoosh Chakelian is deputy web editor at the New Statesman.