Newsnight disgruntled

Newsnight correspondant Paul Mason is commenting on bloggers' influence in Prescott's latest little bit of bother.

Not since 7/7 has the UK blogosphere looked like functioning in the same way as its US counterpart - until now. Slipping and sliding around the libel laws, and the custom and practice of us media types refraining from telling the world who is sleeping with whom at Westminster, the British bloggers are at it, right now, on an almost hourly basis, pushing the Prescott story forward almost faster than the Mainstream Media (MSM).

I would say that we are pushing it considerably faster than the MSM, frankly. And as Unity implies, it doesn't seem to be because the BBC didn't have the materials to hand; not only did they probably have them to hand, but they have failed to make a vital connection.

Well, Newsnight - let’s just see you suck on this.

First, while it's nice that you managed to obtain these documents, can I ask you specifically WHEN you obtained them?

Considering that this whole story has blown up in the matter of, what, a couple of days and that the government is certainly not in the habit of responding to a fresh FOIA request in such a short space of time, one has to wonder quite how you managed to have just the right documents for the story at just the the right time…

…unless you’ve either

(a) known about this story for a while and sat on it, until bloggers smoked it out and force you out into the open, or

(b) your request for information has been fast-tracked by whoever dealt with this request because someone on the inside sees it as being in their interests for you to have this information.
...

The seond observation is simply that, with all the resources at its disposal and its ‘oh, so professional’ reporters and editors to rely on, it seems rather strange that no one at the Beeb appears to have noticed or saw fit to comment on the glaringly obvious pecuniary interest that the government has in AEG’s bid, even though all the information required to make the connection was in the actual report.

But, wait! Our intrepid Newsnight man has bigger fish to fry...

The Prescott issue is an ideal topic for a blog feeding frenzy because it is in the objective interest of the Tory bloggers and the anti-Blair Labour bloggers for Prescott to go. It was when this happened in the USA that blogging started to have a real impact on events.

Obviously, I'm biased but I think that it is in the interests of the whole country for this government to be brought down: they have been—and will continue to be—a comprehensive disaster. Also, I am hardly a die-hard Tory blogger, as my repeated criticism of Cameron has shown (plus, I joined UKIP).

However, I can't conceal the fact that I would personally love to see Prescott humiliated and forced out of office: this is because I dislike corrupt, lazy, talentless sexual bullies; especially when they are doing it on my money.

Newsnight last night acknowledged the fact that bloggers are now a factor in events by putting Toryboy Iain Dale live and unleashed (well, pre-recorded and heavily legalled) on the UK's flagship political programme.

Yes, and Paxman was hardly soft on him. It seems to me that Iain and others have about as much evidence as the Beeb did over the "sexed-up" dossier (and, the smackdown on the Beeb notwithstanding, we now know that the dossier was "sexed up"); if Iain and his ilk believe that they have enough evidence to publish specific allegations, then good luck to them.

If you want to dip into this world of ranching and raunching...click on any of these links and you will soon get as far as we poor professional journalists have got: to a bunch of infidelity allegations that have not been substantiated but are, as of Today's 8.10 interview with Prezza, the subject of a non-denial; and to the documents at the centre of an argument over whether his decision to go and study the intricacies of farming courtesy of Phil Anschutz amount to a conflict of interest...

Guido Fawkes, Ian Dale's blog, Labour Councillor Bob Piper's blog, The Void blog, Devil's Kitchen...

I'm flattered that you should mention me, Paul, but I do not mention anything about Prescott's alleged other affairs; but, yes, I did link to Unity's assessment of the conflict of interest. (UPDATE: Unity quite rightly asks why—since my post was really nothing more than an addendum to his (with added swearing)—he was not mentioned. He also does a far better job of fisking Master Mason.)

Further, though, I think that Paul is being a little disingenuous here. Whilst most of us, I suspect, have a prurient interest in whether or not Prescott has had other affairs (something that he denied when confronted by the Ms Temple debacle which, if these allegations are true, would make him a hypocrite and a liar) this is not really the point. What is the point is that there is a private tender going on in which it seems that a decision has already been made; this is surely dishonest.

Why should we tolerate a DPM who is a proven liar? Prescott's behaviour is bringing the whole of British politics into disrepute after his personal life has already dragged it through the gutter.

Now call me old fashioned, but either the libel laws apply to these blogs the same as they do to Newsnight, or they don't.

Well, that is, of course, an interesting point. Let's have a look at defamation laws courtesy of Wikipedia; I think that the most relevent piece is here.

English law allows actions for libel to be brought in the High Court for any published statements which defame a named or identifiable individual or individuals in a manner which causes them loss in their trade or profession, or causes a reasonable person to think worse of him, her or them.

Can anyone think worse of Prescott than we already do? Causes him loss in his trade or profession? If he was forced to resign, possibly; but then, anyone in a private company would have already been sacked for gross misconduct and would probably be facing prosecution for sexual assault (or sexual harrassment at the very least). The facts that lead us to this conclusion are verifiable and already have been so; although further allegations could lead only to reinforcement of an impression that we already have.

Furthermore, whilst blogging is starting to gain a little profile, they are still read by a minimum number of people. Whilst a programme on the BBC might be watched by millions of people, an individual blog post will probably be read by only a few thousand (many of whom will be bloggers themselves). Therefore, the likelihood of a programme on the Beeb causing someone "loss in their trade or profession" or causing "reasonable person to think worse of them" is far higher than on a blog (at present).

(Mr Justice Cocklecarrot: "What is a blog?" - Brief: "My lord I believe it is a website upon which an individual or individuals may express unsubstantiated allegations in cyberspace") As Guido points out, there have been no writs issued against him.

Not even by Ros... sorry, the unconfirmed female party who has, it must be said, the most to lose here. Prescott's reputation is already at a nadir; hers is not (yet). So why no writ?

Meanwhile Prezza's trip to the prairie is now the subject of an official parliamentary investigation.

Yes, and the Whitewashers' Union is celebrating with a street party.

Instead of trying to start a fight with bloggers, perhaps Paul should be asking himself why Newsnight did such a poor job in analysing the documents; he should also be asking himself where the documents came from: was the BBC already in possession of them, or were they handed over—leaked—in double-quick time? If the former, why did they sit on the story; or did they not consider it a story at all (which would show the Beeb to be slightly out of touch)? If the latter, who authorised the leak the FOI request so quickly?

In short, a little less of the sour grapes and a little more investigative journalism would be welcome, methinks.

UPDATE: And that applies equally to NIck Robinson, also blogging out of Beeb central. By the way, is it just me or does Nick's caricature make him look like a particularly smug child-molester...?