Far Right website London Patriot has picked up the email sent out by Journalist candidate Mark Watts attacking his rival Rich Simcox, who he accused of being part of a Left wing "cabal" aiming to hijack the NUJ.
It says in a posting: "As the smear campaign against the British National Party is up and running again, Nationalists see this as proof that the National Union of Journalists (NUJ) demands that any NUJ Left reporter must give the BNP only negative coverage.
"Now an insider confirms what everyone has suspected for a long time. Mark Watts, one of the candidates in the election for editor of NUJ magazine ‘The Journalist’ has accused a “political faction” called NUJ Left of trying to hijack it."
It adds that Journalist candidates can email NUJ members as part of the election: "Watts has used his to launch a lengthy diatribe against NUJ Left and the candidate it has endorsed as ‘The Journalist’ editor, Richard Simcox (who is a member of the group)."
The post quotes at length from Watts' email and mentions that Channel 4's John Snow is one of his supporters.
The site says: “We are an independent site for London nationalists. We fully support and will promote the British National Party as we believe it is the only serious vehicle for the advancement of British Nationalism. However, any opinions expressed in posts or comments are those of the authors and not necessarily that of the British National Party.”
The left-wingers at the NUJ are not showing themselves in a very good light. (And I speak as a left-winger myself.) The defensive tone of some of the comments on this blog is laughably Old Labour -- attacks on the idea that some journalists just might be more successful or prominent than others, kneejerk evocations of McCarthyism... It must be manna from heaven for the BNP. Plus - something I hate - anonymous comments from people afraid to attach their names to their views. It's pretty clear that if you want a Journalist magazine that prioritises leftist politics over every other aspect of journalism, you vote Simcox, and if you want a mag that's interested in the whole experience of the journalist in a very fast-changing world, you vote Watts. Jon Snow appears to think so -- but Oh Dear, he's prominent, isn't he?
ReplyDeleteMartin Buckley
"Just think about the principle for a minute. Imagine if a candidate had stood in this election, or stands in any future NUJ election, who omits to make clear in material sent to the electorate any political affiliation. Let’s imagine she or he presents a good case. Let’s say, for sake of argument, that she or he wins. Then you find out that the person you’ve just elected into an NUJ position is a member of the BNP. What, you’re going to hope that I’m one of the candidates, that I find out just in time and find the necessary proof, and bring it all to your attention? I’m not comparing “NUJ Left” with the BNP. I’m saying the NUJ membership has the right to know if a candidate is a member of "NUJ Left", the BNP, or any other political group especially for a job such as the Journalist editorship."
ReplyDeleteFrom Mark Watts, from that email circular.
Fiona, imagine another scenario...
ReplyDeleteImagine if a candidate had stood in this election, or stands in any future NUJ election, who lists several pages of glowing testaments from supporters on a website.
Let’s imagine she or he presents a good case. Let’s say, for sake of argument, that she or he wins. Then later, you find out that the person you’ve just elected into an NUJ position actually included some, perhaps many non-members on their website, to give an over-inflated impression of how much support they had from other NUJ members.
How do you feel? Misled? The victim of classic 'spin'? How much do you now trust the person you've just elected?
Would you have been happier if she/he had said right from the start "These are my supporters who are NUJ members....... and these non-members also support me....."?
John Jones
Are you suggesting that support counts for more if it comes from an NUJ member than if it comes from another journalist?
ReplyDeleteIt is not someone’s position in the union that makes them able to judge a candidate’s suitability to be a good editor for the Journalist. It is the fact that someone is a journalist that makes them able to judge whether a candidate would make a good editor for the Journalist.
They know what a good editor should be, and they know what their industry and its union need.
If, unfortunately, someone has felt compelled to leave the union because they thought that it no longer represented them or their industry, then they have more reason, not less, to want the union to stand for the best of journalism.
The idea that Jon Snow is not enough of a journalist to know what journalism stands for and needs, simply because he left the union in despair, is beyond laughable.
Fiona said: "Are you suggesting that support counts for more if it comes from an NUJ member than if it comes from another journalist?"
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely. How astonishing that you seem not to. This is an election for an NUJ post. How extraordinary that someone should want to give equal weight to the views of non-members!
The point isn't that Jon Snow may or may not support any one candidate (and Mark was absolutely right to refer to the fact that Jon is no longer a member - I respect him for doing so).
The point is that in an election in which only NUJ members are eligible to vote, everybody producing a list of supporters on their website ought to be honour-bound to state where a supporter isn't a member. Especially, where the website states that the supporter is an ex-FOC for example.
Where candidates have come out and said "as far as I know, all of the supporters on my website are members except a,b,and c, who are former members", we, the voting members of the NUJ, who pay the subs, can have a reasonable amount of confidence that a candidate enjoys a reasonable level of support amongst fellow members.
Where a candidate fudges or evades the issue, and fails to identify where non-members are listed as supporters, it leaves us up in the air, with no great degree of confidence. Frankly, it strikes me as the sort of obfuscation and 'spin' that we'd all rightly condemn if we heard it coming from a politician.
"The idea that Jon Snow is not enough of a journalist to know what journalism stands for and needs, simply because he left the union in despair, is beyond laughable."
If you re-read my earlier post, you'll find that I didn't say anything of the sort.
John