Journalism is on trial here. Times editor John Witherow has been accused in open court of being a prejudiced bully who intimidates staff who disagree with him. An editor who sets an agenda and then tasks staff with proving his hypotheses.

Isn’t this what an editor is supposed to be? The person who decides the line the paper will take? The staff being those who do what he tells them?

And yes, for the avoidance of doubt, I do – very occasionally – write for that paper.

6 thoughts on “Umm”

  1. Didn’t Kevin Maguire write an article about how uplifting it was to hear the news about Archibald? He must have had a gun to his head.

  2. The new model is that snowflake twenty-somethings get to write about whatever they like, and if their boss tries to make them do something else he’s a nasty patriarchal bully.

  3. ‘Journalism is on trial here.’

    “first define your terms”

    Journalism being undefined. The reader is expected to provide their own definition. The reader’s definition is expected to be glorious, Marshall expecting the rest of the world to glorify her.

    The only people who hold journalists in high esteem are journalists. The West sees journalists as lying creeps, useful idiots in the drive to destroy Western Civilization. Few groups are rated lower in public surveys.

    ‘An editor who brushed aside an award-winning journalist’s “significant misgivings”’

    Apparently an award-winning journalist trumps an editor. That journalists are free birds independent of publishers or publications.

    Why didn’t the ‘award-winning journalist’ just quit? Shouldn’t an ‘award-winning journalist’ have no trouble finding another job? Why wouldn’t he go where he can do the types of stories he wants to?

    ‘if case law is established that toxic editorial positions can lead to prosecutions’

    Great! Let’s criminalize the workplace! Which begs the question, “Can journalism be outsourced?” Hmmm . . . seeing some of the bylines at the Guardian, the answer is a loud, “Yes!”

    Expect the Guardian to become written by people whose English is a second language to them.

    Ms Marshall is making herself unemployable, and feeling GREAT about herself as she does.

  4. ‘if case law is established that toxic editorial positions can lead to prosecutions’

    Ace. Let’s criminalise unsanctioned opinions.

  5. I thought that Journalists wre all suposed to be courageous heroes like Clarke Kent, but with better eyesight and wearing their pants inside their shirts. So how come they are intimidated by this horrible editor?
    I have in the past been commissioned to write research reports – which differ from journalism in that I am allowed to use words with three syllables and that I have standards of integrity – and occasionally someone reading the draft has said “you got this wrong” (mostly a typo: there was one name that I repeatedly mistyped) and when I was wrong I corrected the draft, when I wasn’t I didn’t – my principal client lost a handful of contracts that way [in one case the individual who introduced the objector to my client was so embarrased that he promised to find another subject for research to make up my client’s income shortfall as a result of my refusing to lie] but when another analyst (who is now, some years later, my replacement) asked to join it because his former employer had lower standards of integrity it welcomed him, knowing that it could lose more clients for the same reason. Maybe it wanted honest clients?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *