by Bruce Page
‘Tightly knit group of politically motivated men’. Harold Wilson produced this famous phrase in the House of Commons, 20 June 1966. It was intended to overcome the difficulty of labelling the Seamen’s Union as being under communist control when there were no communists at all on its executive.
Thalidomide. For various reasons (mostly legal) thalidomide’s pharmacological and teratogenic history could not be set out fully in the Sunday Times. A detailed account is given in Bruce Page, A defence of “low” journalism’, British Journalism Review, 9.1 (1998).
Gun-running in Aden. Sunday Times, 1964. Author’s obituary note on Denis Hamilton, Independent, 14 April 1988.
Mussolini Diaries. The ‘six figure’ account is in the Sunday Times, 1967. More details are given by Phillip Knightley, A Hack’s Progress, though this does not mention the role of Colin Simpson in uncovering the fraud.
Northern Ireland. Any account of the events since the mid-1960s will be disputed from some viewpoint, and no volume of references will change that. I have written down the way it looked to me and to a good many of my colleagues. Many of us felt that we – and academics like Professor Richard Rose – were sounding warnings which the Labour government of the day was determined to ignore. Certainly the Sunday Times was not alone, but I think the article ‘JOHN BULL’S POLITICAL SLUM’ (3/7/1966) by Stephen Fay, Cal McCrystal and Lewis Chester had the basic qualities of a firebell in the night.
Old woman on a street corner. There is no way to trace the television news programme in which this remark was made. But John Barry, Eamonn McCann and I all participated, and recall it in similar terms. It was only unusual in being explicit.
Massacres. At Sharpeville near Johannesburg on 21 March 1960, police opened fire without provocation on Africans protesting against repressive ‘pass laws’ and sixty-nine people (eight women, ten children) died. At Tlatelolco, Mexico City, on 2 October 1968 a student demonstration ended in a storm of bullets and several hundred people were killed and wounded; details and causes have yet to be fully understood. At Lhasa in Tibet during March 1989, People’s Armed Police, specially trained to crush anti-Chinese sentiment, killed between 80 and 150 unarmed demonstrators. At Kent State University, Ohio, on 4 May 1970, the National Guard fired on students protesting against the bombing of Cambodia, and four were killed. Peterloo: the same facts are in any standard history of Britain. Some very wild figures were at times cited for Tiananmen: Jonathan Mirsky of the Observer was present, and his immediate estimate of 400 dead seems now to be mainstream. Croke Park (Dublin 1920) has been mentioned as a precedent for Bloody Sunday: the Black and Tans killed thirteen people by firing on a football crowd. But this had more the character of a wartime atrocity – the crowd itself was not political. The Amritsar massacre in India, in which 400 Sikh nationalists died, was certainly an attack on a political gathering. But it was not on Britain’s own soil (and Winston Churchill, the Colonial Secretary, disowned General Dyer’s action in passionate terms).
Peaceably to assemble. This is of course from the first of the ten amendments to the US Constitution which were ratified on 15 December 1791 and which together form the Bill of Rights.
Low levels of competition. Monopolies Commission reports on press mergers. Jay and Barber. House of Commons, Monopolies and Mergers Bill, second reading, 29 March 1965.
Monopolies Commission Report on Thomson takeover of The Times. 1966.
History of The Times. Some Times Newspapers veterans (including Harold Evans) are critical of this work. But its author John Grigg (1924–2001) was a distinguished biographer and historian, whose life of Lloyd George is recognised as a scholarly masterpiece.
Harry Henry confirmed and amplified what he had told John Grigg when interviewed for this book (2 August 1999). Professor Henry clearly thought the Monopolies Commission were naïve.
Blundering amateur. The author was a witness to this pronouncement, and the awful silence following it. It may seem a harsh judgment on an amiable man, but should be compared with Michael Grade’s review of Lord Hussey’s autobiography (British Journalism Review, 13.1 (2002)), which describes Hussey’s period as chairman of the BBC. ‘It displays what those of us who had to work for him suspected from the beginning – he was under-qualified and overrated … simply a placeman.’
Merry Christmas. Fitzpatrick to author, 8 September 1999.
Unattractive characters. It was usual at Times Newspapers in the 1970s for executives to demonise local union officials (somewhat before the word itself became fashionable). Some of them carried a flavour of brimstone, but it was difficult to take the complaints seriously because (a) most of the speakers had no personal acquaintance with the ‘demons’, and (b) it was conventional also to insist on the statesmanlike qualities of Duke Hussey (see above), which made it hard to see what benchmark, if any, was in use.
James Evans. Interview 8 July 1 999.
Prior canvassed. Lord Prior, interview 20 August 1999.
Thatcher Cabinet. The account of Margaret Thatcher beginning her Premiership as leader of a minority within her own government is supported by opponents (such as Lord Gilmour, Dancing with Dogma), supporters (such as Lord Wyatt in his Journals) and independent observers like Hugo Young (One of Us). Lord Prior’s account (A Balance of Power) and Lord Howe’s (Conflict of Loyalty) were amplified by interviews (Prior, 20 August 1999; Howe 15 February 2001).
Pessimism. Sir John Hoskyns to Sir Alfred Sherman, 22 December 1980, in Sir Alfred’s papers at Royal Holloway College.
Thomson decision. In interview James Evans (8 July 1999) and Sir Gordon Brunton (20 October 1999) describe the meeting, phone call and so on, and do so in terms fundamentally similar to Grigg, History of The Times, vol. 6.
Sale of the papers. The same basic narrative facts occur in Grigg, History of The Times, vol. 6; in Harold Evans, Good Times, Bad Times; and other sources. Generally the major events (e.g. Gordon Brunton’s announcement of the sale on 22 October and his complaints against the unions) were reported in The Times next day, and regularly followed up. Charles Raw and other journalists on the Sunday Times enabled Elaine Potter and me to collect most of the Thomson press releases, union resolutions and so on which marked the progress of the sale. Financial disclosure was minimal throughout, but we obtained a copy of the Warburg sale prospectus which contains most of the important figures.
Shawcross Court is in the Royal Commission’s report.
Loss-making company. Strongly emphasised by Harold Evans, Good Times, Bad Times. Sir Gordon Brunton when interviewed did not concede any importance to the distinction.
Evans’ lost opportunity. He has made his regrets very clear in Good Times, BadTimes and in other contexts.
Sunday Times profitability. The figures in the Warburg prospectus are discussed by Harold Evans, and are in essence quite straightforward. As the text suggests, both Don Cruickshank and Ian Clubb (interview, 8 October 1999) were absolutely emphatic that a loss-making picture could only be artificial.
Evans, Maxwell etc. Personal experience while running the Sunday Times investigation of Maxwell.
Lord Donoughue. Tom Bower in Maxwell: The Outsider shows Donoughue as excessively reluctant to accept the evidence of Maxwell’s savage dishonesty.
Vetting Panel. In Good Times, Bad Times, Harold Evans describes this ludicrous procedure without sparing himself.
Public interest. This is the crucial provision in the Fair Trading Act 1973: Part V, section 59(3).
Wyatt Journals. Jane Reed, head of corporate affairs at News International (i.e. Newscorp UK) has attempted to discredit the Wyatt material: ‘I am afraid this is a case of Woodrow being extremely readable but wrong’ (Guardian, 19 October 1998). The Journals contain some strange judgments about science and history, but carry great conviction in their detailed account of Wyatt’s dealings with Murdoch and Thatcher. It’s unlikely anyone reading Wyatt thoroughly will find Ms Reed convincing.
‘Substantial inquiry’. Sir Keneth Clucas, interview 4 August 19
99.
Further information, etc. Brunton, interview 20 October 1999.
Sold as a going concern. Thomson British Holdings press release, 22 January 1981.
Altering the proof. This incident was described by Bruce Page in the NewStatesman (‘Into the Arms of Count Dracula’, 30 January 1981) on the basis of discussions with several of those present.
Bid could go forward. Letter, Lord Biffen to Bruce Page, 28 June 1999.
Parliamentary dress. House of Commons, 27 January 1981.
Linklater, etc. All were interviewed at various times in 1999.
Legal advisers. Arthur Marriott QC and Geoffrey Robertson QC, interviewed in 1999, remembered most of the circumstances clearly and in similar terms. Robertson had copies of the notes made in negotiations after the application was withdrawn. Marriott produced a copy of his letter to the Attorney General. Lord Hoffman could not remember the case at all, which he said was always usual of periods when he was very busy giving opinions.
Twelve people voted against. Malcolm Crawford, Peter Dunn, Tony Geraghty Isabel Hilton, Philip Jacobson, Peter Lennon, Magnus Linklater, Linda Melvern, Gwen Nuttall, Elaine Potter, Charles Raw, Claire Tomalin.
9: VIRTUALLY NORMAL Epigraph 2, Christiansen. Quoted in Francis Williams, Dangerous Estate. New York office. Harold Evans in Good Times, Bad Times.
Running newspapers. James Evans has made this point on a number of
informal occasions. Many financial analysts say something similar. Benchmarking editors. In 2002 the British Journalism Review and the UK
PressGazette asked their readers to vote for the ‘greatest newspaper editor of all
time’. The readers took this in effect as greatest British editor (demonstrating that
newspapers are national phenomena). Few ballots can have been less rigorous
psephologically, and like those assessing musicians and historical figures (Mozart,
say) were on the same footing as current practitioners. Only eight editors received
a worthwhile number of votes. Arthur Christiansen (Daily Express 1932–56),
Hugh Cudlipp (Sunday Pictorial later Sunday Mirror1937–40, 1946–9, editorial
director of Mirror group 1952–63) and Larry Lamb (Sun 1969–81) were grouped
together with Thomas Barnes (The Times1817–41). Kelvin MacKenzie (Sun
1981–94) shared third place with David English (Daily Mail 1971–92). C. P. Scott
(Manchester Guardian 1872–1929) was a long way ahead of them in second place
– and Harold Evans a very easy winner. No active editor received any significant
support. It’s not likely that a more scientific survey would have produced any very
different result.
Gresham’s Law. According to the New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics,
MacLeod thought the statement ‘bad money drives out good’ was expressed by
Aristophanes in The Frogs. Thomas Gresham (c. 1519–79) was concerned about
forgery and corrupt coinage but did not state such a general principle.
Collingwood’s essay ‘Economics as a Philosophical Science’ (1925, in his Essays
in Political Philosophy) should have eliminated it as a quasi-scientific metaphor
for decay, but it has lived on, sometimes in elaborate dress. While it is true that
forgery and so on have caused many currency problems, economists have found it
hard to state a consistent rule from the complex historical record (Palgrave lists
plenty of starting points for anyone who wants to keep trying). The Cape Town
Museum is one which has a collection of tradable cannons imported by the longestablished Malay community.
Heading texts. It shouldn’t be thought that Steven Shapin’s remarkable book,
because it focuses on the gentlemanly scientists of the seventeenth-century Royal
Society, is remote from the contemporary issues. Shapin worked as a biologist
before he became a sociologist and historian (University of California, San
Diego). As he writes (letter to Bruce Page, 23 April 2001), ‘my work is partly
motivated by a general concern about the grounds of integrity. Gentility in the C17
was ONE solution to identifying integrity – and therefore grounds of belief – but
solutions differ from one setting to another.’ His ‘social’ history challenges the
idea that scientific knowledge comes entirely from ‘epistemological
individualism’, and shows that networks of trust are always necessary, in addition
to the personal confrontation with fact. The Locke paraphrase is easily confirmed
from the Essay. Christiansen and Keynes illustrate the fact that some people have
an interest in struggling against Locke’s vision of a predictable world, and others
find it suits them very well.
Child murder. In the early 1970s it was found that in an average month four
children were murdered in England and Wales: seventeen died in road accidents.
Both rates are declining, though people fear otherwise. In 1970 England and
Wales had the developed world’s fourth highest rate of child murder, equal with
Japan, Germany and America. In that year the care and protection professions
were shocked by a public inquiry into the dreadful death of a child named Maria
Colwell. Since then, serious (doubtless imperfect) efforts have been made to coordinate the activities of police, doctors and social workers, and in England and
Wales the child murder rate has fallen to one of the lowest in the world. Professor
Colin Pritchard of Southampton University made an international comparison
(British Journal of Social Work 32 (2002), 495–502) by summing the period
1974–8 and 1993–7 and constructing an index of reduction. In this a low index
figure means a sharp reduction. The index for England and Wales was 0.41: only
Japan (0.35) did better within the period, though Germany (0.56) and the
Netherlands (0.58) were impressive. Over the same time Italy (1.08), Spain (1.10),
USA (1.40) and France (1.58) grew significantly worse. By no means are such changes well understood, though Professor Pritchard points out that British childcare budgets were better protected during the period than America’s – suggesting that the Thatcher and Reagan administrations were not always alike. But whatever prevented it, latetwentieth-century Britain did not suffer the rising tide of violence against children which news media seemed to describe. Nor, when violence did occur, was it often done by a stalking tabloid monster such as ‘no one is safe from’. Children are unsafe principally from their mothers (and frequently the mother’s male partner); they belong to families suffering mental and and social damage which methodical care services can detect and repair before effects are fatal, and that is why improvement can be made. Ferociously dangerous paedophiles certainly exist, says Pritchard. But no useful purpose is served by
giving the impression that they are other than rare, and likely to remain so. Northern Ireland. Violent death in Northern Ireland has never been high by
some standards – the Balkans have been much worse since the collapse of
Yugoslavia, and others more horrifying still. Only in 1972 did the Troubles cause
more deaths than road accidents. But the point is that their media impact, broadly,
was inversely related to their frequency.
Famine. Amartya Sen in Development as Freedom.
Astrology. Augustine’s attack on the astrologers is devastating, particularly
their attempts to explain how twins born seconds apart could receive wholly
different treatment from the stars. But he is a recovering astrologer – that is, before
his conversion he was close to the Manichees, who were astrologers, and offered a
si
gnificant alternative to Mediterranean Christianity.
Hotspur and Glendower. Henry IV, Part 1, Act III, scene 1.
Gauss and normality. The literature on this subject is of course gigantic and
often highly specialised. But Jan Gullberg’s elegant compression of the history in
Mathematics from the Birth of Numbers provides the essence of what is needed
here:
In the early 18th century it became apparent to scientists who studied the
distribution of errors in repeated measurements that observations of a great
number of different measurements often tend to show a similar form of
distribution, now called the normal or Gaussian distribution. In 1733 its
mathematical equation was formulated by the mathematician and statistician
Abraham de Moivre … The mathematical properties of the normal distribution
were studied and explained by Pierre Simon Laplace, Simeon-Denis Poisson and
Carl Friedrich Gauss …
The Belgian astronomer, mathematician and statistician Adolphe Quetelet had
studied astronomy and probability with Laplace in Paris and was the first to apply
normal distribution to the study of sociology. Quetelet presented his concept of the
‘average human being’ (l’homme moyen) around whom measurements of human
traits were grouped in normal probability distributions. His observations of the
numerical consistency of what had been supposed to be voluntary acts of crime
provoked extensive discussions about free will versus social determinism; such studies are still an important subject for research on social behaviour and