We should think most carefully before calling for censorship in any quarter
If you’re me, one of the ways you know that broadcasters are getting desperate for a ‘balancing’ voice to counter a popular point of view is that large numbers of them start telephoning you. You realise they must be scraping the barrel. Never more so, of course, than when what’s sought is that elusive beast, an articulate right-winger who isn’t totally Neanderthal. I generally tell them (always good advice in a tight corner) to try Peter Hitchens or Janet Daley.
But unless (perfectly possible) I’ve missed their broadcast interventions, neither these, nor any of the rest of the small stable of stalwarts on the media right upon whom Britain has to rely for a volume of ‘balancing’ commentary out of all proportion to our numbers, has sprung to the defence of the Daily Mail’s Jan Moir.
Ms Moir last week wrote an entertainingly viperous attack on the late former-boy-band singer and openly gay celebrity Stephen Gately, ‘while his corpse’ (as Ms Moir’s innumerable critics keep protesting) ‘was still warm’. Moir’s column was slyly and nastily — but I must say expertly — done; and if it hadn’t been exceptionally well written it would have needled fewer readers and caused less offence. Moir even contrived to craft her column into an attack of civil partnerships generally, on the grounds that poor Mr Gately was in one.
The Press Complaints Commission has received a record number of complaints — thousands — and in due course will no doubt issue their judgment according to their code. I’m unversed in the PCC code and have no idea whether the Mail has breached it. I would be sorry, though, if Moir gets no support — not for an unpleasant piece of journalism, but for the right to publish it.
More articles from: Matthew Parris | this section
Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit
Advertisement
You can’t fight racism by ignoring facts
Was there a ‘racial’ or ‘cultural’ angle to the crimes…
Ancient and modern: The wrong ancient gods
The Royal Mint has just released some gold coins to…
The football fan theory of nationalism
Observing the fealties of football supporters, I’ve been struck by…
How I became a 24-carat goldbug
If you’re at all worried about the current global financial…
Status Anxiety: Parenting is a moral issue
When the government announced its new £5 million parenting project…
1 One man's terrorist... - Rod Liddle
2 10 Pretty Unpersuasive Reasons for Scottish Independence - Alex Massie
1,700 Unusual Christmas Presents Request Catalogue 01935 815 195 Quote SPEC10 for 10% discount www.presentfinder.co.uk
Pimilco based Florist with online ordering Web: www.olivebranch.net Tel: 020 7630 1868 Fax: 020 7233 8844
62 Shore Road, Warsash, Southampton, SO31 9FT Telephone: 01489 578867 Web site: www.ruffs.co.uk
Apollo Magazine | Corporate | Advertising | Privacy | Terms
Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London, SW1H 9HP
All Articles and Content Copyright ©2012 by The Spectator | All Rights Reserved
emjaydub
October 22nd, 2009 9:57pm Report this commentThis isn't about taking offence. Most of us as individuals can turn the other cheek to Ms Moir. What I question is the right of anyone (not only Ms Moir but her editors) to go uncriticised for spouting homophobic views in a world where - by way of a recent example of an unisolated incident - a man was kicked to death in Trafalgar Square by teenagers shouting homophobic abuse. Jan Moir and her editors bear a particular responsibility because the Daily Mail is a high circulation newspaper which has a certain influence on the general public.
Back to top