MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
Obviously this is a forum belonging to a magazine, and so likely to include a journalist or two, but I was wondering if one might be able to advise me.
I run a small (so far!) enterprise that is primarily education-focused, but for which I would like to get recognition as a journalistic agency. Now, having spent a good few days trying to wade through the countless websites on the subject, I still can't figure out what I need to do, or what organisation I need to approach for advice/registration. There appear to be a few organisations for individuals that also involve demanding proof of journalistic work, but that presents the chicken-egg problem, and also doesn't quite match what I think I need.
So I'm not actually sure what I need, or even what it is I am asking, but I would really appreciate hearing from someone that might be able to help me navigate these new waters.
I'd say the obvious first step would be to join the NUJ so you can become a credited journalist yourself. By that I mean you can get an NUJ 'Press' card, which is a remarkably useful thing.
I'm not sure I fully understand your situation. You don't need accreditation to publish journalistic work. Anyone can do it, it's just writing and publishing, whether it's in a physical form or via online media such as blogs etc. So I'm not sure what a 'journalistic agency' actually is in the context of a private business.
As an individual, there are qualifications in journalism, such as the National Council for the Training of Journalists, but these are more about offering a grounding in general news journalism so you can get a job with a media organisation.
I believe Martin (above) and I are the forum's resident professional jouranlists, although I've moved into marketing myself.
If I catch your drift, then I don't think what you are looking for exists. There's no one body which recognises "proper" journalists in the UK (unless they kept it secret from me).
As mofo said, joining the NUJ can be very useful in giving you some degree of credibility - and perhaps help if things go wrong.
If you're looking for something like the local council to recognise you as press and invite you to briefings etc, then I believe that's just up to them.
If you just want to write stuff, crack on and do it.
And yeah, the NCTJ is the recognised specialist training provider for the sector. And I still see their qualification stipulated on some job adverts.
Their courses were very good in the late '90s, but you might want to get a more current view.
believe Martin (above) and I are the forum’s resident professional jouranlists,
<Subbing intensifies>
It's been a while since I wore my hat with the press card tucked in the brim. Actually, I've never had a press card, NUJ or otherwise.
Basically, these days, anyone can be a journalist, because all it takes is the desire to write stuff and the means to publish it to an audience. If you want to report on a specific event where the organisers are asking for accreditation for entry, you just need to have a conversation with the organisers, explain who you are and what you do, and supply links to stuff you've published if requested.
<Subbing intensifies>
Haha, I'm off duty when I'm on social media.
I even use the odd exclamation mark from time to time, against my better judgement.
OP, it's not very clear what you want to use 'press accreditation' to achieve? My assumption is that it's so you (or members of your enterprise) can attend or be invited to events (ie press conferences, committee meetings, openings etc) as members of the media? If so, then there's no single magic pass, though working for a recognised media outlet is the most obvious point of entry. However, if you simply wish to publish 'news' then there's nothing stopping you just doing that so fill your boots. (Former editor on national newspapers and ex-NUJ member - and the NUJ is where I got my press card that did get me into various places.)
This is all extremely helpful, thank you.
You rightly detected that I don't know what I am asking for, but you managed to answer my question anyway. You see, I had a colleague in Canada who was able to get a 'Press Card' for himself when he started a small paper, and with it he was able to get recognised 'Press' status at certain (fairly impressive) events.
I have established an outfit here in the UK (a bit like GCN, but dedicated to another topic entirely!), and wanted to gain access to certain events in the near future. But if I understand you correctly, I should just apply to the event organisers with an explanation of who I am, and hope that they will grant me/my organisation Press status. Otherwise, it may be helpful in some instances to join the NUJ, but otherwise just crack on.
So, if I have summed it up accurately, I have what I need. In which case, thank you again!
to get a ‘Press Card’ for himself
Do they still have the machines in service stations that make business cards?
Interesting thread this...
Since the vast majority of media outlets are owned or run by the rich and powerful, (and for the most part, journalists prefer getting paid well and enhancing their career prospects) how many important stories never get exposure?
I spent almost 2 decades in global media as a hard news editor, in various countries.
Journalism is a vocation and credentials serve one purpose - to try to keep people out (read breakingsmart dot com for insight on the perils of pastoralists and their creds).
In SaxonRider's case the only thing people will want to know is a) can he get them to an audience and b) how trust worthy, or in this day and age, how manipulable is he? Will he take a story as it is pitched, or will he put his own spin on it?
Jive honey - sigh. And sigh with weary exhaustion once more. There are many stories that go unreported, but 99.9999% of the time it is because they are not real stories or they are boring. There is no global conspiracy from the Illuminati policing what we can or cannot read.
To be clear: Journalism is not about freedom for the press or protecting democracy or holding the powerful to account. It is a business and it is there to make money - often for people who are already very wealthy. The whole upholding of democracy blah blah thing is a happy side product of money being made in most cases, but it is not the primary aim.
Orwell (I think) was spot on when he said: Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed; everything else is public relations. The problem is that puts the onus on us to be able to critically interrogate the media and most people can't/won't/don't for whatever reason.
I'm an inveterate lefty so I think the Tories continual beat-up on "mickey mouse degrees like media studies" are entirely self-serving, rather than expressing concern with the quality of education.
If you want to be a journalist, be a journalist. I'm happily out of it (burned out and PTSD), but it is a great way to make a meagre living.
Jive honey – sigh. And sigh with weary exhaustion once more. There are many stories that go unreported, but 99.9999% of the time it is because they are not real stories or they are boring. There is no global conspiracy from the Illuminati policing what we can or cannot read.
I admit in the past I may have pursued some foolish avenues... there again, I was well ahead of the curve on the whole Prince Andrew thing.
Speaking of which, feel free to fact check what is mentioned in the speech bubbles; if you're not familiar the guy on the left is Turki Bin Faisal, head of Saudi intelligence throughout the 80s and 90s, who resigned on Sept 1st, 2001; one of his son's is currently the Saudi sports minister
https://twitter.com/OldTomYoung/status/1196015237599809536
(not that I'm suggesting such a conversation ever took place, simply a means of getting facts out there in a concise fashion)
🥱
Breaking news: Wealthy people use their wealth and their connections to protect their wealth and connections!
🥱🥱🙄
@ Jive Bunny - You need a Mastermix of that to get Mavis to elbow Doris and proclaim: Hey Doris, have you seen ... ! Otherwise that Twitter guff - true or not - is going nowhere other than a circlejerk.
Hmmm, if only there were any accredited journalists with the gumption and will to kick ass, rather than bowing down for reliable paycheck...
@ Jive - What difference would accreditation here make? I * suspect * you are mistaking reach for accreditation? You want someone with an audience of millions to pick up your pet project and do the leg work for you? You don't want to do the legwork because you don't know what the story is, or how to stand it up or if it is actually a story.
The whole point about journalism is that it doesn't need accreditation. You could be a bus driver and do the legwork on the story on the side and then sell it to the Mirror. The Mirror won't ask for your accreditation.
If you've got a bee in your bonnet about wealthy people using their wealth to further their wealth, do something about it. Don't dump on the poor newsroom grunts who are lucky to make £25k a year these days and adopt a holier than thou stance.
To use one of your expressions: Wake up! There are fewer paid journalists than 20 years ago. There are more channels to feed than before (all the socials). And they earn less than ever. Where exactly are the hacks going to find the time or resources to wade through the smug inside Tweets of a few self-proclaimed Twitterati having a circle jerk?
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/07/13/u-s-newsroom-employment-has-fallen-26-since-2008/
Honestly JHJ - have a word with yourself. Wake up! Take the red pill, man.
@ Jive - I need to step away - but there is a newsroom truism that you need to hear: The people get the press they want.
For all your talk of circle jerks, surely the same could be said of the state of journalism; the same stories get bandied around through all the mainstream channels, whilst some stories are suppressed by them all, for whatever reason...
Don’t dump on the poor newsroom grunts who are lucky to make £25k a year these days and adopt a holier than thou stance.
Are Esme Wren and Emily Maitlis really paid so poorly?
As for legwork, take a deep dive, not forgetting to fact check as you go:
For all of the extensive research you claim to have done, have you ever had the gumption or balls to publish any of it under your own name? Even on here you hide behind a pseudonym. I wonder why that is?
If the evidence is as compelling as you would have us believe, why are you so lacking in confidence that you need a media organisation to publish it on your behalf?
That's the other side of the journalism coin. Not only do you have to publish these claims, you have to be accountable and prepared to prove them if required.
Funny you should say that...
Any questions?
Hmmm, if only there were any accredited journalists with the gumption and will to kick ass, rather than bowing down for reliable paycheck…
Well this isn't a movie, unfortunately. And even if it were, what happens to most of the ass-kicking journalists in those? Maybe if you were 29, female and gorgeous you'd be alright but not me, I'm the wrong side of 45. Although I'm a fair way to retirement so that might protect me a bit. OTOH have kids, so it depends what the certificate of the movie is.
I'm not even sure what your twitter link was about. Some rich people up to no good? Yeah, probably.
You're right, it's not a movie, real life is often far grittier...
Retired journo here. I went and did a marketing.
<Subbing intensifies>
I see your cardigan, @MartinHutch.
From what I can see, OP, it sounds like you want to gain access to events run by companies or organisations that your organisation covers. Generally, it's a case of proving to those organisations that you cover that sort of stuff. Look at something like TES: aside from the fact it's already really well known, sending the Comms team for an education trade show the URL for the mag plus physical copies with your name in the flannel panel is usually enough to prove that you have some sort of role as a journalist.
The catch is when your organisation may also benefit from you being there in other ways. Having briefly ventured to the dark side that is the press office for a fairly major technology insights company a long time ago, there are always a few people who try to get in with a press pass who should really be paying the entrance fee. So think quite carefully about whether the thing you are trying to get access to is something you're covering for news value / content or something you're attending for benefit to your business.
Until 2015 a newspaper was obliged to register as such - if you have an old back issue of a UK mag or paper from before then, you'll see something in the flannel panel about it being registered as a newspaper. This is to do with the 1881 Newspaper Libel and Registration Act, which was repealed in 2015. That often didn't cover websites or news agencies like AP, Reuters or SWNS. That may also have been what you are thinking of. No such requirement now, AFAIK: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/repeal-of-the-newspaper-libel-and-registration-act-1881
Individually, the NCTJ is the commonly-accepted training accreditation for professional journalists, as Chakaping says - but that covers the practical bits of the job, such as shorthand, news writing, basic editing, layout, broadcast, legal (court reporting and avoiding libel, primarily) and so on. I did mine so long ago that list is incomplete and outdated. The expectation is that the NCTJ gave you the basics and a good newsroom gave your the finer craft - I got mine at the South Wales Echo before graduation and then in greater depth at Dennis and Future as a magazine journo.
Then there's press ID. The most common is issued by the NUJ and is recognised by various bodies, including ACPO as a form of identity. I think I last had to use mine in London on 7/7, although it also came in handy as a form of ID when I was stopped and searched by the Met shortly after. To get that, you need to become a member and demonstrate you are involved in some sort of journalistic enterprise; you can be a journalist without working for a major publishing organisation, by the way. It doesn't get you access to a cabal of lizard people or reveal what's inside the pyramids or anything, but it does prove you're a journalist in some way shape or form. It's most often useful at large public events, especially those that are policed, as it identifies you as a bona fide news gatherer. That's why you often see photographers and journalists at demonstrations with their NUJ cards in laminate pouches, publicly displayed. Although sometimes that means a random protestor or 5-0 gives you a thump, too.
Jive honey – sigh. And sigh with weary exhaustion once more. There are many stories that go unreported, but 99.9999% of the time it is because they are not real stories or they are boring. There is no global conspiracy from the Illuminati policing what we can or cannot read.
To be clear: Journalism is not about freedom for the press or protecting democracy or holding the powerful to account. It is a business and it is there to make money – often for people who are already very wealthy. The whole upholding of democracy blah blah thing is a happy side product of money being made in most cases, but it is not the primary aim.
Orwell (I think) was spot on when he said: Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed; everything else is public relations. The problem is that puts the onus on us to be able to critically interrogate the media and most people can’t/won’t/don’t for whatever reason.
Excellent summary.
Sigh. I know better than this. The first rule of the internet is not to argue with idiots, and yet, here I am 🤦♂️
Well done Tom, you once posted something to Facebook six years ago. Trebles all around!
In one of the newsrooms I worked, with 3 other journos I was responsible for lining up 90 minutes of TV news every day and updating 3 three websites - one of them with a continuous breaking news stream. The best part of my day was idiots who wanted me to cover a story without being able to tell me what the story was because I should do the investigating for them 🤦♂️
What I love is that you feel qualified to tell a whole industry how to do its respective jobs better, without, I imagine, ever having a worked a day in that industry.
What is it you do Tom? Can I come to your workplace and tell you how to do it betterer so that it fits with my worldview?
So say for example I got a press card; and blagged my way into a downing street press conference; how many awkward questions could I ask, before being escorted from the building and not invited back?
On the flipside, if I were to essentially toady to HM Government, whilst asking mildly uncomfortable questions in such a way as to appear probing, what kind of a lifestyle might I enjoy?
Oh and by the way, I'm currently a professional MTB trail builder and uplift driver; all feedback welcome 😉
how many awkward questions could I ask, before being escorted from the building and not invited back?
The thing is though, sometimes questions aren't awkward because the secret lizard overlords don't want you exposing the truth. Sometimes they're just a banal string of whataboutery and insinuation that is fruitless and annoying for everyone. That's probably what'd get you kicked out.
Sometimes they’re just a banal string of whataboutery and insinuation that is fruitless and annoying for everyone. That’s probably what’d get you kicked out.
🙂
how many awkward questions could I ask, before being escorted from the building and not invited back?
Does remind me of someone...
His investigative journalism career isn't going too well either.....
Even a cursory reading of the Facebook link vs the Big Stink blogpost you linked earlier shows why you are happy to put your name on one but not the other. I assume the blog is yours? Why not stick your name on it?
If I was handed your rambling blog on a newsdesk, my interpretation would be that the author is flirting with some highly defamatory innuendo about a serving Conservative MP. My knowledge of the law surrounding defamation would prohibit me from regurgitating any of it without significant evidence of wrongdoing to back it up. It would never get legalled, in fact it would never get beyond my desk. That's not because I'm part of a corrupt cabal, it's because I understand how the legal system works, and because your evidence is somewhere between weak and non-existent.
Basically, a writer may think they're being smart by offering up a long list of 'facts', not spelling out the allegation, and leaving it to the reader to make the connections they're hinting at, but if the sum of them or the way they are arranged could produce a defamatory innuendo of the worst kind, then the author and publisher better be prepared to back it up.
@MartinHutch - #nailedit
Beautifully done. Straight, honest and succinct.
You’ve just shown me how out of practice I am 🤣🤣 Happily I’m now a decade out of the game.
So am I. Got sick of all the lizards. 🙂
Hold on my dudes - we're lizards too, right?
BRB. Got to dislocate my jaw to swallow a frozen hamster.
Ah got it, so the general tone of veterans of the industry is that dodgy so and so's should be left well alone?
That seems a bit odd to me; if it wasn't thanks to journalists asking awkward questions, issues like the dodgy events surrounding the Iraq dossier, the links between climate change and the fossil fuels industry or indeed, Prince Andrew's dabbling in the arms trade and the Al Yamamah Oil for Arms deal would never have come to light. Delving further you could surmise that the arms industry and foreign invasions are often in pursuit of those same fossil fuels that are leading to the accelerated demise of the planet whose hospitality we all enjoy
(Of course, my life would probably be far simpler if this information wasn't readily available, but I digress)
Despite the efforts of many brave veterans of the press, often draconian measures like the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill make it all the harder to fight the powers that be...
10 years for defacing a statue!
But does that mean we should just leave the world to burn?
I was under the impression that a lot of the reason people got into the press into the 1st place was to use their platform to make the world a better place...
No Jive, the tone of the veterans is extreme fatigue and frustration.
There is a right way to do things and there is a wrong way. You are a fully paid-up member of the Wrong Way to Influence People club.
Honestly, I got out because I got sick of muppets like you on the phone or social willfully refusing to read or write in complete sentences. And the reward for doing so was not enough to a pay mortgage.
Most people got into journalism because they wanted a job and to earn enough to support themselves. Most get out because they don't earn enough to support themselves. For many journalism is little more than subsistence living - and let me be clear, that ain't nearly enough for it to seem worth engaging with the delusions of the Wrong Way to Influence People Club.
Some got into it because they simply like writing. That's probably most. I didn't know what else to do and was curious about the world. A vanishingly small percentage are deluded enough to get it into it with a view to changing the world.
Anyways, as to your work - you're too jerky when letting off the clutch to start your uplifts and your trails lack the joyful flow of those built by Glen Jacobs. Your lefts are consistently too shallow and overall the lack of imagination in working with the land is disappointing.
I never said I maintain the uplifts 🤷♂️
As for the rest, it's food for thought, but if I catch you skidding, you'll be eating homegrown sweetmeats 🥜
I never said I maintain the uplifts 🤷♂️
CONSPIRACY!!!11111!!!
so the general tone of veterans of the industry is that dodgy so and so’s should be left well alone?
also
Despite the efforts of many brave veterans of the press,
Plus two links to stories where the media did cover allegations of misdeeds of powerful individuals without fear or favour.
Which is it? You can't have it both ways.
The difference in the published stories you link is the quality of evidence. What you present falls so far short of the threshold of proof that a major news organisation would have to be insane to touch it. Even you know it, hence the flirting around the edges rather than coming straight out and making the accusation, plus your decision to keep your name off the blog.
Spell it out. What exactly are you accusing Sir Roger Gale of being involved with? You won't, obviously, you'll deflect, you'll evade, you'll ignore, you'll change the subject. I don't think, for all your thousands of words on here, you've ever made a direct accusation against any of these public figures. But somehow, it's the job of other organisations to assume that risk, not you.
In terms of your day job, it's like me telling you to put a massive jump with no landing onto one of your trails, then accusing you of cowardice because you suggested that it would expose you and your organisation to significant liability.
Yes, the pay-to-play libel laws are harnessed by the powerful to suppress stories, and yes, editors won't print evidence-free allegations and innuendo on that basis. But the counter-argument is that if the balance is tilted too far against those who are subject to serious accusations, then the press and others would abuse this. The willingness of the media to speak ill of the dead is testament to this. In the states, where libel laws are far, far weaker, the supermarket tabloids routinely trash the reputations of ordinary people with no recourse.
Basically, a writer may think they’re being smart by offering up a long list of ‘facts’, not spelling out the allegation, and leaving it to the reader to make the connections they’re hinting at,
That is exactly the strategy used by the Anti-vaccine brigade. If they outright accused the vaccines of killing people etc they'd get sued / blocked, so they just list a load of leading question, implying but not explicitly saying what they want people to think.
The NY Times did an excellent exposee on the subject.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/24/technology/joseph-mercola-coronavirus-misinformation-online.html
Appreciate there's a lot ot untangle there; maybe in future I should go for a more bitesize format; dripping information, rather than drowning the audience with it...
To me at least, Big Stinks is catchier than just another name; besides, my name is pretty clear from the linked twitter account
Nonetheless, I think this is a fair question:
How is it that the Director of BBC Children’s programming responsible for this piece of TV history:
came to be chairing the Parliamentary debate on the Brexit Withdrawal Bill over 40 years later?
maybe in future I should go for a more bitesize format; dripping information, rather than drowning the audience with it…
No, just get to the point and tell us, what you do think is the answer to the question you just posed?
what you do think is the answer to the question you just posed?
Let me guess, the illuminati, Q-Anon, Lizard Overloads?
Am I close?
No, just get to the point and tell us, what you do think is the answer to the question you just posed?
Huh... that's not how you do things in the press though, is it?
What with all those embargoes n whatnot...
Let me guess, the illuminati, Q-Anon, Lizard Overloads?
Am I close?
Not even slightly, but muddy the waters if you must...
Not even slightly,
So if you 'know' the answer, why not just post it?
I appreciate there’s a lot ot untangle there;
As an accredited lizard person I lack the opposing digits necessary for untangling stuff, I'm afraid. The knots are too tricky for my tiny little scaly claws.
What are you on about?
As I said before, evade, ignore, change the subject. It's been your MO forever, as far as I can tell. God help any journo who gets you on the tip line.
Do your own research
It pretty clear I have, hence the question:
How is it that the Director of BBC Children’s programming responsible for this piece of TV history:
came to be chairing the Parliamentary debate on the Brexit Withdrawal Bill over 40 years later?
No, it's not clear. Humour us in our stupidity. What are you saying about Sir Roger Gale, MP?
It's like trying to nail down jelly.
'Would you like to buy the pork pie?'
'I don't think you really know about why I'm here today.'
'You mean you're not in my shop trying to buy that pork pie you're holding?'
'You don't seem to be aware of the insidious link between lizards, Big Pork Pie(tm) and Prince Andrew.'
'What?'
'Do I need to spell it out for you?'
'No, there are other customers here, I don't have all day and I want to know if you're going to buy that pork pie or put it back on the fridge, actually.'
'Yeah, but the BBC has misreported the location of this pork pie because Jimmy Savile.'
etc etc.
Are you sure jivehoneyjive isn't really Tommy Robinson?
Same standard of investigative journalism and I've never seen both of them in the same room?
What are you saying about Sir Roger Gale, MP?
Well, before he was elevated to Her Majesty's Privy council on 13th February 2019, he had quite a colourful history...
Bit like Sir Edward Leigh I suppose:
https://bigstinks.wordpress.com/2019/04/21/privy-to-what/
Well, before he was elevated to Her Majesty’s Privy council on 13th February 2019, he had quite a colourful history…
Bit like Sir Edward Leigh I suppose:
No, not Edward Leigh, Roger Gale.
What specifically has he done recently that is of concern?
If this was a newspaper I’d be back to page 3. What EXACTLY is the story about Mr Gale?
Spell it out in clear words, no links allowed.
I don't really appreciate your tone; you can after all read, so do so...
No, all I'm reading are vague questions by way of insinuation. What are you actually saying about Mr Gale? And no questions allowed.
When presented with facts, would you make these same outrageous demands of an accredited journalist?
When presented with facts, would you make these same outrageous demands of an accredited journalist?
A straight answer to a very simple question about your 'journalism'? How outrageous!
I don’t really appreciate your tone
Oh my. 🙂
I don’t really appreciate your tone; you can after all read, so do so…
You can't actually answer the question, can you? Are you Michael Howard?
What specifically has he done recently that is of concern?
OK you lazy ****ers, you do the legwork, I ain't being paid after all
https://generalaviationappg.uk/parliamentary-members/
JHJ, that's sort of the point that's been made to you above, and I'm not sure if you are deliberately choosing to ignore it.
Journalists state the position (often / usually) backed by facts, they don't insinuate.
That's why they struggle to cut through sometimes, and why you'll never be a journalist.
It's a bit off to accuse them of something that you consistently fail to do in your output i.e. articulate the direct accusations. And to test my theory...
Specifically, what has Mr Gale done recently that should concern us?
If you ever do get paid, make sure it's by the word rather than on actual content.
they don’t insinuate.
Don't make me laugh... all too often the hired guns of the press will insinuate every which way to nail a character assassination for political ends; meanwhile, some particularly nasty people get off scott free; why is that?
So, to clarify, which of the facts presented in the blog do you dispute?
And why is it that those with years of collective experience in the industry aren't trying to help a guy who's clearly worked his arse off to investigate further?
And why is it that those with years of collective experience in the industry aren’t trying to help a guy who’s clearly worked his arse off to investigate further?
Because your game of unrelated facts, faint innuendo and leading questions contains no hard evidence of serious wrongdoing. Zero. You won't even tell us what this wrongdoing you'd like us to investigate is.
You may have worked your arse off, but there is very little to show for it.
Anyone who has worked in a proper newsroom has encountered plenty of people like you. One of the skills you learn is to spot the difference between genuine news stories you might be able to prove and grandiose conspiracy-buffs who just tell you the mayor is a nonce and you should look into it.
When presented with facts, would you make these same outrageous demands of an accredited journalist?
It is literally the job of sub-editors and editors to make sure that aCcReDiTeD jOuRnAlIsTs can spit out the story and explain what the sweet **** they're on about. If they can't do that (just like you can't) they don't last very long in the industry.
why is that?
You tell us JHJ, and do it without recourse to a blog or a link referencing people who like small planes. And do it without asking another question.
Just spell it out.
And whilst you're at it explain the wrong doings of Mr Gale 😀
JHJ
Tell us what he’s done or shut up.
Anything outside of those bounds will get you a ban for being a deliberate troll
Many cases go to court with no hard evidence
No, they don't. Does not happen.
Crown Prosecutors must be satisfied there is enough evidence to provide a "realistic prospect of conviction" against each defendant.
https://www.cps.gov.uk/publication/code-crown-prosecutors
It's a massive story that is immensely tricky to piece together; that's why it's easier to present in a blog...
To get up to speed, you really need to be aware of Julian Lewis' role in the cover up of North Wales child abuse, then work back to the 70s and his days working with his mentor Brian Crozier and that bastion of Childrens TV (and Guiness world records) Norris McWhirter, with the Freedom Association
That takes us to Brian Crozier's work with Le Cercle:
Within the leaks revealed by the Langemann Papers (relating to Le Cercle meetings in 1979 and 1980) is a quote a from planning paper by Brian Crozier about a Cercle complex operation “to affect a change of government in the United Kingdom (accomplished)”
Wait, WHAT?
Affect a change of government, isn’t that something the MI6 and the CIA do in far off places like Iran, Chile, or Libya?
Well yes, but as Cambridge Analytica shows, there’s also all sorts of ways that the ‘democratic’ outcomes of Her Majesty’s Government can be influenced
Assuming Brian Crozier’s claims hold true, how did they do it?
Well, given what has since come out about Jeffrey Epstein and his myriad links to the global political elite (not forgetting his hidden cameras), it doesn't seem too far fetched to suggest blackmail operations...
Now, Brian Crozier's claims to have affected a change of Government in the UK would relate to the election of Margaret Thatcher, whom he'd met, whilst she was leader of Her Majesty's opposition, at the residence of the Viscount De L’Isle:
errr, this Viscount De L'Isle:
But back to Margaret Thatcher...
Long before she got into Chequers, whilst still leader of Her Majesty’s Opposition, Margaret Thatcher appeared with Jimmy Savile on Jim’ll fix it:
The programme was a primetime broadcast on New Years Day 1977; however, it would’ve been filmed beforehand sometime in 1976.
Who was Margaret Thatcher's private secretary when this was being arranged?
Edward Leigh, son of Sir Neville Leigh head of the privy council from 1974-1984
Leigh also a long time associate of Julian Lewis and Brian Crozier
Edward Leigh is alleged to be a child abuser, though these allegations have never been tested in court
But hold on, you wanted to know about Sir Roger Gale...
well, on the face of it, Gale being elevated to Her Majesty's privy council on the same day as Sir Edward Leigh seems completely innocuous
Now, back to 1976, when Brian Crozier, Norris McWhirter and Julian Lewis were cooking up all kinds of political chicanery, who pray tell was appointed as Director of BBC Children’s Television?
Roger Gale
to delve deeper on this, you really need to know more of Roger Gale's past, from his role as personal assistant to the general manager at universal studios (Beginning in 1962), mafia ties n all, to his role in setting up Radio 270 (1966-67), a pirate radio station broadcast from a ship moored off Scarborough.
Managing director of Radio 270 was Wilf Proudfoot, who having previously been a Conservative MP, wasn't averse to using the station for political broadcasts.
A group of Conservative MPs and activists became involved with Radio 270. These included the MP for Beverley, Patrick Wall. The station gave airtime to a number of political causes including a broadcast by Wall in which he advocated British recognition of the white minority UDI regime in Rhodesia. Radio 270 broadcast advertisements supporting Conservative party candidates in the Scarborough municipal elections of 1967.
As Programme Director, Roger Gale (who had joined the Conservatives in 1964) would've been involved with booking and facilitating these broadcasts; including:
Harvey Proctor, then Chairman of the University of York Conservative Society, made regular half hour current affairs broadcasts.
Proctor went on to have a controversial career as a Conservative MP and prominent member of the Conservative Monday Club.
We'll leave it there for now...
Do I allege that Sir Roger Gale is directly implicated in child abuse?
No, but there can be no doubt he knows far more than he's telling
Your words JHJ (and you still can't avoid using a question):
Do I allege that Sir Roger Gale is directly implicated in child abuse?
No
Best leave it there eh?
Lives get ruined by this tripe.
Lives get ruined
Never a truer word spoken, but I get the feeling you're not too concerned about the lives of the victims of organized abuse.
Or the planet for that matter... as chair of the APPG on aviation, Roger Gale will be lobbying on behalf of the aviation industry, so key to the climate change that looks set to ruin millions of lives in the not too distant future.
Still, at least BAE Systems and the like will be happy; the more planes that fly, the more fuel will be consumed; and the more demand there will be for weapons systems for leverage and security in the extraction of that fuel
The OP had his questions answered. This thread has served its purpose.
Can't be bothered to wade through all of this shit on this thread, but my experience (...and i've worked for ITN/CNN/BBC by whole life) is that the more desperate people are to require bits of paper and cards saying they are bonafide journalists, the more likely they are to be cranks and not journalists at all. They are the kind of people who make a beeline for camera crews at protests in order to show them their press cards (I've never really understood this, but it's quite common) and attend student-union style meetings at groups like the NUJ where great policies are discussed and solidarity is expressed.
The usual suspects are batty old women who want to talk about the fall of the Shah (or some similar historic event often involving their fathers) and men of a certain age with a par chant for DSLR cameras and conspiracy theories. There is a particularly irritating new breed of these neo-journalists who want to talk about common law and the magna carta with anyone who will listen. They sometimes like to represent themselves as "legal observers". It doesn't matter if you are there to film the village fete, there will have been some serious breech of common law which needs urgently investigating - and there will be someone on hand to show you their press card and let you know how their inquiry is going.
Currently the Gurkha Hunger strike in Westminster is a particular magnet for such people.
The country is becoming more and more American - i suspect social media has a lot to answer before. Maybe our proud tradition of eccentricity has exacerbated the problem.
The official press card is a useful tool to get into downing street etc, but beyond that there is no "accreditation" of any form.
Joe knows. Very true what he says.
I did a couple of years reporting, but was way better as a news editor pulling everything together - and I’m so grateful to have minimised my nutter exposure as a result.
Didn’t know where else to put this but it’s a must watch IMO. Monbiot speaking more freely about/away from the MSM re the media’s complicity towards ongoing environmental destruction.
Harvey Proctor, then Chairman of the University of York Conservative Society, made regular half hour current affairs broadcasts.
.
Proctor went on to have a controversial career as a Conservative MP and prominent member of the Conservative Monday Club.
.
See the problem with Harvey is that shock white hair of his. Pretty much distinguishable from anyone else cutting about London in the mid 80's.
And another thread starts interesting and descends into tin foil hat t@#*ery......
And another thread starts interesting and descends into tin foil hat t@#*ery……
Just look at it as making life interesting. Or would you prefer yet another round of What brakes should I buy, Whats the best hardtail or why is my car not starting.
I've unsubscribed from this thread. The pub bores have taken over.
Hmmm, if only there were any accredited journalists with the gumption and will to kick ass, rather than bowing down for reliable paycheck…
There are plenty, however, if they’re not saying what you think they aught to be saying, then how long will it be before you, or others, start muttering ’fake news’…
There is one particular source that I put absolute faith in when it comes to publishing news about the powerful, they have a large number of citizen researchers with a deep knowledge of how to do in-depth searches of out-of-the-way parts of the internet, along with how to do searches for surveillance photography. I’m not going to bother giving their name, you can do your own research, you like doing that sort of stuff.
And there are many who are either in hiding, or dead, as a result of their having the gumption to kick ass in print - it’s just that those whose asses are most in need of a kick are those who have the means and the power to have such journalists murdered, and they don’t care how openly it happens, because they can just deny it. Plays well to the home crowd, you see.
If you want just one example, I’ll give you just one word - Salisbury.
To be fair, you do have a point there... Gary Webb is a clear example of a journalist who dug too deep in the days before the internet gave a far greater degree of protection;
Webb exposed drug smuggling from Central America, so key to the US Crack Epidemic (and the running of arms in return, via Mena airport)... turns out it involved not only the CIA, but also the US president at the time, Ronald Reagan and 2 men who would go on to become US presidents; George HW Bush and Bill Clinton.
And to think, all of that was going on whilst the CIA and MI6 were pumping arms into Afghanistan and aiding Osama Bin Laden's efforts before the Mujahideen became Al-Qaeda and the Taliban.
No doubt Bill Barr could fill you in on more details of that period, though of course, more recently he was tied up with the Jeffrey Epstein affair and just why it was his Father recruited Epstein in the 1st place when he lacked the necessary qualifications.
All heavy stuff no doubt, but something tells me that despite GCHQ and the NSA's best efforts, there are still ways to stick it to da man...