Taoiseach resignation blow to Scottish independence – go figure

Having apparently feared that “one too many and they’ll turn” Bertie Ahern is to resign. The Irish PM has indicated that various scandal investigations – from which he insists he has nothing to hide – threaten to undermine the office of Taoiseach. So much for the bare facts on a story that will not have eluded those with a passing interest in British and Irish politics.

The connection between Ahern’s fate and Scotland’s independence prospects appear to be tenuous but The Herald earns top marks for trying. In today’s (Thursday) leader, the paper warns:

“This has a resonance for Scotland, Britain and the European Union.
“Alex Salmond, the First Minister, has made much of Ireland's economic miracle, arguing it is a success story that could be emulated by Scotland if independent. The narrative looks less convincing, with potentially damaging consequences for the SNP, given Ireland's economic problems. The challenge now for Dublin's coalition government is to manage a transition from high to low growth. Ministers warn of tougher times ahead. If the Celtic Tiger has been tamed, it will hold less appeal for Mr Salmond and be less persuasive for Scots in the run-up to a possible referendum on independence.”

Now, it is of course unfair to blame Alf Young for claptrap such as this when editorials are invariably printed without a byline. Nevertheless, the work does seem to bear his thumbprint to an extent that even Shirley McKie would be unlikely to challenge.

This is not a new theme to The Herald leader comment. On 14 February, the paper posited:

“It can be argued that Dublin has become, in many ways, Ireland's London. An EU report, published earlier this week, on wealth disparities in different parts of Europe, highlighted the discrepancies and inequalities in Ireland between thriving and poorer areas. There is a bigger question to address in the context of the so-called Irish miracle. Is the Celtic tiger running out of energy? If so, it would challenge many of Mr Salmond's assumptions and could, potentially, undermine the case for independence.”

Just a few days earlier (8 February) Young was identified as the author of the following with what should by now be a familiar theme:

“Let me offer one example from the Salmond government's own hand.

“It has just published a discussion paper on tackling poverty, inequality and deprivation in Scotland. In it, the SNP government proposes a cohesion golden rule which seeks more balanced growth across Scotland to give all Scots "the chance to succeed". But research it has commissioned shows just how hard it might be to deliver on that. Between 1995 and 2005, according to findings on page 17, Scottish GDP increased by, on average, 2.5% a year. Over the same period, annual growth in two of Alex Salmond's arc of prosperity countries, Ireland and Finland, averaged 7.5% and 3.5% respectively.

“Should we assume that higher growth then led to greater fairness? Not a bit of it. Between 1995 and 2005, despite that stratospheric growth, the percentage of people in poverty in Ireland rose from 19% to 20%…”

“But [the SNP government] has staked substantial political capital [its first] Budget delivering some transformational changes in Scotland's economy and in the kind of country Scotland is. If it fails to deliver, it will have no-one but itself to blame”.

The Herald, perhaps precipitously, last year celebrated 300 years of the union with the assertion that partnership with England had generally served Scotland’s interests well, warning of the uncertain perils of separation. In the aftermath of the Holyrood elections, and perhaps having underestimated the strength of support for independence amongst Herald readers, the pro-unionist line has generally been less explicit of late while still prompting invective in response.

The Herald may, of course, take any position it pleases but scare-mongering on the basis of an Irish politician’s domestic problems (and perhaps hinting at old prejudices) will do nothing for the title’s credibility on this issue of such profound importance to Scotland's people.

Red top red faced over Jock Stein slur

Sports journalists are a breed apart. This is a rule, and therefore with exceptions but, by definition, too few to undermine the inherent truth of the statement.

That much has long been understood by anyone who has ever worked at a moderately sized title, mixed with a few hacks or even read the back pages as well as the front.

They have their own style guides – happily contradicting the edicts applying to other desks; their own understanding of the profile of their readership and how it is best served and, more importantly, their own set of standards and values.

The logic behind the latter factor is that, frankly, sport doesn’t matter. As long as it entertains and doesn’t leave the title liable to any risk, pretty much anything can be written within the general parameters of the tabloid or broadsheet “brand”.

Unfounded speculation that a senior politician or captain of industry plans to defect? Unthinkable. Mischievous rumours that a star player or manager will be grazing pastures new next season? Harmless fun.

Broadsheets (yes, let’s abuse that term before it becomes obsolete) will indulge less in the fiction than their diminutive rivals but often compensate with the use of contrived opinion and verbosity.

But there is another reason for the distinction between the sports desks and the proper journalists – the calibre of men (and few women) themselves.

Even on a quality title, the hack foolish enough to converse too frequently on anything more philosophical than Andy Murray’s mood swings will be branded a prima donna or a "poof" before too long. And that too often attracts those whose values and rationale are informed by the loudest voices on the football terraces.

Generally required to do nothing more than “slag the other side” to disguise their partisanship, hacks spend much of their day idly winding up sports fans and gleefully reading the irate letters in response. However, these happy few who rarely have the responsibility of dealing with sensitive matters occasionally allow malicious chuckles to drown out the quiet voices of reason, decency and common sense.

This week, that charge is rightly levelled at the Daily Record. For the benefit of the innocents – who won’t be thankful for the background information – an appalling campaign has in recent times been directed at the former Celtic and Scotland manager Jock Stein. Primarily heard from Rangers fans, though infamously also christening Linlithgow Rose’s entry to the Scottish Cup, the chants of “Big Jock Knew” have been used to attempt to implicate Jock Stein in the Celtic Boys Club abuse scandal of decades ago. That the jibe is as relevant, tasteful and accurate as holding Winston Churchill accountable for the Holocaust is neither here nor there. It has been happening, almost all of Scottish football knows it, and very few writers have bothered to mention it.

But the Daily Record managed to go beyond dereliction of duty this week, attaching a “Big Jock Crew” kicker to a photo in the paper this week while feigning ignorance of its error. Subsequently confronted with outrage, Sports Editor Jim Traynor has acknowledged the mistake and the paper issued a printed apology while at the same time certain figures tried to deflect from the seriousness of the issue with implausible excuses issued through “contacts”.

This time, though, they have clearly gone too far and riled Celtic into action on this “poisonous, repugnant, despicable and cowardly campaign”. The club statement went on: “With regard to the newspaper involved, the club has discussed this issue with their senior management, who have assured us that they are regretful as to what has happened and that they will be taking action.”

And the management assurances are likely to be credible. At a time when every print title is under intense pressure with regard to circulation and advertising, major potential economic partners have unprecedented leverage against the media.

Traynor has borne the brunt of the fans’ criticism having done what he had to do in taking responsibility for the mistake while defending his desk. There are worse crimes than that.

But he is no fool – he knows that his reputation is tarnished by such output from unnamed staff (or non-regular casuals as one report claimed). As a writer formerly of some standing and a very smart individual, Traynor is known to sometimes despair of the quality of professionals entering sports journalism. When such cheap shots as these “three little words” appear, however, we must all wonder at the motivations of person responsible.

Trust, ethics and the Scottish Licensed Trade News

Never trust a journalist.

We’ve all heard it – it is a maxim that rankles with many and some expend great energy convincing people it is unfair. There are two main ways of doing that – lying through your teeth or trying to adhere to the highest standards of “journalistic ethics”, whatever they are.

Sadly, not every journalist cares. Take, for example, the reporter from the Scottish Licensed Trade News, one of Scotland’s most influential trade papers. Now some say that journalism and PR are a bad mix – one tries to get to the heart of the story and expose the truth; the other tries to deflect from the story with any amount of diversionary fluff.

That is simplistic and unfair, of course: the reality is a tale of shades of grey.

But when a journo in a trade title has a background in PR, perhaps you better watch out. At least, that is the moral of the story of one young man who had an off-guarded moment with a woman who phoned him at work. She was chatty, a bit unusual and asked if he would mind if she asked him a few questions. He was affable, trusting, tired, indulgent of people and naïve.

So after easing in with questions about a particular football match day and how things were in the area – the atmosphere, any trouble, whether people enjoyed the day, if it was fun to work, etc., he was “softened up” by the time it came to ask two more sinister questions.

“Was business quite good?”
“Yeah, we had a good day.”
“Can I ask how much you made, for example?”

In black and white, it is obvious that the only correct answer to that is click-brrrrrrrr. But, we’ve all been there in one sense or another – taken in, deceived, conned.

Any of us who have made similar mistakes would hope that the damage would be minimal. We would certainly hope that we weren’t talking to a journalist that hadn’t identified herself as such. If she was, we might hope that she would just use the information so carelessly given and dishonestly gleaned as simple background, rather than publishing every detail including precise figures. And, if ever there was a time for a journalist to protect her sources, rather than naming the individual in the trade paper, that would seem to be it.

However, these sentiments are apparently far from the mind of the kid-on hacks at SLTN. And the outcome? One young man who had spent five years with the company, working his way up to the position of assistant bar manager lost his job.

SLTN, part of the Peebles Media group, has had a reputation in recent years for being willing to smudge the line between editorial and advertorial depending on the importance of the client. Allegations that senior figures at the group have offered key advertisers the option of writing their own copy, which would be printed without identification as adverts, have persisted almost since the former editor Pat Duffy moved on from his role of direct responsibility for the title. It is understood that Duffy would not countenance such activity.

On one level or another, that type of things happens in many better-known titles. But when staff are obtaining information by deception at the cost of people’s jobs, it brings shame on the title and makes that proposition of trust ever harder to justify.