After its false allegations about Milly Dowler voicemails, what other falsehoods has the Guardian published?

You won’t find this update, about the Guardian’s allegations about Milly Dowler’s voicemails being deleted by people working for the News of the World, on the BBC News website.  The BBC, as the broadcast arm of the Guardian, has an editorial culture of omitting stories that paint the Guardian in a negative light and thus will act as if the story does not exist.

So rather than rely on the world’s largest news gathering organisation, with the unique way it is funded, we cross the globe to Australia’s Telegraph to learn that:

T Mobile, the company that bought the One-2-One network that Milly’s Nokia phone was registered to, yesterday confirmed that any voicemail messages left on her phone would have been automatically deleted after 72 hours whether they were listened to or not.

The Guardian, for all its lofty and self regarding cant about high standard and media ethics, went to print with allegations that were at best single sourced.  Its award winning investigations team, being fed information from police insiders, either made no effort to check if there was a technical reason for the voicemail deletions, or did check but omitted it from the story despite knowing their claims could be untrue.  This is not just shoddy, it is downright irresponsible.

But why did it happen?

Sitting in his comfortable ivory tower, the Guardian’s editor, Alan Rusbridger, saw within the story Nick Davies had drafted the vehicle with which he could escalate his petty, vindictive and politically motivated assault on Rupert Murdoch and News International.  The phone hacking story had been relentlessly pursued – not out of journalistic desire to expose unacceptable behaviour but to service an agenda to ruin Murdoch.  A nakedly political agenda of the centre left, big government, authoritarian establishment, dressed up as exposing abuse by a ‘power elite':

Via a single campaign the Guardian could undermine Murdoch‘s desire to regain control of BSkyB – thus preserving the BBC’s monopoly of news broadcasting in the UK with its centre left editorial slant.  Sure, many people would be appalled at the behaviour of the News of the World, but it would take something more emotive to provoke the kind of outrage that could result in serious and permanent damage.

The news that people working for the News of the World hacked the voicemails of a missing schoolgirl would be bad enough.  But the claim that NotW journalists or investigators deleted voicemails to make room for more emotional messages they could eavesdrop was the dynamite to hole the NotW below the waterline.  No matter what other evidence there was of NotW voicemail hacking, it was that claim that was intended to play to the famously sentimental British public and spark a kneejerk backlash that would benefit the Guardian.

Don’t be surprised.  The Guardian is well versed in underhand methods to suit its own agenda and interests.  It is already trying to wriggle out of its responsibility for repeatedly reporting so vehemently its claim about the deletion of voicemails.  Years ago the Guardian ran a vicious and hypocritical campaign to undermine the then owners of the Observer, Lonrho, its proprietor, Tiny Rowland and a number of Observer journalists so it could seize control of the Observer as a ready made Sunday stablemate.  Shamelessly using and manipulating the Dowler family and their lawyer, Mark Lewis, the Guardian machine swung into action – this time against the NotW – again to suit its own self serving interests.  This time Rusbridger and Co have been caught red handed and did what they could to bury the correction to their frequently used claim about voicemail deletions.

I’ve sometimes felt like I was wasting my time over the months trying to get people to see and understand the Guardian’s agenda, methods, and the dishonesty and hypocrisy of some of its prominent journalists.  Most people wanted to focus on other things that seemed more interesting.  But now it seems a lot of those who ignored the story being set out on this blog (including other newspapers and media), because the Guardian supposedly has prestige and this is, well, just a blog, are starting to see the Guardian for what it  is.  The number of hits in recent days shows this story is starting to pique people’s interest.

Where now from here?  This is almost certainly not the first time the Guardian has acted this way.  This is just the tip of the iceberg.  So, the question people must now ask themselves is what other falsehoods has the Guardian retailed to an unwitting public in support of a self serving agenda?  It is time to look at the Guardian’s editorial history with fresh eyes.

About these ads

15 Responses to “After its false allegations about Milly Dowler voicemails, what other falsehoods has the Guardian published?”


  1. 1 Dizzy Ringo 14/12/2011 at 10:43 pm

    Many years ago the Guardian was called the Manchester Guardian. It was considered as solid in its niche as the Yorkshire Post – sort of right of centre liberal – with a small l. In 1953 it sided with Eisenhower over the invasion of Suez and all the worthy burghers of Manchester cancelled their orders. So the circulation dipped.
    Then it got delusions of grandeur – “all newspapers of note must be located in London”. So while old Mrs Scott (widow of CP Scott) was away on her usual trip to warmer climes from Jan to March, they took the decision to move to London – and the rest is history.

  2. 2 Arthur Dent 14/12/2011 at 11:27 pm

    I think you might find it worth investigating the role of the Guardian in the issue of Neil Hamilton, Mohammed Fayed and the question of cash for questions……

  3. 3 Autonomous Mind 14/12/2011 at 11:33 pm

    Arthur, you might very well think that. I couldn’t possibly comment…

  4. 4 ian 14/12/2011 at 11:59 pm

    Along with chronic overmanning (as in “Labour”), the declining circulation of this Hampstead rag will be the death of it. Thanks, AM, for bringing that day forward a little.

  5. 5 Alan Douglas 15/12/2011 at 12:06 am

    Have you not uncovered a central tenet of the left wing, whether politician or newsman ?

    Being of the left wing means never having to say you’re sorry ….

    (From a book called, I think, Hate Story)

    Alan Douglas

  6. 6 Edward. 15/12/2011 at 12:45 am

    I watched ‘the beast’ on Newsnight tonight 14 Dec, he is a shameless, self serving bottom feeder, who is as bad, if not worse than the very hacks he disdains.

    A typical, Londonistani-elitist and sanctimonious div, with a dangerous, subversive and insidious left wing agenda, he should work for the Beeb – ah but then, the graun’ is, the organ of the beeb is it not?

    A beast is what and all that he is.

  7. 7 Span Ows 15/12/2011 at 1:28 am

    Arthur Dent: I think you might find it worth investigating the role of the Guardian in the issue of Neil Hamilton, Mohammed Fayed and the question of cash for questions…

    And the evidence that got Jonathan Aitken into court: lucky for them he then proceeded to lie in court; had he not been so stupid the Guardian hacks would have been done for making up evidence (which they did)

  8. 8 Charlie 15/12/2011 at 7:58 am

    I play a little game at about 9.55 pm; I tune into the BBC News Channel and guess which papers’ front pages will be be briefly reviewed,. I won again last night: Independent followed by Guardian. No others..

  9. 9 Robert Colier 15/12/2011 at 10:42 am

    “The phone hacking story had been relentlessly pursued – not out of journalistic desire to expose unacceptable behaviour but to service an agenda to ruin Murdoch.”

    Loving the noise from the pro-NO / NOTW crowd. It really is like a rapist’s supporters crowing that he didn’t wipe his genitals on his victim’s dress, *actually*.

  10. 10 Span Ows 15/12/2011 at 11:17 am

    Robert Colier: “Loving the noise from the pro-NO / NOTW crowd. It really is like a rapist’s supporters crowing that he didn’t wipe his genitals on his victim’s dress, *actually*.”

    Oh dear. It is no such thing and not even a close comparison as nobody is denying or forgiving any wrongdoing; they are highlighting the hypocrite. To amend your example to fit, it would be another rapist that gets the other rapist convicted of a rape he didn’t do. And it is this hypocrisy being discussed by the “pro NOTW crowd”.

  11. 11 HerewardMW 15/12/2011 at 11:47 am

    I have a suggestion for dealing with the Guardian once and for all. Local councils are trying to save money yet many/most advertise a huge number of vacancies via the Guardian. How many are Conservative local councils which could be convinced (via a letter writing campaign or some other means) to advertise via the governments own employment website their own websites and local papers only? This would be much cheaper, would be a saving which would be far more popular than other services and would, entirely coincidentally of course, massively reduce the Guardians income.

  12. 12 napiersabre 15/12/2011 at 5:05 pm

    Edward love your description of the beast. I to watched him on Newsnight and was disgusted with his hypocrisy.

  13. 13 john in cheshire 15/12/2011 at 6:20 pm

    The guardian, in my opinion, is not fit to call itself a news paper. It is a propaganda pamphlet, with a fixed agenda, which it repeatedly and daily disseminates to a gullible readership. But then I think socialists have a genetic defect for believing falsehoods regardless of the evidence to the contrary.

  14. 14 AJC 15/12/2011 at 6:50 pm

    What has happened to the promise to poison the Guardian’s well of local and national job adverts?

  15. 15 60022Mallard 17/12/2011 at 2:56 pm

    Probably a bit late but

    Charlie

    A gentleman on the Biased BBC website took the trouble to analyse Newsnight’s paper coverage. The Guardian was the only one mentioned on every occasion and was first mentioned well ahead of any other.

    From an FOI request I learned that the BBC, for some reason, buys 20% more copies of The Guardian than any other national.

    HerewardMW.

    You will not be surprised to learn that the BBC has spent up to 80% of its job advertising budget with the GMG!


Comments are currently closed.



Enter your email address below

The Harrogate Agenda Explained

Email AM

Bloggers for an Independent UK

AM on Twitter

Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.

STOR Scandal

Autonomous Mind Archive