Comment

Thursday, 19 November 2009 Print  |  Send

              Share

---

Add your comment

I agree with Kay Shelley, but would add that, after my 40 years of NUJ membership, I find it laughable that some appear shocked at the notion a trade unionist should be (tut, tut) "left wing". Isn't that what started the whole thing off? The real trouble is our country, indeed hemisphere, has been ruled by the "right" for too long and only the blind and/or ignorant cannot count the cost the majority are paying for this lunacy. Posted by: Mike Starke: 4 Nov, 2009 12:40:20

As an NUJ member for 40 years, I’m sure I would have noticed if my Press & PR Branch colleague Richard Simcox was the dyed-in-the-wool, red-under-the bed agitator he is being painted. I did not know of his membership of the NUJ Left until recently but I have been twice to ADM with him, and have never noticed anything dangerously subversive about his behaviour or his opinions. Groupings within a union are normal and usually healthy. If Mark Watts did not know that the NUJ Left existed, I suspect he would be too ignorant for the Journalist editor’s job. He implies that we all have to be frightened of diverse opinions, especially if they are of the left. Personally I am much more afraid of the Loony Right than the Loony Left. It was the NUJ Right that was responsible for the panic that apparently led to the resignation from the union of Jon Snow and others. If Jon Snow resigned a) because of the proposal to boycott Israeli goods and b) because he thought the union was being manipulated by the NUJ Left, he was wrong on both counts. The motion from my branch was supported by a broad spectrum of members, and was narrowly approved at ADM by members who were equally appalled at the treatment of Palestinians. What happened next would have been ludicrous if it wasn’t so dangerous. The NUJ Right tried to usurp the democratically reached decision with insults, threats and demands that it be reversed. We in the branch were accused of anti-semitism. The general secretary of the NUJ received death threats, even though he had nothing to do with the motion. Yes, DEATH threats. The NEC panicked and despite the fact that the resolution was in any case dependent on the agreement of other organisations, buried it. Yet two years later, following the invasion of Gaza, people across the land were calling for a trade boycott on Israel. For the record, I am not a member of the NUJ Left, and have never belonged to a political party except the Labour Party for one year when I was 18. Posted by: Kay Shelley: 29 Oct, 2009 10:07:25

The NUJ was founded to protect both journalism and journalists. The editor of the Journalist needs to be first, a good journalist, secomnd a strong union person. Mark Watts is both of these. But no one needs an editor who belongs to any faction, left or right. Making the Journalist a respected magazine will help both journalism and the NUJ. Posted by: Kevin Cahill: 24 Oct, 2009 19:28:15

I am a journalist first and an NUJ member second. The Union is however, extremely impoirtant to me and has been over the 34 years I have been a member. In the present climate it is even more important to strengthen the Union. Having said that I want to see a real journalist with a real track record in journalism as editor of the Journalist. I do not want to see someone who puts the union before the profession it was set up to protect, journalism. I am especially keen not to see a political operative of any persuasion, left or right, use the Journalist to pursue factional issaues. Contrary to some of the infantile comment on the election, Mark Watts is a wholly committed NUJ member. But forst he's a class A journalist. That's what we need at the Journalist. Posted by: Kevin Cahill: 24 Oct, 2009 08:06:54

I was very disappointed to read the attack by one of the candidates on the present editor of the Journalist. I like the magazine. I find it interesting and actually quite an absorbing read. Of course the magazine must evolve, as must all publications, online sites and broadcast programmes. But I feel the attack was really very rude and absolutely out of place in the election campaign. Posted by: Chris Coneybeer: 23 Oct, 2009 18:31:20

I agree that Frank Morgan's attack on the incumbent editor was out of order. I like the present Journalist and look forward to receiving it. I don't suppose the current editor will be able to answer back, so Frank should never have made such an unfair and untrue remark. On the wider issue, does it matter that one candidate is of the NUJ Left? So far as I am aware, the NUJ Left is not a secretive organisation. I want to see a Journalist that inspires people to fight back. As simple as that. I'll vote for Rich Simcox. Posted by: Neil Graham: 22 Oct, 2009 15:59:35

I saw Mark Watts' McCarthyite email statement this morning. I wasn't even thinking of voting in this election, but now I'm voting for Richard Simcox. Posted by: Basil Miller: 21 Oct, 2009 18:16:57

As far as I'm aware Richard is the only candidate to have thus far declared publicly that he is not in any political party. Not that I think people should be hounded if they are. Posted by: Tomdavies: 21 Oct, 2009 17:33:55

Interesting that Richard Simcox, who appears to be the NUJ Left candidate, works for the PCS which is led by Socialist Worker Party Trots. It rather supports Mark Watts' take over theory. Posted by: Ed Davie: 21 Oct, 2009 15:17:10

I think Mark Watts' circular is an absolute disgrace. It is a vitriolic, highly personal attack on a candidate on account of his political views. There is not an ounce of investigative merit in Mark's email. Virtually every active NUJ member will have come across the NUJ Left at some stage -- at ADMs, NEC meetings or M/FoC meetings. It is a broad, united, grassroots group that is perfectly open about its activities in the NUJ. There are similar networks in many other unions. Mark's circular himself refers to the NUJ Left's insistence on working by "democratic means". To talk of some sinister take-over bid is ridiculous. Mark belittles every single one of us who may have agreed or, god forbid, even worked with the NUJ Left on particular issues. I may not agree with the political stances of quite a few NUJ members I've come across in my 15 years in the union, but at least I manage to respect them. If we can't appreciate people from all political walks of life inside the NUJ then we're in deep trouble. I have no faith whatsoever in Mark's abilities to run The Journalist as a union magazine that represents ALL its members. Posted by: Jenny Witt: 21 Oct, 2009 15:03:35

I'm going to be voting for Christine Buckley, because she seems to combine a knowledge of and commitment to the trade union movement with the journalistic nous needed to make the Journalist a must-read in the trade. She also refrains from attacking other candidates or circulating the mixture of disgraceful McCarthyite scaremongering and absurd windbaggery that I received in an email from Mark Watts. Members will know what the mail contains, and can make their own minds up. No doubt, if Mr Watts's mail is to be believed, this comment will be characterised as part of the "smear campaign" that he reckons he's "due for". Some of the many disturbing things about this email are the establishment of a 'Save the NUJ' campaign which implies that if Mr Watts doesn't win our union is doomed, and the assertion running throughout that groups of people with similar ideas working together is somehow a threat to the entire trade union movement. I was, I have to say, moved to wonder how the fact that this has been a feature of the political scene for over 100 years has so far escaped the attentions of an "award-winning investigate journalist". I am sick and tired of people bashing my union, a union which has helped many, many members and fought many, many campaigns for our benefit, just because they can't always get their own way. The NUJ has sometimes taken decisions I don't agree with. That's life. The bottom line is we are stronger with an NUJ than without, something people should think about before firing off wild accusations and launching damaging campaigns. Posted by: Martin Cloake: 20 Oct, 2009 08:56:40

I have just recieved an email from Mark Watts and I am astonished that he has used his candidacy as a platform for a party political pop. I believe he may be bringing the union into disrepute and would urge the NUJ leadership to investigate. Aside from this it would seem that Mark Watts in far from interested in editing the journalist in order to bring about a united union working for all its membership. This is not the time or place for pathetic party political battles or pathetic point scoring attempts. Posted by: Sarah Evans: 20 Oct, 2009 08:38:11

I don't know who I'll be voting for yet but I'd like to express my annoyance at one of the election addresses I've received by email. Personally I like the current Journalist, both layout and content, and it is already on my 'must-read' list. But even if I didn't, I would still have been infuriated to read the comments by Frank Morgan criticising, made in the most personal terms about the current editor (and the previous one, whoever that was). I consider this a very unprofessional approach. I will not be voting for Frank Morgan for this reason. Posted by: Penny Vevers: 13 Oct, 2009 18:02:51

For me, Mark Watts is the person who should be editor of the Journalist. He has very clear ideas and the skills and contacts to make it into something that really is worth reading both online and in print. I think we need someone with a flair for digging up great stories about the media and someone who will support quality journalism and the NUJ. Posted by: Bill Goodwin: 12 Oct, 2009 18:41:50

Rich Simcox is also the choice of NUJ Left; you didn't mention that, Kyran. Personally, I think that any pressure group silently pushing their candidate into what should be an independent editorial post would be a disgrace. I completely agree with you that a high turnout would be a very good thing, however. See: www.nujleft.org Posted by: Fiona O'Cleirigh: 12 Oct, 2009 10:54:01

My name is Kyran Connolly, and I shall be voting No 1 for Richard Simcox as I believe he has what the job requires: experience in editing a sister union journal, that of civil service workers union, PCS, and a strong commitment to the NUJ in particular and the wider trade union movement in general. Please ensure that the turnout is not a disgrace for a democratically controlled union. I shall be using a transfer vote for Christine Buckley as I believe she has a sound trecord as former industrial correspondent of The Times and also women are woefully underrepresented in our Union structures. Having elected Michelle Stanistreet as first woman DGS, it would also be a first if a womman were elected Editor of The Journalist. In any event, make sure you cast your vote. Posted by: Kyran Connolly, Book Branch (personal capacity): 12 Oct, 2009 00:04:52

Yes, the best candidate is a good journalist and is committed to the union. This being an editorial position, journalistic experience is vital. Hence my support for Mark Watts. But he was an FoC too, and he went into that knowing he was likely to lose his job (which he did). His union-supporting credentials are pretty solid, I'd say. Posted by: Fiona O'Cleirigh: 10 Oct, 2009 21:41:44

I was at the London hustings and I thought Tim Arnold spoke from the heart, was lucid, and had a convincing argument for improving communications with the NUJ. He also has a nice line in self-deprecating humour! Mark has got a good background as an investigative reporter but I wonder if he might be too cerebral for the bread-and-butter stuff that needs to go online especially. My worry is that he would be frustrated and would end up leaving - so we'd have to go through this expensive election process again. I will certainly be voting for Tim Arnold. Posted by: Paul Jeffries: 8 Oct, 2009 21:38:22 Posted by: Paul Jeffries: 9 Oct, 2009 16:10:13

Neil - it's an award winning magazine. Why re-invent the wheel? Why waste precious resources just to put the new editor's mark on the magazine? It's the members that are the important thing, not the editor's ego. The issue is how to improve the on-line content. And extend the union's communications reach. With almost zero resources. The answer: give each sector its own pdf magazine, delivered by email. And provide pod-casts eaturing "as live" interviews, similar to what you see and hear on broadcast news bulletins. Only one other candidate has any broadcast experience at all - and he does not have the technical and craft skills needed to process the podcast material in-house. It is unlikely that the union will provide any more resources, given the job losses which have already taken place. So there is only one solution. Elect a candidate with the production skills to produce the written Journalist, and who can take charge of producing exciting and relevent yet cost effective web contact. None of the other candidates has that skill set, apart from me. So perhaps you'll consider give me your alternative vote, Neil? Posted by: Tim Arnold: 8 Oct, 2009 16:53:45 Posted by: Tim Arnold: 9 Oct, 2009 14:16:24

At the London hustings last night, it was clear that the choice is between a journalist for the job, or an activist. For editor of the NUJ's magazine, it has to be the journalist: Mark Watts. But, whether you vote this way or not, make sure you vote. Posted by: Fiona O'Cleirigh: 8 Oct, 2009 13:52:56 Posted by: Fiona O'Cleirigh: 9 Oct, 2009 14:14:36

I cannot believe that Tim Arnold believes that The Journalist is not broken. He lost any chance of getting my vote right there! Steve Usher's idea of repositioning the magazine beyond the membership is worth exploring and I believe that the key role of the new editor will be to establish it as a strong voice within the industry and that will probably mean that the bulk of the news content needs to go on-line. Posted by: Neil Turner: 7 Oct, 2009 14:22:15 Posted by: Neil Turner: 9 Oct, 2009 13:42:05

I disagree entirely with Fiona O'Cleirigh. The best candidate is a committed NUJ rep and a good journalist. Tim Arnold was highly praised for his heroic actions while covering the Poll Tax riot, and has been a reporter in Northern Ireland for the BBC. He also has news agency experience with Associated Press and Reuters as well as being part of teh launch team on SKY News. His journalistic credentials are impeccable. Yet he also has considerable experience of industrial relations, has taken on personal cases and negotiated national pay agreements with employers. So Tim Arnold gets my vote because he's a good journalist AND an effective trade unionist. Guy Roberts Posted by: Guy Roberts: 9 Oct, 2009 10:14:59

Click to add your blog comment to this item.