• Home
  • About
  • Comments policy
  • Contact
  • My fans

Trial by Jeory

Watching the world of east London politics

Feeds:
Posts
Comments
« Cllr Rabina Khan’s £120 cab for a 1.5 mile trip to the park (bus fare £1.35)
Labour’s shortlisted candidates for Tower Hamlets Mayor »

East End Life: now it’s altering the quotes of opposition members as well

March 1, 2013 by trialbyjeory

The basic job of a journalist is to report what people have said, not what you think they should have said. The latter belongs in the category of spin and public relations.

Which is why when you read quotes from a council meeting in, say, the East London Advertiser, you can be fairly confident they’re accurate, while those reported in East End Life have to be treated a little sceptically.

The following email exchange between the council’s press office and Tory councillor Tim Archer this afternoon is enlightening in several respects.

Tim is initially being asked by Kelly Powell, the town hall’s “head of media”, whether she has an accurate report of the words he used at Wednesday’s full council meeting. She explains  these quotes are for an article they’re running in this Sunday’s East End Life. (This is itself is interesting because the costs of Kelly’s time–and those of other press officers–are never billed to East End Life, which means the paper’s costs are understated. Here we have proof of the work they’re doing.)

Then after Tim agrees the quote is accurate, the press office says actually they can’t report it because the council finance chief (the section 151 officer) doesn’t agree with it. Tim is then told what he is allowed to say in East End Life.

So what we have is East End Life, a paper that costs taxpayers £1.5million a year to run, effectively censoring the democratic debates held on behalf of taxpayers in its own council chamber.

No wonder its critics dub it Pravda.

Here’s the email exchange in chronological order:

From: Kelly Powell

Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 10:57:05 +0000

To: Peter Golds, Tim Archer

Cc: Takki Sulaiman>; Emily Blackshaw<; Ross Archer>

Subject: Request for quote approval for EEL

Dear Councillors

Further to Wednesday’s budget Council meeting, we are running an article in East End Life summarising the proposals and next steps in the budget setting process.

We would like to include a quote from you and have the following comment you made on the night:

Cllr Tim Archer, said: “In effect this budget is seeking to mortgage the future and the budget black hole grows to £94 million in 2017.”

Cllr Peter Golds, said: “East End Life should be closed immediately as the government will soon be introducing legislation to prevent councils from printing newspapers.”

Please could you let me know asap if you are happy for this to be used in the East End Life article.

With apologies for the tight turnaround, I would be very grateful if you could come back to me by 4pm today in order to meet the paper’s print deadline.

Kind regards

Kelly

Kelly Powell

Head of Media

Tower Hamlets Council

From: Tim Archer

Sent: 01 March 2013 11:56

To: Kelly Powell; Peter Golds

Cc: Takki Sulaiman; Emily Blackshaw; Ross Archer

Subject: Re: Request for quote approval for EEL

Hi Kelly, I think the quote was ‘by 2017’ not ‘in 2017’.

Could you let me know the context of the quote, ie the para preceding and after where you plan to use it?

Thanks

Tim.

From: Kelly Powell <>

Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 12:13:37 +0000

To: Tim Archer, Peter Golds

Cc: Takki Sulaiman>; Emily Blackshaw, Ross Archer

Subject: RE: Request for quote approval for EEL

Hi Cllr Archer

Thanks for the swift response.

The context is that there will be a pull out box in the article, which describes the Conservative Group’s amendments and then the quotes from both you and Cllr Golds (subject to Cllr Gold’s approval).

Kind regards

Kelly

From: Tim Archer

Sent: 01 March 2013 14:14

To: Kelly Powell; Peter Golds

Cc: Takki Sulaiman; Emily Blackshaw; Ross Archer

Subject: Re: Request for quote approval for EEL

Yes I’m happy with that.

From: Kelly Powell

Sent: 01 March 2013 15:28

To: Tim Archer’

Cc: Ross Archer; Takki Sulaiman; Emily Blackshaw

Subject: RE: Request for quote approval for EEL

Importance: High

Hi Cllr Archer

The Section 151 officer has reviewed all the figures in this article for EEL and has said that he can’t verify the £94m figure in the quote below. We can’t therefore include it in EEL as it’s currently drafted:

Cllr Tim Archer, said: “In effect this budget is seeking to mortgage the future and the budget black hole grows to £94 million by 2017.”

I understand that officers have advised that there will be further savings to be made after 2015/16 (paragraph 1.3 of the budget report), but without a revised forecast outlining specific figures/savings.

Can you please provide an alternative quote asap for use in EEL?

Thanks

Kelly

From: Kelly Powell >

Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 16:22:39 +0000

To: ‘tim archer

Cc: Ross Archer>; Takki Sulaiman< >; Emily Blackshaw< >

Subject: RE: Request for quote approval for EEL

Hi Cllr Archer

Further to my [last] email, can I suggest:

Cllr Tim Archer, said: “In effect the mayor’s budget is seeking to mortgage the future and in our view the budget black hole will grow to £94 million by 2017.”

Regards

Kelly

From: tim archer

To: Kelly Powell

CC: Ross Archer; Takki Sulaiman < >; Emily Blackshaw <Emily.Blackshaw >; cllrpetergolds < >

Sent: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 17:37

Subject: Re: Request for quote approval for EEL

So I thought you were quoting me from the budget meeting. I did not realise that a quote from a member had to be agreed by finance officers. Calls into question the impartiality of the reporting in eastend life really doesn’t it?

 

UPDATE – Saturday, March 2, 6.30pm

It wasn’t just the Tories who were cheesed off their quotes from the council meeting were being censored. Labour, as you can read below, were having a far spikier row with Takki on Friday afternoon as well.

This issue goes to the heart of what East End Life is about. According to its website:

East End Life is the council’s free weekly newspaper which is distributed to more than 83,000 homes and businesses across the borough each week, enabling us to keep residents up-to-date in an informal and accessible way on the work of the council.

The word “newspaper” is used deliberately and it claims to keep residents informed of the “work of the council”. At the very core of the work of the council is the debate in the council chamber. Yet on this issue, its spin doctors have tied themselves up in knots.

If they believed they were unable to report what is said in the council chamber (on the dubious basis that that’s political), then why did the paper’s bosses ask approval in the first place for quotes uttered in that debate? Wouldn’t it have been better simply to have asked councillors to supply fresh quotes? Or instead, if the Section 151 officer was unhappy with the members’ quotes, why not just have a few words from him or her on those particular points of fact?

As you can see from the following row between Takki and Cllr Josh Peck, we now learn that only “statements or outcomes of positive policy” emanating from the council chamber are reportable by EEL. So if you are a resident who traipses across the borough (on public transport) to submit a question or raise a criticism at a council meeting, that effort, and that cause,will never be reported in the very paper you pay for.

Here’s the row:

 

From: Kelly Powell

Sent: 01 March 2013 11:02

To: Amy Whitelock; Carlo Gibbs

Cc: David Courcoux; Takki Sulaiman; Emily Blackshaw; Joshua Peck

Subject: Request for quote approval for EEL

Dear Councillors

Further to Wednesday’s budget Council meeting, we are running an article in East End Life summarising the proposals and next steps in the budget setting process. 

We would like to include a quote from you and have the following comment you made on the night:

Councillor Carlo Gibbs, said: “This is a wasteful budget that makes promises that cannot be continued beyond a two year period. We want to see a truly sustainable budget that protects residents from the worst of the cuts by stopping spending on what we do not need such as East End Life and mayoral advisors.”

Councillor Amy Whitelock: “Residents have lost trust in politics and politicians. We can only restore that trust by spending less on bureaucracy and propaganda and more on frontline services.”

Please could you let me know asap if you are happy for this to be used in the East End Life article.

With apologies for the tight turnaround, I would be very grateful if you could come back to me by 4pm today in order to meet the paper’s print deadline.

Kind regards

Kelly

Kelly Powell

Head of Media

Tower Hamlets Council

 

From: Kelly Powell <>

Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 15:21:09 +0000

To: David Courcoux< >; Joshua Peck< >

Cc: Emily Blackshaw< >; Takki Sulaiman< >

Subject: RE: Request for quote approval for EEL

 

Hi Cllr Peck and David

The Section 151 officer has reviewed all the figures in this article for EEL and has said that he can’t verify the £55m figure in the quote below. We can’t therefore include it in EEL as it’s currently drafted:

Cllr Joshua Peck, Labour Group Leader, said: “With a £55 million unfunded black hole – and massive pre-election spending – at the heart of the Mayor’s budget Labour councillors couldn’t support it. Our amendment starts to address this financial challenge and is a clear commitment to residents that we won’t play fast and loose with their money or services.”

I understand that the figure was thought to come from a Cabinet report in June 2012, but am advised that report showed a £44m gap to the end of 2016/17, but that the figure is now out of date and there is not a revised forecast published beyond 2015/16.

Can you please provide an alternative quote asap for use in EEL?

Thanks

Kelly

 

From: Kelly Powell >

Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 16:19:38 +0000

To: David Courcoux; Joshua Peck

Cc: Takki Sulaiman; Emily Blackshaw< >

Subject: FW: Request for quote approval for EEL

 

Hi both

I’ve spoken to David about the fact that this figure is in the agreed Motion, but I’m also aware that the S151 comments on the Motion state that the funding gap for 2016/17 has not yet been calculated.

Can I therefore suggest the following:

Cllr Joshua Peck, Labour Group Leader, said: “We believe that there is a £55 million unfunded black hole at the heart of the Mayor’s budget and Labour councillors couldn’t support it. Our amendment starts to address this financial challenge and is a clear commitment to residents that we won’t play fast and loose with their money or services.”

Please could you confirm asap if you are happy for this to be used.

Thanks

Kelly

 

From: Joshua Peck

Sent: 01 March 2013 16:45

To: Kelly Powell; David Courcoux

Cc: Takki Sulaiman; Emily Blackshaw

Subject: Re: Request for quote approval for EEL

I’m unimpressed, although not surprised to be honest, that you won’t just report a decision of Council. East End Life serves both the Council and the administration, and trying what are clearly political positions is nonsensical. I’ll go with: Cllr Joshua Peck, Labour Group Leader, said: “With an unfunded black hole estimated to be over £55million – and massive pre-election spending – at the heart of the Mayor’s budget Labour councillors couldn’t support it. Our amendment starts to address this financial challenge and is a clear commitment to residents that we won’t play fast and loose with their money or services.”

 

From: Takki Sulaiman

To: Joshua Peck

To: Kelly Powell

To: David Courcoux

Cc: Emily Blackshaw

Subject: RE: Request for quote approval for EEL

Sent: 1 Mar 2013 16:55

Hi Councillor Peck

The principle we’re trying to uphold is that EEL represents the council not only the council chamber – but we do try to report outcomes and statements of positive policy from the chamber.  EEL has never included an allegation about pre-election spending before and we do not cover political accusations made in the chamber.  This means we cannot run the phrase ‘and massive pre-election spending’.

If we included a similar phrase from the Executive about another party’s position we would rightly be criticised.  The minor deletion is suggested in red below.

Regards

Takki

Takki Sulaiman

Head of Communications

Tower Hamlets Council

 

——Original Message——

To: Takki Sulaiman

To: Kelly Powell

To: David Courcoux

To: Stephen Halsey

Cc: Emily Blackshaw

Subject: Re: Request for quote approval for EEL

Sent: 1 Mar 2013 16:58

Takki

You regularly include political statements from the administration, including in the Mayor’s column. You’re regularly, for example, carried the lie that there have been no frontline service cuts. That’s not only a political statement but its manifestly untrue.

Why the double standard?

Josh

Share this: Facebook & Twitter

  • Share
  • Tweet

Like this:

Like Loading...

Posted in Uncategorized | 12 Comments

12 Responses

  1. on March 1, 2013 at 11:48 pm Curious Cat

    You wrote “The basic job of a journalist is to report what people have said, not what you think they should have said. The latter belongs in the category of spin and public relations”

    Yet English newspaper reporters regularly use “Cut & Paste” to plonk into their publications other people’s carefully worded Press Releases. These days very few “reporters” are truly reporters.

    Why don’t you describe the council’s “head of media” more truthfully as the council’s Chief Spin Doctor ? The fact that councils employ people to mislead the public and distort the truth is a bigger story than the potential loss of £94m.

    Why too are councils, the deliverers of public community services, allowed to be political out-of-control cesspits unaccountable to the public funding them ?

    The Tower Hamlets mess is solely due to the major political parties, Lab and Tories, that created the Local Government system of which you now complain.

    Having a moan on a public blog is merely the first step in an overdue long journey to reform England’s wasteful public community services.

    What are the annual running costs of EEL ?

    P.S. Having a moan, however well deserved and justified, is not going to change the system which those in authority call “democratic” despite the postal votes abuses and the fact some voters can not read or write in English and can not sign their own names !


    • on March 2, 2013 at 11:49 am Anon1

      The right to vote isn’t tied to your literacy levels. And a good thing, too. Someone’s ability to read/write doesn’t impact on their ability to exercise their vote. I would say more about the clearly racist sentiments behind your comment but I really cannot be arsed.


      • on March 3, 2013 at 1:17 pm Hugh Barnard1

        Although I actually agree with you about the ‘right’ this comment is somewhat simplistic, produces the knee-jerk race card [the bane of this borough] and is probably disingenuous, since you’re ‘Anon1’.

        Unhappily or happily, democracy isn’t just ballot boxes and voting, it’s also evolution, debate, being informed, understanding ideas about utility: http://economics.about.com/od/economicsglossary/g/utilitarian.htm rather than voting for someone or something that will bring you the best ‘return’, looks like you or believes the same things as you. So levels of literacy do matter in a well-functioning democracy as they matter in society. Tower Hamlets, isn’t, of course, a well-functioning democracy in any sense of the word.

        Also, finally there’s a difference between deciding not to learn the language of the country where one lives [I saw a lot of that in my twenty years abroad], not being able to and not being given the facilities or being allowed to. So immigrant literacy is not a ‘simple’ matter either.


  2. on March 2, 2013 at 12:22 am Snowman

    Ted, slightly aside, however how the hell has the Mayor’s blog which is highly political been given a platform from the public funded council web site. Within one click, a person is directed from a public service funded and branded website of local government to attacks on the mayor’s opposition. No distinction or note is provided to ensure readers are aware that they are leaving a public service web site to a personal political blog. Perhaps the officers of the council have no other option but to do what they are told by the Mayor’s office. The shameful and difficult truth is that LR has got the next election all stitched up as well as the resources and officers of local government. God help us all.


  3. on March 2, 2013 at 11:43 am Anon1

    The alternative (to proposing the amended quote) would be for the reporter to include a line saying that Archer’s figure is wrong. I.e. suggesting that Archer is either lying or he doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Would that have been preferable?

    This is such a non-story Ted. So much more that could be covered! I hear the council meeting itself was a shambles. Nothing particularly new there but I hear this one went south quite quickly for the Labour group and Josh in particular. Are we going to hear your first hand account?


    • on March 2, 2013 at 3:59 pm trialbyjeory

      1. I wasn’t there.
      2. The “alternative” was to produce a fair and accurate report of what was actually said by all sides, given that EEL is there for the council as a whole not just the ruling administration.
      3. It’s by no means a non-story. It goes to the heart of what EEL is and why ruling admins of both Labour and Lutfur have been so reluctant to give it up. It’s a v powerful propaganda tool. It’s why no letters are ever published in it.


      • on March 2, 2013 at 5:41 pm eastendersscriptwriterscouldn'tmakeitup

        I’m with Anon1 on this. When asked the press officer explains that the quote is for a pull-out box containing details of Tory amendments together with quotes from the two councillors. In other words the article would be highlighting the amendments and drawing them to the particular attention of the reader.

        A verbatim quote buried in the middle of a long article might be able to get away with putting forward unsubstantiated figures. What is, effectively, a sub-headline can’t (or, in my opinion, shouldn’t) get away with unsubstantiated numbers. When I’ve written or edited magazine articles I’ve endeavoured to make sure that facts and figures are correct or else stated as a matter of opinion. A couple of years ago you allowed me to do a guest post on this blog and you asked to check something I had written before it was published.

        I have no idea what a section 151 officer is but if they are sub-editing for accuracy I think they are right not to want readers to be misled into thinking that the £94m by 2017 figure is fact rather than opinion.

        And at least EEL are offering up some real coverage of the other parties for once.

        PS EEL did used to include letters once upon a time. I didn’t realise it had stopped. Maybe it’s because you have to have an interested readership in order to receive correspondence.


      • on March 2, 2013 at 7:06 pm trialbyjeory

        A section 151 officer is in charge of council finance. It was Resources Director Chris Naylor until he quit before Christmas.
        I’ve updated the post for a further exchange between the press office and Labour on the same issue on Friday.
        I think you’re on dodgy ground here. You seem to be saying that the word of the Section 151 officer is sacrosanct, that it can’t be anything else but fact. How do you know Tim Archer’s figure is “unsubstantiated”??
        If that officer has a problem with alternative figures, why not just have a few words from him or her explaining their position.
        As I say in my updated thoughts in the post, I think the EEL press office has tied itself in knots on this issue and in doing so exposed the fundamental flaw in EEL.


      • on March 5, 2013 at 8:01 am trialbyjeory

        Worth having a look at the actual article that ended up in EEL.

        None of these quotes appear and while there are bref mentions of the Labour and Tory suggestions, 80 per cent of the piece is devoted to ideas proffered by Lutfur, Rania Khan and Oli Rahman.

        Balanced?


  4. on March 2, 2013 at 7:32 pm Jhno

    I have defended EEL for years: I find it really helps me keep abreast of what is going on in the borough from a “things to do this weekend” kind of perspective; the local restaurant reviews; planning applications and (I never thought I’d say this) its’ One Tower Hamlets community cohesion slant makes me feel good.

    But POLITICALLY it is getting worse and worse. Its prime purpose these days is to promote the Mayor and his cabinet. The other (ie the vast majority) of non-cabinet councillors never get a look in (this article under discussion would be something of a first – apart from the annual Meet Your Councillor double-page spread).

    The Mayor shouldn’t be allowed to use EEL as a taxpayer funded propaganda sheet.


  5. on March 3, 2013 at 1:47 am Snowman

    Dear “communcations” department,
    1. Go to Google.
    2. Type in “Tower Hamlets”
    3. Select the “Tower Hamlets Council” Link.
    4. On the top of this local government website, funded by the taxpayer select the “Mayors Blog” link.
    5. See “Tower Hamlets Labour vote to slash funds for the disabled, the elderly and the 3rd Sector” and “Tower Hamlets Labour are doing the Tories dirty work and “Tower Hamlets Labour Group threaten to block progressive budget and many more stories presented by the “Political Advisor to the Mayor” funded by the hard working people of Tower Hamlets. Blatant political attacks from the prime position on this local government website. So when you say “we do not cover political accusations made in the chamber. This means we cannot run the phrase ‘and massive pre-election spending’ this does not cover the direct attacks by the Mayor from the Tower Hamlets website link.


  6. on March 3, 2013 at 9:19 pm Hugh Barnard1

    I especially love this bit from Sulaiman’s email:

    but we do try to report outcomes and statements of positive policy from the chamber

    So here we have an explicit admission of the ‘good news only’ policy by one of the principal perps.



Comments are closed.

  • Ebuzzing - Top Blogs - London
  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 6,448 other subscribers
  • Latest Tweets

    • Also attended.Thought film was interesting,poetry reading by @slhesketh excellent (as was contribution from the cou… twitter.com/i/web/status/1… 1 week ago
    • This all seems great and does seem a beacon in theory but who in Newham actually knows about this?? Zero from our c… twitter.com/i/web/status/1… 2 weeks ago
    • No lessons learned from last time, it seems. No residential streets or pavements gritted in my part of Canning Town… twitter.com/i/web/status/1… 2 weeks ago
    Follow @tedjeory
  • Recent Comments

    taj on Election Day: an open thread 
    Curious Cat on Election Day: an open thread 
    Jay Kay on Election Day: an open thread 
    Curious Cat on Election Day: an open thread 
    Cllr Andrew Wood, Ca… on Election Day: an open thread 
    Abdul Hai on Election Day: an open thread 
    Stewart Rayment on Election Day: an open thread 
    Stewart Rayment on Election Day: an open thread 
  • Archives

  • March 2013
    M T W T F S S
     123
    45678910
    11121314151617
    18192021222324
    25262728293031
    « Feb   Apr »
  • Blogroll

    • Blood and Property
    • Dave Hill's Guardian blog
    • David Osler
    • Designed for Life
    • Diamond Geezer
    • Ealing Rose
    • Emdad Rahman's Blog
    • Hackney Wick Blog
    • Harry's Place
    • Mayor Lutfur Rahman
    • Mile End Residents' Association
    • Richard Osley's blog
    • Spitalfields Life
    • The Bow Bell
    • The Londonist
    • Tower Hamlets – it's your money
    • Tower Hamlets Watch

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

WPThemes.


  • Follow Following
    • Trial by Jeory
    • Join 752 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Trial by Jeory
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Copy shortlink
    • Report this content
    • View post in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
%d bloggers like this: