• SubScribe commentary
  • The schedule
    • Celebrities >
      • Robin Williams and suicide reporting
      • George Clooney v Daily Mail, round 3
      • Are we playing fair with celebrities?
      • L'Wren Scott's death and Mick Jagger's grief
      • Jill Dando
      • Alain de Botton and Philip Seymour Hoffman
      • Wendi Deng and Rebekah Wade love letters
      • Elizabeth Hurley
      • Gwyneth Paltrow
      • William Roache
    • Crime >
      • The release of Harry Roberts
      • Alan Henning and Alice Gross
      • Dave Lee Travis and Operation Yewtree
      • Rotherham child sex exploitation
      • Operation Tuleta
      • Rolf Harris and Andy Coulson sentencing
      • Maxine Carr's wedding
      • Ann Maguire stabbing
      • Stephen Lawrence and police corruption: time to sit up and take notice
      • The Mirror and Jill Dando
      • William Roache acquitted
      • Rape cases never have a happy ending
      • Lee Rigby and the law of contempt
      • Michael Le Vell: don't shoot the messenger
      • Madeleine McCann: missing an opportunity
      • Maria the 'Greek Madeleine'
    • Foreign Affairs >
      • David Haines and Isis propaganda
      • The murder of Steven Sotloff
      • James Foley murdered
      • Nigeria's abducted girls and massacre
      • Kidnapped Nigerian schoolgirls
      • Al Jazeera on trial: why should we care about journalists?
      • Al Jazeera on trial: the final session
      • Al Jazeera on trial: Abdullah Elshamy
      • Al Jazeera on trial: Peter Greste
      • Al Jazeera on trial: the court hearings
      • Peter Greste sent back to jail as Al-Jazeera journalists' trial is adjourned
      • Al-Jazeera journalists refused bail in Egypt
      • Frontline reporting
      • Putin, the Man of Destiny, and dreams of a Eurasian empire
      • Putin wants more than Crimea, he wants half of Ukraine
      • Ukraine revolution and the threat to the West
      • Obama's selfie
      • Typhoon Haiyan
    • Gender Issues >
      • It takes all sorts to make a family
      • This is what a flawed feminist campaign looks like
      • A level results day: bring on the token boys
      • Kellie Maloney faces the world
      • Cheerleading
      • Pregnant soldiers
      • Women in trouble for getting ahead
      • Doris Lessing, Helen Mirren and silly sexist tokenism
      • Bank notes campaign
    • Health and Beauty >
      • Ebola
      • Ashya King and the force of authority
      • Robin Williams and suicide reporting
      • Sun boobs with page 3 breast cancer campaign
      • Stephen's story: did the Press help his cause or take over his life?
      • Anorexia, bulimia and high-achieving students
      • Colchester cancer scandal
      • New year diets
      • Food for thought: will red meat kill you?
    • Obituary >
      • Robin Williams and suicide reporting
      • Chapman Pincher
      • Rik Mayall and the trouble with death
      • Tony Benn: why we shouldn't speak ill of the dead
      • Thatcher and Crow: speaking ill of the dead
      • Bob Crow wins last media battle
      • Fred Sanger
      • Nelson Mandela
      • Doris Lessing
    • Politics >
      • Poppymania
      • Cameron's tax cut promise
      • Brooks Newmark sting
      • Scottish referendum >
        • Scottish referendum: the final editions
        • Scottish referendum miscellany
        • The Queen speaks
      • Politicians need their holidays too
      • Cameron's reshuffle: bring on the women
      • Food banks
      • The European elections audit >
        • Election audit: the last wordle
        • Election audit: Daily Mail
        • Election audit: The Times
        • Election audit: Daily Express
        • Election audit: Daily Mirror
        • Election audit: The Independent
        • Election audit: Guardian
        • Election audit: Daily Telegraph
        • Election audit: The Sun
      • Maria Miller
      • The blue-rinse bingo Budget
      • Harman, Hewitt and the paedophiles
      • Hewitt apologises and the Sun picks up the cudgels
      • Mail v Labour trio, day 6: Harman capitulates and the bully wins
      • David Miranda detention matters to us all
      • Education >
        • A level results day: bring on the token boys
      • Immigration >
        • A year of xenophobia
        • The Express and immigration
      • The Royal Family >
        • Prince Charles and the floods
        • Prince George
      • Sport >
        • Cheerleading
        • Kelly Gallagher beats the world
        • Why is football more important than all the news?
        • Jenny Jones struggles against Kate and ManU
      • The weather >
        • Smog
  • Journalists in court
  • Phone hacking
  • The Brooks-Coulson trial
    • Hacking trial: sentences
    • Hacking trial: commentary
    • Hacking trial: background
    • Hacking trial: reportage and comment
    • Hacking trial: press coverage
    • Hacking trial: verdict and reaction
    • Hacking trial: sentencing hearing
    • Hacking trial: mitigation
    • Hacking trial: Rebekah speaks
    • Hacking trial: mainstream Press
    • Hacking trial: periodicals
    • Hacking trial: Guardian
    • Hacking trial: Independent
    • Hacking trial: The Times
    • Hacking trial: Daily Telegraph
    • Hacking trial: The whitetops
    • Hacking trial: The redtops
    • Hacking trial: evidence
  • Nationals
    • Express
    • Guardian
    • Independent
    • The i
    • Mail
    • Mirror
    • Daily Star
    • Sun
    • Telegraph
    • Times
  • OpEd
    • OpEd: UK politics 24-12-14
    • OpEd: 23-12-14 Christmas
    • OpEd: 22-12-14 UK politics
    • OpEd: 19-12-14 North Korea
    • OpEd: 18-12-14 British politics
    • OpEd: 17-12-14 UK politics
    • OpEd: 16-12-14 UK politics
    • OpEd: CIA torture 15-12-14
    • OpEd: UK politics 12-12-14
    • OpEd: CIA torture 11-12-14
    • OpEd: CIA torture 10-12-14
    • OpEd: British politics 09-12-14
    • OpEd: British politics 08-12-14
    • OpEd: Autumn Statement 05-12-14
    • OpEd: Autumn Statement 04-12-14
    • OpEd: Autumn Statement 03-12-14
    • OpEd: Gordon Brown 02-12-14
    • OpEd: Black Friday 01-12-14
    • OpEd: Scottish finance 28-11-14
    • OpEd: European politics 27-11-14
    • OpEd: David Mellor 26-11-14
    • OpEd: Lewis Hamilton 25-11-14
    • OpEd: British politics 24-11-14
    • OpEd: British politics 21-11-14
    • OpEd: British politics 20-11-14
    • OpEd: British politics 19-11-14
    • OpEd: British politics 18-11-14
    • OpEd: British politics 17-11-14
    • OpEd: Labour 14-11-14
    • OpEd: forex scandal 13-11-14
    • OpEd: British politics 12-11-14
    • OpEd: the Labour Party 11-11-14
    • OpEd: Ed Miliband 10-11-14
    • OpEd: British politics 07-11-14
    • OpEd: British politics 06-11-14
    • OpEd: British politics 05-11-14
    • OpEd: British politics 04-11-14
    • OpEd: space tourism 03-11-14
    • OpEd: British politics 31-10-14
    • OpEd: immigration 30-10-14
    • OpEd: immigration 29-10-14
    • OpEd: British politics 28-10-14
    • OpEd: British politics 27-10-14
    • OpEd: NHS 24-10-14
    • OpEd: British politics 23-10-14
    • OpEd: Ukip 22-10-14
    • OpEd: Britain and EU 21-10-14
    • OpEd: British politics 20-10-14
    • OpEd: Lord Freud 17-10-14
    • OpEd: British politics 16-10-14
    • OpEd: British politics 15-10-14
    • OpEd: British politics 14-10-14
    • OpEd: British politics 13-10-14
    • OpEd: Isis and UK politics 10-10-14
    • OpEd: British politics 09-10-14
    • OpEd: British politics 08-09-14
    • OpEd: LibDem conference 07-10-14
    • OpEd: British politics 06-10-14
    • OpEd: party conferences 03-10-14
    • OpEd: Cameron's speech 02-10-14
    • OpEd: Conservative conference 01-10-14
    • OpEd: Conservative conference 30-09-14
    • OpEd: Conservative conference 29-09-14
    • OpEd: War on Isis 26-09-14
    • OpEd: Labour conference 25-09-14
    • OpEd: Miliband's speech 24-09-14
    • OpEd: Labour conference 23-09-14
    • OpEd: Referendum fallout 22-09-14
    • OpEd: Scottish referendum 19-09-14
    • OpEd: Scottish referendum 18-09-14
    • OpEd: Scottish referendum 17-09-14
    • OpEd: Scottish referendum 16-09-14
    • OpEd: Scottish referendum 15-09-14
    • OpEd: Scottish referendum 12-09-14
    • OpEd: Scottish referendum 11-09-14
    • OpEd: Scottish referendum 10-09-14
    • OpEd: Scottish referendum 09-09-14
    • OpEd: Scottish referendum 08-09-14
    • OpEd: Scottish referendum 05-09-14
    • OpEd: Nato and Isis threat 04-09-14
    • OpEd: Scottish independence 03-09-14
    • OpEd: Nude photographs 02-09-14
    • OpEd: British politics 01-09-14
    • OpEd: Ukip defection 29-08-14
    • OpEd: Rotherham sex abuse 28-08-14
    • OpEd: Islamic militants 27-08-14
    • OpEd: Middle East 26-08-14
    • OpEd: James Foley 22-08-14
    • OpEd: James Foley 21-08-14
    • OpEd: British politics 20-08-14
    • OpEd: Iraq 19-08-14
    • OpEd: Iraq 18-08-14
    • OpEd: A levels 15-08-14
    • OpEd: Iraq 14-08-14
    • OpEd: Robin Williams 13-08-14
    • OpEdL Iraq 12-08-14
    • OpEd: Iraq 11-08-14
    • OpEd: Boris Johnson 08-08-14
    • OpEd: Boris Johnson 07-08-14
    • OpEd: Warsi resignation 06-08-14
    • OpEd: First World War centenary 05-08-14
    • OpEd: Gaza 04-08-14
    • OpEd: British politics 01-08-14
    • OpEd: Gaza 31-07-14
    • OpEd: British politics 30-07-14
    • OpEd: British politics 29-07-14
    • OpEd: Gaza 28-07-14
    • OpEd: Gaza 25-07-14
    • OpEd: EU and Russia 24-07-14
    • OpEd: Flight MH17 23-07-14
    • OpEd: Flight MH17 22-07-14
    • OpEd: Flight MH17 21-07-14
    • oped: Gaza 18-07-14
    • OpEd: Cameron's reshuffle 17-07-14
    • OpEd: Cameron's reshuffle 16-07-14
    • OpEd: Cameron's reshuffle 15-07-14
    • OpEd: British politics 14-07-2014
    • OpEd: public sector strikes 11-07-14
    • OpEd: public sector strikes 10-07-14
    • OpEd: sex abuse 09-07-14
    • OpEd Sex abuse 08-07-14
    • OpEd: Westminster child abuse 07-07-2014
    • OpEd: Middle East 04-07-14
    • OpEd: Ed Miliband 03-07-14
    • OpEd British politics: 02-07-14
    • OpEd: edeucation 01-07-14
    • OpEd: Britain and Europe 30-06-14
    • OpEd: Britain and Europe 27-06-14
    • OpEd: Luis Suárez 26-06-14
    • OpEd: Iraq 25-06-14
    • OpEd: British politics 24-06-14
    • OpEd: Iraq 23-06-14
    • OpEd: Iraq 20-06-14
    • OpEd: British politics, 19-06-14
    • OpEd: British politics, 18-06-2014
    • OpEd: Iraq 17-06-14
    • OpEd: Tony Blair 16-06-14
    • OpEd: Iraq 13-06-14
    • OpEd: Oxfam, baby buggies, World Cup 12-06-14
    • OpEd: education and British values 11-06-14
    • OpEd: extremist education 10-06-14
    • OpEd: May v Gove 09-06-14
  • The columnists
  • Regionals
    • Regional Press Awards 2013
    • Local newspaper week
    • Local papers matter
    • Reading Chronicle and football hooliganism
    • Time for change
    • Monty's vision
    • The Full Monty: the Local World vision put into practice
    • The Pirates of Parkham
    • Colchester cancer scandal
  • Backnumbers
    • Weekend papers Dec 27-28
    • Front pages Dec 22-26, 2014
    • Weekend papers Dec 20-21
    • Front pages Dec 15-19
    • Weekend front pages Dec 13-14
    • Front pages Dec 8-12
    • Weekend papers Dec 6-7
    • Front pages Dec 1-5
    • Weekend papers Nov 29-30
    • Front pages Nov 24-28
    • Weekend papers Nov 22-23
    • Front pages Nov 17-21
    • Weekend papers Nov 15-16
    • Front pages Nov 10-14
    • Weekend papers Nov 8-9
    • Front pages Nov 3-7
    • Weekend papers Nov 1-2
    • Front pages Oct 27-31
    • Weekend papers Oct 25-26, 2014
    • Front pages Oct 20-24
    • Weekend papers Oct 18-19, 2014
    • Front pages Oct 12-17
    • Front pages Oct 5-11
    • Front pages Sept 28-Oct 4
    • front pages Sept 21-27
    • Front pages Sept 14-20
    • front pages Sept 7-13 2014
    • front pages Aug 31-Sep 6
    • Front pages Aug 24-30, 2014
    • Front pages August 17-23, 2014
    • Front pages, Aug 10-16, 2014
    • Front pages, Aug 3-9, 2014
    • Front pages July 27-August2, 2014
    • Front pages July 20-26, 2014
    • front pages July 13-19, 2014
    • Front pages: July 6-12, 2014
    • Front pages June 29-July 5, 2014
    • Front pages June 22-28, 2014
    • Front pages June 15-21
    • Front pages June 8-14, 2014
    • Front pages June 1-7, 2014
    • Nationals May 25-31
    • Front pages May 18-24 >
      • Press review: 24-05-14
      • Press review: 21-05-14
      • Press review: 20-05-14
    • Front pages May 11-17 >
      • Press review 15-05-14
      • Press review 14-05-14
      • Press review 13-05-14
      • Press review 12-05-14
    • front pages May 4-10, 2014 >
      • The review 09-05-14
      • The review 08-05-2014
      • The review 07-05-14
    • Front pages April 27-May 3 2014
    • Front pages April 20-26, 2014
    • Front pages April 13-19
    • Front pages April 6-12, 2014
    • The front pages March 30-April 5
    • The front pages March 23-29, 2014
    • front pages march 16-22
    • front pages March 9-15, 2014
    • front pages March 2-8, 2014
    • front pages Feb 23-Mar 1 2014
    • front pages Feb 16-22, 2014
    • The front pages Feb 9-15 2014
    • The front pages Feb 3-8, 2014
    • The front pages January 2014
  • You have to laugh
  • Blog archive
  • About SubScribe
  • Join the SubScribers
  • Contact us
  • Cookie policy


This week's front pages


Friday 31 October, 2014
front pages 31-10-14
A couple of weeks ago the Sun declared war on comparison websites, saying they were concealing deals from companies that didn't pay them commission. Some cheaper options would appear only if a prechecked box was unchecked.
It caused quite a stir and the paper joined forces with an organisation called the Big Deal to try to use mass buying power to secure better energy prices for its readers. We should learn in the next few days how that has worked out. It's an interesting enterprise, although SubScribe is not entirely comfortable with it. Nor did the "scandal" seem to be particularly heinous, the savings gained by unticking that box were not large and we know from TV and newspaper advertising that some companies do not make all - or even any - of their packages available through comparison sites.
Today the Telegraph comes up with a similar story, which has some far more striking figures. The structure of rail fares in this country has for years been absurd, with advance and online prices showing huge variations from those available at ticket offices. Now the Telegraph tells us that machines standing side by side on big station concourses are offering tickets for the same journey with a price difference of £100 or more. 
There are some splendid examples of how passengers could save money. It apparently costs half as much to travel from Carlisle to Manchester if the journey is split into chunks for ticketing purposes as it does to buy one ticket for the whole trip. 
But is it fair to expect a machine to suggest to a passenger in Chester-le-Street that if they want to go to Manchester, they'd be better off buying a ticket to Barrow 60 miles along the track and getting off early? 
Maybe not, but it can't be right for a machine not to offer a simple off-peak option for a journey, as another example states.
This is important, not least because passengers risk big fines if they dare board a train without a ticket - you can't even get a permit to travel now - and if the booking office is closed, they are at the mercy of the machine.
A good job well done here.

Overseas aid
Less well done is the Mail's deliberate over-interpretation of a report into the impact of Britain's overseas aid efforts.
The report, by the Independent Commission for Aid Impact, does indeed give the Department for International Development an "amber-red" rating, which calls for significant improvements. The report does say that Dfid has not paid enough attention to the impact of corruption on the lives of the poor or developed an approach equal to the challenge. It also says that the £22m directly targeted at fighting corruption should be set against an overall budget of £10.3bn. 
The Mail does not agree with the way that taxpayers' money is sent abroad and has long argued that it is bolstering disreputable regimes. So its splash heading this morning is entirely understandable and, indeed, justified.
But it couldn't resist pushing that bit further:
Picture
The billions Britain pours into foreign aid are actually doing harm by making corruption worse in many parts of the world, a damning report reveals.
In fact, the report focuses tightly on the effects on the poor of Dfid's anti-corruption efforts since 2011 in just two countries - Nepal and Nigeria, which between them account for 5% of the foreign aid budget.  Nigeria received a little under £437m between 2011 and 2013 and Nepal about £160m.  Hardly "billions".
Nor does the report criticise the department for spending too little of its budget on fighting corruption, as the Mail asserts. It actually says:.
Picture
Dfid was unable to tell us how much it spends on anti-corruption activities. We, therefore, could not form a view as to the relative weight given to anti-corruption work within DFID’s overall development assistance
It points out that spending specifically aimed at fighting corruption had risen from £3.5m since 2008 and that it is projected to rise to £190m by 2018. But it adds that the figures "significantly underestimated" Dfid's efforts because they didn't include money spent indirectly or through other agencies, including the UN. 
This report does not put Dfid in a good light and it gives the Mail ammunition for its argument that our money isn't reaching the right people. So why did it have to over-egg the pudding?
Finally, SubScribe makes no apology for repeating that while overseas aid spending has increased greatly to reach 0.7% of GDP, that means 99.3% of our money goes on other things.  And many of them are a great deal less deserving.

Thursday 30 October 2014
front pages 30-10-14
Fact, spin and opinion battle for the highground today.
First, three of the four heavyweights put drugs at the top of their schedules. What is particularly interesting is that the intros are almost the same, but the headings go in three different directions.
"There is no evidence that tough enforcement of the drug laws on personal possession leads to lower levels of drug use, according to the government's first evidence-based study," writes Alan Travis in the Guardian. The Independent takes its first paragraph slightly further - referring to a punitive approach, including locking up addicts, failing to curb addiction.  The Telegraph turns it round to say: "Decriminalising drugs would have little effect on the number of people abusing illegal substances."
Look then at the headings: for the Guardian drug laws are failing; the Telegraph moves away from the nub of the report to home in on disagreements within the Government over how to respond to it; the Independent editorialises with its loaded question. 
We're used to newspapers approaching stories according to their own perspective or agenda, but this is an unusual example of a fact that would have been compelling without embellishment being dressed up unnecessarily, as though it were not strong enough to stand up as a splash on its own without a row or a bit of posturing.

Cameron's tax pledge
The Times, which puts the story on 16 under the heading "Drug laws don't work, ministers admit"  is meanwhile busy printing shameless Conservative propaganda. The paper leads on a write-off of a David Cameron OpEd piece in which he asserts that the average taxpayer would be £3,800 better off over the next parliament if he, rather than Ed Miliband, returned to Downing Street next May.
The calculations that lead to this conclusion are so tortuous that the first-edition sub misinterpreted the figure as an annual gain. The reporters do try to leaven the party political broadcast with a limp attempt at impartial assessment:  "A leading independent expert was unable to endorse the figures, saying that the benefit might be up to £1,000 less than the Conservatives suggest." Why isn't this expert named?
There are also a couple of explanatory/questioning paragraphs on the turn. These suggest that Cameron has reached his figure by going back to 2010 and then assuming that if Labour had stayed in office it would have increased the personal allowance in line with RPI  over this parliament, which would have taken it to £7,500 rather than the £10,500 at which it stands today. That's a bit presumptuous, but that's politics for you.
But what happens with the hypothesis after 2015? Does Cameron assume that Labour would continue to lift that allowance in line with RPI? What about Miliband's pledge to reinstate the 10p lower rate of tax? Indeed, mightn't he have done so by now? 
The Times does point out that Cameron's numbers do not take account of benefit changes or the freezing of working tax credits for two years. The story also mentions a surge in "stealth" taxes over the past ten years, although it doesn't say how much of the extra take was down to Gordon Brown and how much to Cameron. 
It's all smoke and mirrors. If you have the Prime Minister writing for you, you are almost bound to splash on what he has to say. That leaves you with the choice of subjecting his figures to proper scrutiny - thereby running the risk of disproving claims put forward by one of your columnists - or of accepting what he says at face value and being accused of printing propaganda. 
Which is why the Times's former policy of not running columns by serving politicians was a good one. It should be reintroduced - and others (who have this week offered space to Yvette Cooper, David Blunkett and Nigel Farage among others) should follow suit.
SubScribe: crunching Cameron's numbers

Wednesday 29 October 2014
front pages 29-10-14
Migration, migration, migration: Mehdi Hasan will have been dismayed to see today's front pages for there is - and will be - no respite from this conversation.
The Mayor of Calais hopped across the Channel to talk to MPs yesterday and took the opportunity to blame British benefits for the camps full of refugees cluttering her town. People were willing to die for the £36 a week they expected to receive once they landed here, Natacha Bouchart told the home affairs select committee.
“The real magnet is not the city of Calais but the benefits that are perceived in Great Britain. People call and say, ‘We’ve got through. This is El Dorado. We are here and we are staying here.’ 
“The weekly benefits of £36 that are given to migrants or asylum seekers is a huge amount for people who have nothing in their lives. They have no idea about the value of money and they don’t understand that £36 is very little."
Both the Times and Express splash on the story and highlight Bouchart's description of Britain as a "soft touch". Except she doesn't seem to have said that. An MP asked if she thought Britain was a soft touch and she said "Oui". Not quite the same thing. 
Natacha Bouchart
Nor do her words, as reported, justify the headline "Calais goes to war" or the phrase in the Times splash that she "unleashed an attack" on the benefits system. This is not to say that they are not a fair reflection of the hour Bouchart, pictured, spent in the company of our MPs. Rather that the paper made an unfortunate decision to combine its report of the encounter with the verdict of the public accounts committee on the way the Home Office handles asylum applications, thus ending up with the worst of all worlds.
Ann Treneman's sketch on page 6 gives more of a sense of conflict in the committee room - indeed, our MPs seem to have been most discourteous to their guest. Why should Bouchart have had to put up with Michael Ellis barking at her about international treaties and border responsibilities over which, as a small-town mayor, she has no control? 
The paper leads page 2 with Cameron's ally Nicholas Boles saying that Britain would never be able to control its borders so long as it was in the EU - not a particularly helpful contribution from the Prime Minister's point of view. But the paper's coverage falls down badly through its decision not to run a separate story on the public accounts committee report, which details a huge backlog of asylum applications, the disappearance from view of 50,000 illegal immigrants and £1bn wasted on systems that don't do what they're supposed to.
The Mail, in full splutter mode, combines the elements far more  effectively with its generic "What a mess!" headline, triple strap, and  dedicated story for each outrage. It also does better than the Times with its England-France panel. The Times's is an embarrassment, the Mail's far more informative - albeit with the editorialising headline "Lessons we can learn from France".
The Mail also has room on its inside spread for a piece on the boat people who are to be left to their fate once Italy stops Mare Nostrum (see yesterday's review). The Times and Express don't mention it. 
The Guardian follows up yesterday's lead on the Italian rescue service with three-quarters of an inside page, although it doesn't really take the story much further. The splash is another wrap, in this case nosed on the accounts committee report with a bit of the mayor and Boles incorporated. The Independent (which splashes on ebola) and the i meanwhile combine the PAC and Mare Nostrum. The i also has room inside for a story on the mayor, the Independent prefers to give Boles his own slot.
So which was the better story? SubScribe thinks the Times and Express were right to go with the Mayor, a truly unusual story with provocative quotes; the PAC figures are shocking, but we are used to the committee producing alarming statistics - and the material is dry by comparison with Bouchart.
There is little new to say about Mare Nostrum, but the facts of this operation will come as a surprise to many and present a serious moral dilemma. Leader writers and commentators have rightly concerned themselves most with this today. It is a matter of life and death for tens of thousands of desperate people.
It will be a long time before Hasan gets his wish and we all shut up about this.
See what the commentators have to say about Mara Nostrum here


Tuesday 28 October, 2014
front pages 28-10-14

In his Mail piece, Blunkett repeats the canard that we 'should not avoid talking about' immigration. Argh!! It's all we bloody talk about...

— Mehdi Hasan (@mehdirhasan) October 28, 2014
Hasan is right. But unfortunately none of that hot air has produced answers to the tough questions being asked not only here, but throughout Europe. 
The Mail's Blunkett splash is a redigestion of an OpEd piece in which the former Home Secretary seems more concerned about justifying his choice of words 12 years ago and assorted policies that he espoused, including the introduction of ID cards.
Far more interesting and concerning is the Guardian's lead about migrants from Africa who are drowning in their thousands trying to cross the Mediterranean to Europe crammed into rubber dinghies. For the past year the Italian navy has been looking out for refugees in the Med and helping them to safety. The Mare Nostrum programme - established after 366 died when their boat sank off Lampedusa - is believed to have saved 150,000 people so far. But it costs Italy €9m a month and the country wants to scale back the operation. The EU has agreed to introduce some patrols under what it calls Operation Triton, although not to replicate the Italian enterprise.  
None of this is new; there has been much debate for the past three months, both about Triton and the merits or otherwise of the Italian effort. An article by Nicholas Farrell in the Spectator last month described it as a tragic folly that had acted as a magnet for boat people. That view turns out to be in line with government thinking, for at the heart of the Guardian's splash is a written answer from the Foreign Office minister Lady Anelay saying that Britain would not be taking part in Triton. There was, she said "an unintended pull factor" in search and rescue operations that encouraged more migrants to attempt the dangerous sea crossing and so lead to more deaths.
She may be right, but the answer cannot be to stand by and watch people drown.
 
Ukip poll surge
Europe and migration are, of course, the subjects of consuming interest to Ukip, and Nigel Farage is adept at making them - rather than health, education, poverty, justice, or defence - of greater interest to the country at large. Today the Independent and i report that support for Ukip is at a record high in the wake of the £1.7bn bill we have just received from the EU. An opinion poll for the two papers puts Ukip on 19% with the Tories and Labour  on 30% each. Ukip is four points up on last month and Labour five points down. Tough times for Miliband.
Tough times for Cameron, too, who had to contend not only with a noisy House of Commons demanding what he was going to do about this enormous EU bill, but also with a jogger who ran into him in the street. Everyone uses the sequence of blurry photographs taken by a passer-by with a smartphone, and most fretted about security. "What if this man had been carrying a knife?" the Mail demands, while the Mirror leads on the incident with the clumsy heading "It could've been a terrorist".
The Mirror is not alone in producing an unfortunate terrorist head. The Sun was too busy being clever with the play on The Only Way in Essex to stop and think about whether it was a remotely suitable headline for a woman believed to have taken her toddler to join the jihadis in Syria.
It wasn't. Nor was the injection of her liking of the programme into the first sentence to justify the heading. It was a throwaway quote, not the point of the story.
The Star completes the redtop parade with the most compelling splash headline of the day - and one which is completely untrue. This poor lady didn't eat the fridge. She ate its contents. Sorry to spoil the fun.

Monday 27 October, 2014
front pages 27-10-14
For Britain the war is over. Thirteen years after Osama bin Laden's suicidal pilots flew into the heart of Western democracy, our troops are finally on their way home from Afghanistan. A war that lasted longer than the two world conflicts of the last century, Korea and the Falklands put together has ended. Quite a moment.
Not, perhaps, a dramatic, hard news moment - such as the drowning of three surfers on the first weekend of half-term. Not a controversial political moment to equal a ministerial gaffe or the EU budget tussle. Not a scientific moment to match the discovery that a bedtime cup of cocoa might help your memory. Not a nail-biting moment with the intensity of decision time on X Factor or Strictly.
But quite a moment, nonetheless.
It is natural, therefore, to see it recorded on every front page. For five it is the splash, for eight the main picture. But only two papers properly grasped the nature of the occasion.
For the Mirror there is room for nothing else; the Telegraph also dispenses with its puff for its one-subject cover, but sadly not the ad. Both complete their Afghanistan news coverage before letting any other topic get a look in. Both run a spread further back with the names and photographs of every one of the 453 British servicemen and women killed during the conflict.
Here we see the two papers at diametrically opposite points of the national newspaper market, the rightwing broadsheet, the leftwing tabloid, marching together with such conviction that everyone else looks out of step.
This really is purposeful journalism, beautifully executed. Good writing, strikingly presented - although, again, the ads in the Telegraph get in the way. 
Telegraph 2-3
telegraph 4
telegraph features
telegraph roll of honour
Mirror 2-3
Mirror 4-5
Mirror
Of course there is work to commend in other papers, too - a striking graphic on the Times's inside spread, a poignant cartoon in the Independent. But there are also a few false steps - the Mail's petulant splash moaning about the removal of a memorial from Camp Bastion and the Independent and Guardian's positioning of their coverage too far back in the book. 
The Sun splits its material between page 2 and 8-9, a spread framed with photographs of the dead. But the skinny picture and poor heading on the front - squeezed to the edge by a soap actress and a trio of puffs - are a big error.  This is the paper that regards itself as the mouthpiece of "our boys", the staunch supporter of Help for Heroes, the first to bring out the remembrance poppy.
The Express, too, sees itself as the home of patriotism, yet the end of a war that has involved tens of thousands of troops comes in third after that cup of cocoa and a couple of sunny days. For the Star - which, like the Express, has been wearing its poppy with pride since Friday -  it is even less important, ranking well behind the X Factor, football and freebies. 
See the weekend papers (but no reviews) here



Picture
Daily Star rats
A year of fear: 
a Hallowe'en
tribute to
the Daily Star


Immigration
Immigration: let's spike the scare stories, and print some facts instead


Daily Star
Nasty foreigners
or nasty papers? 
A year of 
xenophobia


election wordle
The European election audit: 
how balanced is press coverage?



June Churchill
Women are beaten and murdered 
every day. Does that mean it's not news?


Ebola virus

Insular Press
wakes up 
to Ebola 
- and panics


Typhoon Haiyan
Beware of assuming that readers
don't care about 
disasters abroad


Colchester hospital
Colchester cancer scandal and a catalogue
of complacency


David Cameron
Will we really all be better off? Crunching Cameron's
tax-cut numbers


Scott cartoon
Struggling to bring colour to
the blue-rinse
bingo Budget


Madeleine McCann
Madeleine McCann: missing an opportunity to do good for others


Greek Madeleine
We'd all like to find the missing children, but splitting up families won't help



Picture
The release of Harry Roberts: predictable outrage and 
unasked questions


Daily Mail June 5
Editor's blog:
Conducting entire
trials in camera
is not democratic


bring back our girls
Twitter puts smug British Press to shame on kidnapped Nigerian schoolgirls


Michael LeVell
The Michael Levell trial: rape cases never have
a happy ending


William Roache
Beyond our Ken: 
why celebrity rape allegations
must be put to a jury


Maxine Carr
Let's celebrate 
Maxine Carr's wedding and 
her fresh start


Brooks Newmark
Editor's blog
A malicious and misconceived sting...

Style Counsel
...No it was the Press doing its job...

Editor's blog
...second thoughts and humble pie


Stephen Sotloff
Isis hostages:  let's honour the brave men who died, not glorify their killers


David Haines
David Haines: remembering a man murdered because he tried to help


James Foley
Death or dishonour:
Are we fit to stand alongside 
James Foley?



Will and Kate
Remember those who went to die
in 1914, but forget
the ersatz emotion


Afghanistan map
Picture
Sean Langan was invited to give evidence about Afghanistan to the foreign affairs select committee's inquiry into global security. Its members could not find Helmand on a map. 
"The foreign affairs select committee: they're supposed to be specialists. They had sent soldiers to die in Helmand and they didn't know where it was."
Frontline reporting


Gameoldgirl
Follow @gameoldgirl

comments powered by Disqus

Please sign up for SubScribe updates  
(no spam, no more than one every week or two)

I'd like to become a SubScriber

* indicates required
Quick links

Picture
Main sections:
The industry
Press freedom
Press regulation
The schedule
Phone hacking
News judgment
Regionals
Picture
About SubScribe
Send an email
Blogs:
Pictures and spreads
Editor's blog
Press Box
Style Counsel
You have to laugh
OpEd
Front page reviews
Picture
The old blog