As the case of Jonathan Portes’ complaint to the
PCC about the routinely dishonest attack on him by Dan, Dan The Oratory Man
continues, claims are now being made that the complaint was in fact dismissed.
This, Hannan and
his editor Damian Thompson, clueless pundit of no fixed hair appointment,
have decided, mean that they are in the right. Moreover, a Tory MP agrees with
them.
To no surprise at all, that MP is Mark Reckless, whose name
will be familiar to Zelo Street regulars following his lengthy encounter with the
Commons bar facilities one warm summer evening in 2010. Reckless’ contention is
that Portes, in seeking redress against Hannan’s smear – that NIESR can only
get grant money from the EU because they are pro-EU – makes him
less trustworthy.
No doubt Reckless would rather Portes stay silent and then
be damned as guilty because he was a good little boy and didn’t make waves. It
is a supremely bone-headed approach, but in character for someone who told
anyone who would listen that he had extracted an admission of criminal
wrongdoing from Guardian editor Alan
Rusbridger during the latter’s appearance before a Commons committee recently.
That the rozzers have not descended and taken Rusbridger off
to the Tower, despite the certainty of Reckless and the advocacy of bawling
troll Louise Mensch, does not sink in with either of them. But let’s not lose
sight of the PCC and its behaviour: even if it has let Hannan off, that is no
guarantee that he was making a factually correct statement. I cite two other
rulings in support of my contention.
Hannan’s fellow inhabitant of the bear pit that is Telegraph blogs, James “saviour of Western civilisation”
Delingpole, was the subject of a PCC complaint by scientists from the University
of East Anglia over his routinely abusive comments on their behaviour. The PCC
excused Del Boy, accepting
his interpretation of comments in the so-called “Climategate” emails as if they were fact.
Then there was the case of blogger Primly Stable making a
complaint to the PCC about the Daily Mail’s
unfunny and tedious churnalist Richard Littlejohn over his assertion that any
Afghan getting out of the back of the lorry at Dover “automatically goes to the top of the housing list”. The PCC agreed
that the statement was untrue, but hey, it was an opinion column, so
it was OK for him to lie.
So exoneration from the PCC does not validate what Hannan
said: this body has previously allowed pundits to have not merely their own
opinions – which is fine – but also
their own facts, which is not. And it has excused blatant dishonesty on
the grounds that “it’s only an opinion
column”. If the PCC patted Dan on the head and let him off, all that does
is put another nail in its coffin, and that of successor IPSO.
Daniel Hannan is still a habitual and proven liar. And that’s a factual statement.
No comments:
Post a Comment