As the fallout from the crude sting operation that entrapped
Tory MP Brooks Newmark continues – both
he and fellow Parliamentarian Mark Pritchard are taking the matter to new
press regulator IPSO, and Pritchard
is contacting the Police – there remains one corner of the commentariat
that found out about the affair rather earlier than everyone else, and has been
defending it rather too strongly.
Yes, despite silence from the Sunday Mirror over their freelance source, emerging from the traps
the earliest were the perpetually thirsty Paul Staines and his rabble at the
Guido Fawkes blog: as I noted yesterday,
their newly anointed teaboy Alex Wickham Tweeted out the news of the splash at
1805 hours, a whole hour before either of the hacks whose name appeared on the
by-line.
And the Fawkes blog followed up with a post just 14 minutes
later: at 1819 hours, getting Brooks Newmark’s resignation statement, along
with a photo of the model used for part of the sting, whose permission was
apparently not given before her image was used. Then came the over-zealous
defence of the story, undertaken mainly by the odious flannelled fool Henry
Cole.
He was also rather too quick on the draw, observing “No surprise that Brooks Newmark has gone.
Details tomorrow” at 1812 hours. Then, as Cristina Odone mused “Come on, is sexting more than a minor sex
scandal”, Cole aggressively fired back “It’s
a little more than that though isn’t it?” This was backed up with a Cole
speciality: the lying and smearing combo.
“You can either be the
back channel to Assad, or you can be the kinda guy who trawls the net for girls
to send dick pics to. But not both”. But, as any fule kno, Newmark did not
trawl the net. He was targeted. As were six other MPs. Cole’s crude dishonesty,
a clear effort to make Newmark look a lot worse, again shows that the Fawkes
rabble is protesting rather too much.
And why should they make so much noise, if they are not
involved? Ah well. Consider Cole’s reaction to someone Tweeting “Marr glosses over ‘minor sex scandal’ with
Cameron”. Then look at Wickham’s response: “why might Andrew Marr not want to talk about sex scandals”. The
Great Guido and his followers never do get onto The Andy Marr Show (tm) sofa, do they?
What we have here is a group of unsavoury characters who
believe that the media owes them rather more respect than they are at present
obtaining. The Fawkes rabble craves recognition and status: most right-thinking
media folks, sadly for them, think the diametrical opposite. And they have
still not explained why they were so well informed about the Newmark sting,
while not being involved, honestly.
Somebody is protesting too loud and too early. Another fine mess, once again.
Good blog but I think you are wrong about "right-thinking media folks." The Fawkes rabble does get recognition and status from the BBC and Sky. Harry Cole seems to be given lots of opportunities on both to expound his personal brand of schoolboy idiocy.
ReplyDeleteA man distinguished only by his complete lack of morality
Looks like you've just been proved to be spot on, Tim. Wickham was the reporter.
ReplyDeleteWhat a sad, grubby little man.
Well done. Your theory has been confirmed on Newsnight. Alex Wickham's pants are now on fire.
ReplyDelete