Murdoch Paywall Pleading PATHETIC

After the Sunday Times article detailing the shortcomings of alleged Prime Minister Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson in his leading Britain’s response to the Coronavirus pandemic was made freely available online, and a number of extracts from the piece were circulated via social media, several journalists became conspicuously righteous in their indignation at the busting of the Murdoch mafiosi’s paywall.

Rupe shows his appreciation for the support

A member of the journalist establishment explains his straitened circumstances to the lay person

Much of the conspicuous righteousness - a phenomenon to rank alongside that of conspicuous consumption, with which, one suspects, some of those involved are already familiar - was directed at campaigner and Guardian journalist Owen Jones. Some was merely lecturing and patronising. Most likely none of it has had any effect.

Jones Tweeted out a long thread (link HERE) which began “The Sunday Times investigation into the government's catastrophic handling of the coronavirus is one of the most important things you've read. It's behind a paywall, so here's a thread with the key points. Make sure everyone sees it”. The adverse comment was not far behind.

In the vanguard was Oliver Kamm, who managed not to declare an interest. “It is quite extraordinary that instead of posting Guardian copy, Owen Jones copies-and-pastes material that Sunday Times journalists have researched & written, and sees nothing wrong in doing so. I hope someone explains the issue to him”. Thank you Tedious Maximus.

After Polly Vernon had exclaimed “My god! The Sunday times article is not ‘sitting behind a paywall’ so as to deprive those who can’t afford it... it’s asking that people pay for it, so more articles like it can be produced. Don’t read it for free!” Caitlin Moran added “This is a really simple but important point: that Sunday Times piece is an incredible piece of journalism, which everyone should read, & might topple the PM - but it simply wouldn't exist if those journalists had tried to write & research it for free in breaks from waitressing”.

I did warn you there would be patronising, and there it was. There was also admonishment from Hadley Freeman. “Note to people sharing the Sunday Times article by cutting and pasting snippets: you are not helping. Newspapers are dying right now. If you want to support journalism, link to the newspaper itself. People get 2 free articles a week from the Times when they sign up”. This point was also made by James Ball.

“Anyone can read that Sunday Times article for free by registering on the website (you get two free articles a week). There is absolutely no excuse for doing a thread on it, or reposting it ‘without the paywall’. It is shitty, self-regarding behaviour”. Very good James, you can fuck right off too. And let me put all these august individuals straight.

Give the Murdochs personal information so I can view two articles a week? There’s a lot of people wanting to be told to shove it today. Feel guilty about a multi-billionaire being short of a monkey or two? Well, my heart fails to bleed: this article was well researched, but papers like the Guardian and FT also put free content out there.

This is, after all, the paper edited for so many years by John Witherow, whose use of illegal information gathering is well known. It is part of the same stable as the late and not at all lamented Screws. And the Sun, also the subject of phone hacking claims. And I should give it my personal information? They sup some strong stuff in that media bubble.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by adding to its Just Giving page at

https://www.justgiving.com/crowdfunding/zelostreet5