web analytics


By ATWadmin On November 26th, 2006

cheire.jpgI wonder what you make of Cherie Blair’s attack on the media claiming there is “no professional morality in journalism”. The Prime Minister’s wife took her revenge on a profession that has bedevilled her for years when invited to address students at Roehampton University on Wednesday. She told a stunned audience that it was “not a noble calling” and journalists “have no ethics”.

Now then, time for my pennysworth. I’m sure you might accept me to be a reasonably trenchant critic of the MSM. However I also happen to know several journos and I consider some of them to be deeply principled. ( though I would take issue with some of those principles!) I think journalists are no different to the rest of us, and their profession exposes them to a wide range of views and disciplines. So I  think that Cherie Blair is wrong.

But let me offer up a profession that truly “is not a noble calling” and which self-evidently “has no ethics”.. yes, I’m talking about POLITICIANS. As far as I am concerned, it really is a profession of whores.

19 Responses to “A PROFESSION OF WHORES…”

  1. I think the idea of an "ethical" or "responsible" press is usually special pleading by someone who doesn’t want something written about.

    Sometimes that is out of self-interest and sometimes it is out of political interest.

    Thus we are given constant stories on global warming and nothing on the demographic crisis.

  2. Luckily we have the blogsphere where your good self , Mark Steyn and others address the real issues.

    From Steyn today

    "Fatma-An-Najar (grandmother and suicide bomber) gave birth to her first child at the age of 12. She had eight others. She had 41 grandchildren. Keep that family tree in mind. By contrast, in Spain, a 64-year old woman will have maybe one grandchild. That’s four grandparents, one grandchild: a family tree with no branches."

    "Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church, Katharine Jefferts Schori, the first woman to run a national division of the Anglican Communion. Bishop Kate gave an interview to the New York Times revealing what passes for orthodoxy in this most flexible of faiths. She was asked a simple enough question: "How many members of the Episcopal Church are there?"
    "About 2.2 million," replied the presiding bishop. "It used to be larger percentage-wise, but Episcopalians tend to be better educated and tend to reproduce at lower rates than other denominations."

    If Fatma An-Najar has 41 grandchildren and a responsible "better educated" Episcopalian has one or two, into whose hands are we delivering "the stewardship of the earth"? If your crowd isn’t around in any numbers, how much influence can they have in shaping the future?

    For the full article


  3. Apologies if that is too far off topic but the point is that the problem with the media is not what Mrs Blair thinks it is.

  4. The special pleading is more often than not made BY the journalists who too often push their own tedious agendas our way lecturing us as though they know best. Their influence is profound and dangerous. I though the point of the blogosphere was to combat the one side opinionated press. For once I find myself in agreement with Cherie that there is little noble in the profession anymore. Most of which was highlighted over the summers often blatantly false coverage of the war, their hyprocrisy over the cartoons in terms of freedom of expression which they will happily refer to when it suits them…Journalists personal opinions or political opinions hold too much sway.

  5. Alison,

    As far as I am concerned, the blogosphere IS the new media and is eclipsing much of the dross in the MSM. This is more apparent in the US than the UK, where we have far too many bleeding hearts and limp-wristed fellow bloggers. But here on ATW we make no compromise (Allah be praised)

    I can only speak about the mainstream journos I know, and I do respect a few of them. Peter Hitchens falls into this class. There are others who write in old and new media, like Mark Steyn and Melanie Phillips, whose views are pretty much aligned with my own. I think they have loads of integrity.

  6. "whose views are pretty much aligned with my own. I think they have loads of integrity"


    which journalist whose views do not allign with yours do you think have most integrity? ;o).

  7. Suzanne Breen. Our best local journalist and a lady whose views are mostly (albeit not exclusively) non-aligned with mine. For a while the BBC considered having us both as co-commentators on a radio programme but then they decided to stick to what they do best…..

    Betcha didnt expect this answer!!!!

  8. David

    I am intrigued! That would have been an interesting programme.

    In what way are her views not aligned with yours?

    I just see her as someone who has no time for terrorism and she has always been fine with me.

    I don’t really know what her views are apart from that.

    Is she a leftie? ;o)

  9. Aileen,

    Well,,,her views on Israel/Palestine and mine differ, her views on the war on terror and mine differ….BUT she’s got bags of integrity and is witty and intelligent. She’s a raving lefty just as I’m a raving righty – the radio prog would have been great listening…

  10. Well you learn something new….

    She is witty. She is also very easy to blather to, which probably makes her a good journalist.

  11. Alison,

    I take your point on journalists. I think they inhabit a self-referential and narrow world, which is sustained in part by the sense of their own importance.

    But Cherie’s a parasitical ambulance-chaser – even worse than a journalist, in my jaundiced eye!

  12. The press can be unpleasant at times but seeing as she and her husband have been quite willing to use the press to smear opponants and trivialise politics it is a bit rich coming from her.

  13. Surely we must make an exception in the case of dear old Polly Toynbee – a journalist who really puts her money where her mouth is! She insists on being paid no more than the minimum wage by the Guardian (she works tiresomely long hours to earn her £140K salary!), plus she refuses to send her children anywhere else but to the local comprehensive school, as she is so passionately anti-academic selection.
    (PS, in true MSM journo style, I didn’t have time to fully check all my facts there, so I may have made one or two slight errors. If so, I’ll publish a "corrections and amendments" comment, er, some time later)!

  14. This would be the same Cherie, socialist and property investor, a mother who in Barrister mode fought on behalf of a convicted paedophile who objected to a court order barring him from going near children’s playgrounds ?

  15. Tom,

    Don’t get your arithmetic!

    Assuming Polly’s salary is indeed £140,000, she would of necessity need to work (140 000 / 5.35) / 52 = 503.235083 hours every week to remain at the standard minimum wage of £5.35 per hour!

    No wonder she gets upset with lots of people!

  16. "I didn’t have time to fully check all my facts there, so I may have made one or two slight errors."

    Don’t worry about that, it’s fake but accurate.

  17. Cherie’s comments only go to prove that some journalists are obviously getting it right.

  18. I always want to see politicians (and their spouses when they throw themselves into the pulic forum) complain about the media. It means that the media are doing their job. Those comments of hers strikes me as made by one who knows she is on her way out.

  19. Just be thankful there is no Chappaqua in England.