Since the Sun made its latest revelation about soon-to-be-ex-Tory MP Brooks Newmark, the perpetually thirsty Paul Staines and his rabble at the Guido Fawkes blog have been pushing the line that this somehow vindicates them. And there are indeed some who believe this. However, and here we encounter a significantly sized however, others are concerned about the way they conducted their sting.
Fart in lift inquiry strikes bum note
Indeed, the Sunday Mirror had to apologise after it was found that the photos used by Staines’ newly anointed teaboy Alex Wickham were not, as it believed, posed by one or more models, but crudely copied from a trawl of the Web. Mirror management are finding out the hard way that their description of Wickham as a “reputable freelance journalist” is deficient on two of those three counts.
The Great Guido is not only unable to understand that the ends do not always justify the means, but also that others are entitled to hold this view, whatever their opinion of Newmark’s conduct. To this end the Fawkes folks have gone into Guardian bashing overdrive, all because future head of media Jane Martinson is adopting a “wait and see” approach – and commenting positively about Zelo Street.
Ms Martinson has, by doing this, committed three acts which to the Fawkes rabble are unforgiveable: saying anything about this blog (Staines has ordered not just Wickham, but also the odious flannelled fool Henry Cole, to keep schtum in the hope that I will just go away), working for the hated Guardian, and not acceding to views that are acceptable to Themselves Personally Now.
So the Guardian bashing has been ramped up: Wickham attempted a smear of the paper this morning, trying to push the idea of putting a photo of Amal Clooney on the front page was sexist. It was as lame as his nasty Owen Jones smear, but the intent was clear. He also whined “All I would say is listen to your colleagues in the media today, who say story is vindicated. I look forward to your apology”.
Yes, Wickham is still pretending to be a journalist. Staines himself carped “You were more concerned about processology than substance of story. We did a public service, you just whined ‘whataboutery’”, which Ms Martinson did not. Cole added “Are you for real? You buy the idea that the 2nd Newmark story would have ever have [sic] come out had the first one not surfaced?”
And then it started to get out of order, as Media Guido (Staines) sneered “Are you one of those internet conspiracy theorists?” Whining at the Guardian in order to garner brownie points from the rest of the press, to which they have so shamelessly sold out, is de rigueur for the Fawkes rabble. But this is just a feeble attempt to smear someone who does not trust them to tell the truth.
There are a lot of those kinds of people about. Another fine mess, once again.