Information control picture
Christopher Hope, chair of the parliamentary lobby and assistant editor at the Daily Telegraph, says lobby correspondents have more access to ministers and special advisers but are still sometimes frustrated at how announcements are timed to deflect bad publicity. If a critical report by backbench MPs or the National Audit Office is expected, the government may try to steer public opinion in its favour by announcing a change in policy related to the report or extra spending. “It can confuse the news agenda, which can only cope with one message,” explains Hope. “If the government is doing something, it normally trumps anything from a group of MPs.” In addition, ministers are less likely to hold press conferences
or give lengthy interviews to newspapers and magazines. This is partly down to time, says another lobby correspondent. Ministers are also aware that anything they say to broadcast media is less likely to be ‘spun’ or taken out of context, with the public sometimes able to see or hear an interview in its entirety. Over the past 20 years, Whitehall press officers have become
increasingly media savvy, says a special adviser during the last Labour government. But this does not necessarily mean they are biased towards the party in power. “Communication officers want to do a good job for their department,” he says. At the same time, adds the former spin doctor, journalists should not assume that press offices deliberately hold information back. There may have been last-minute wrangles between ministers or between Number 10 and the department concerned. “Often, it’s incompetence,” he says. “The document is just not finished.” Press officers are often keen to offer journalists a prepared quote, or written answers to questions submitted via email, but opportunities to put questions directly to the minister who is supposedly answering them are rare. “The answers are written by press officers,” says the former special adviser. “The special adviser will then rewrite them, so they don’t sound as if they come from a robot.” If holding the government to account is difficult at national
level, it is more so away from Westminster. While regional journalists may have a good relationship with local MPs, a rare visit to the area by a cabinet minister or the prime minister is unlikely to result in much beyond a smile for the cameras. The experience of the Plymouth Herald during the 2017 general election campaign (see box) illustrates the problem. Edd Moore, editor of the Herald’s online edition, says the south-west is largely overlooked by the government, which makes Theresa May’s unwillingness to take its questions seriously two years ago more disappointing. “We feel massively under-represented and ignored by
Westminster,” says Moore. “Trying to get local issues addressed by senior MPs and cabinet ministers is a real issue.” Back in the Commons, Jim Pickard of the Financial Times
says the problem is not new. “It’s not always easy to hold the government to account because of the usual tricks of failing to respond properly, non-denial denials and evasiveness,” he says. The answer lies in good journalism, including checking that ministers’ claims have foundation and are not just soundbites. Earlier this year, a claim by trade secretary Liam Fox that
the UK was replicating EU trade deals with other countries before Brexit was proved wrong when the FT checked with the Department for Trade and Industry. “Ultimately, the government is held to account because you can judge its performance by results and statistics,” says Pickard.
TRINITY MIRROR / MIRRORPIX / ALAMY STOCK PHOTO theJournalist | 13
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28
