The censoriousness of The Daily Telegraph
Upon hearing of the ill treatment of Guido Fawkes at the hands of The Daily Telegraph, Cranmer posted this today upon Janet Daley’s blog. It has been deleted (the first time any of his musings has been so treated), but this is more or less as he remembers it:
It is no surprise to learn that The Daily Telegraph stands accused of deception and betrayal. Its standards have declined over recent years, for the Barclay brothers know little and care even less about journalism.
Observing the eradication of such institutions as Craig Brown and AN Wilson, not to mention Patrick Barclay, Sam Leith, Andrew McKie, and also noting the phasing out of the regular columns of Iain Dale and Daniel Hannan MEP, the Barclay brothers have convened a coterie of Labour-leaning and like-minded journalists who criticise the Conservative Party and berate the Church of England at every turn. Many of its articles evidence government partiality. Where comments are invited, postings can take hours to be published, and those which have immediate publication are arbitrarily deleted without reason, thus hindering reasonable argument and stifling debate.
It has been long observed that the Barclay brothers are notoriously touchy about any criticism. They have been happy to use laws that inhibit press freedom. They want their papers to be mouthpieces for their own reactionary opinions and clamp down - through intermediaries - on anything that runs counter to their views. They are utterly intolerant of voices raised in protest - religiously or politically.
The Daily Telegraph is not only opposed to all that Mr Fawkes seeks to achieve in exposing political corruption and hypocrisy: it has become antithetical to all that is noble, true and honourable.
If someone from The Telegraph would care to explain why this did not pass your censors, His Grace would be most appreciative.
Or is it that he is simply too near the truth?