The sleeping watchdogs

David G. Jones

This has been the year of the scandal. First Poulson, then Lonrho, then Lambton and Jellicoe. Now we have a furore surrounding the shareholdings of Mr Heath's oil troubleshooter Lord Polwarth. The facts are disturbing in themselves. But these scandals demonstrate a serious failing on the part of the British press, which can claim little credit for bringing such indiscretions to the public notice. It seems that improbity in public and business affairs can only come to light by accident.

Would we know of the corrupt generosity of architect John Poulson if there had been no bankruptcy examinations? Would we have heard of the dubious financial dealings of Mr Tiny Rowland had there been no battle in the boardroom?

True enough, the recent misdemeanours of certain government ministers have come to

light via the News.of the World But the news

paper cannot claim that campaigning journalism was responsible for the revelations. It.

was simply that two men offered the paper photographs in exchange for large sums of money. The only credit journalists can take for recent exposures is in the case of Lord Polwarth's shareholdings (the Minister of State for Scotland did not declare his interest —holdings in three investment trusts associated with oil development — before accepting the new post of North Sea Oil supremo). But where was the campaign that unearthed Lord Polwarth's interest? Not in any of the establishment press. The report ap

peared in Glasgow News, an eight-page news sheet describing itself as 'Glasgow's free press."

The traditional British press has a shameful record when it comes to exposing dishonesty in business and public life. Contrast this with the situation in the United Sates, where the Washington Post can claim sole responsibility for bringing to light the White House coverup of the Watergate affair. Mr Harold Wilson, that master of opportunism, said at the time of the Lonrho scandal that the uncovered skulduggery demonstrated the evils of the Tory free market system. Of course, an abuse of the system does not mean the system itself is unsound. How ever, it is in the interests of all of us who believe the present economic system is basically a good one that 'shady dealings,' including backhand payments and the use of tax havens, are exposed. Constant criticism of the system would bring improvement. It is not to be resisted on the grounds that it provides political fuel for revolution. After all, continual criticism is preferable to periodic major scandal.

What we need to maintain a free market system is a free market press. Today's press —the natural vehicle for criticism of the economic status quo — is complacent, myopic and dominated to an unnecessary extent by the thirst for advertising revenue. At the present time, there is little investigative journalism on the American pattern in Britain. The Sunday Times ' Insight ' team is one of the few places where the journalist becomes an analyst instead of a mere writer.

The situation is far worse in the provinces, where newspapers do not possess the resources of the Sunday Times, and, indeed, are much more susceptible to the pressures of advertiser. The raison d'être of the provincial evening paper is not now that of informing the public. The paper has become merely a vehicle for the merchandising of advertisements. In addition, today's provincial newspapers are almost exclusively monopolies. Yet although monopolies are bitterlyattacked everywhere else the7 occur in our "Tory free market system," on the provincial newspaper front they exist unchallenged.

Most provincial evening papers have never heard of the word ' competition.' And in the larger cities — such as Birmingham, Liverpool, Sheffield, Leeds, Cardiff and Newcastle —both the morning and evening papers are owned by the same company. Thus there is no effective vehicle for the voicing of interests conflicting with those of the newspaper companies, except possibly local radio, which has as yet gained no reputation for campaigning journalism or consumer protection.

Correspondingly, most of the developments towards a free market press are taking place in the provinces. In uncovering the indirect oil holdings of Lord Polwarth, the Glas

gow News has already won an important feather for its cap. In Liverpool, an excellent

monthly paper, the Liverpool Free Press, run by disillusioned employees of the Liverpool Daily Post and Echo, has emerged.

The so-called " alternative " press generally suffers because its style and content preclude its being taken seriously. (The frivolous Private Eye suffers as much from this disease as the propagandist Workers Press.) Unfortunately, the traditional voice of the left-wing paper is a juvenile " Kick the fascist Tory pigs," and similar gems of intellectual insight. Moreover, what part of the alternative press that is not dramatic exaggeration is often flagrant obscenity.

Where some of the new provincial' alternative' papers score over the existing left-wing press ;s in their campaigning rather than purely political or pornographic slant. Brian Whittaker, one ot the joint editors of the Liverpool Free Press, told me, "We have made a conscious attempt not merely to churn out political propaganda and underground-cult material for students. We hope the Free Press is acceptable enough to be read by everybody. In this way we believe we can have much more impact than a traditional left-wing paper." We must welcome the Liverpool Free Press, and any other paper which makes its business inquiring journalism. It can bring a much needed breath of fresh air to our news-stands. More important, it can help keep our 'Tory free market system 'on its toes.

A free market system needs a free market press to enable it to flourish. Monopolies are as dangerous in communications as they are in industry. It is the system, and all of us who believe in it, who stand to benefit from attempts to revitalise the British press. As the late Adlai Stevenson said, 'A free society means' a society based on free competition, and there is not more important competiton than competition in ideas, competition in opinion. This form of competition is essential to the preservation of a free press."

David G. Jones is a postgraduate journalism student at University College, Cardiff