MEDIA STUDIES
Who wants to read about Max, when old Charlie is trying to hang on to the Independent?
STEPHEN GLOVER
Iwas going at last to set pen to paper on the subject of Max Hastings, the new editor of the Evening Standard, and then the letters started arriving. Some were in his defence and others — well, let us say they took a less sympathetic view. I realise that no work of research is ever complete, and sooner or later one has to take the plunge. But it seems short-sighted to rush into print with- out having the full facts at one's disposal.
In any case there is another subject which cries out to be written about this week the editorship of the Independent. Does any- one care about that newspaper any more? Last November Charles (`Charlie') Wilson was appointed its acting editor after the dis- missal of Ian Hargreaves. His task was to sack 50 journalists and to find a new editor prepared to run the paper on a shoe string.
Nearly three months have passed and the journalists have not yet been sacked, nor has an editor been found. In the last few days it has become clear that the claims of the Independent's political columnist Andrew Marr, the most plausible internal candidate, have been overlooked by David Montgomery, chief executive of Mirror Group Newspapers, which manages the Independent. The question arises whether, at the age of 60, Mr Wilson, a former editor of the Times and the Sporting Life, is about to be confirmed as editor of the Independent.
It may seem bizarre that Mr Mont- gomery, an ex-editor of the News of the World, should have a big say in the matter, but there we are. The Mirror Group owns 43 per cent of the loss-making Independent as well as of its Sunday sister, and its day- to-day control of the two titles is much greater than that implied by the size of its stake. The other main shareholder, Inde- pendent Newspapers plc of Ireland, sits in the back seat. The Irish, reasonably enough, are usually to be found in Dublin, while the company's proprietor, Dr Tony O'Reilly, is based in Pittsburgh, where he is chairman and chief executive officer of Heinz. Mr Montgomery and his cronies are ruling the roost, and one of these cronies is Charlie Wilson.
In his time Mr Wilson has been a crony of a great variety of people. As a rather unlikely editor of the Times (he had previ- ously toiled on mid-market newspapers), he was a sort of baby crony of the paper's pro- prietor, Rupert Murdoch. In those days he naturally tried to kill off the fledgling Independent. Then he became editor-in- chief of the Sporting Life and a crony of the late Robert Maxwell. After Mr Maxwell's unfortunate death, Mr Wilson found him- self for a while proprietorless and generally croniless, but then Mr Montgomery hove into view. In due course the two of them became cronies, and almost from the moment Mirror Group acquired its interest in the Independent Mr Montgomery hoped to make his friend editor.
Mr Wilson is a character. He is a diminu- tive Glaswegian who could convincingly play the part of an uncompromising prison warder in a television drama. I can imagine him as a hard-bitten news editor yelling instructions across the newsroom at some namby-pamby reporter not quick enough off the mark. There are things about him that one might admire. He will serve any master with unflagging loyalty: the once faithful servant of Rupert Murdoch now cheerfully runs anti-Murdoch editorials in the Independent. And he will fight his cor- ner ferociously: a recent critical item in the Evening Standard about the Independent provoked an article in the media pages of Mr Wilson's paper which virtually suggest- ed that Mr Hastings' organ is in its death throes.
Mr Montgomery had for a long time con- ceived an animus against Mr Hargreaves, who is high-minded, idealistic and serious. It was obvious that he would fall. Even so, when Mr Wilson was installed in his place much was made of the temporary nature of the appointment. This is still the official line. Mr Wilson professes that he longs to be relieved of the job. According to Mirror Group sources, more than ten potential editors have been identified by Mr Wilson and Mr Montgomery. The only trouble is that they do not appear to be any good. Mr Marr is not among them. My guess is that Mr Wilson would like to be confirmed as `Who ordered the pepperoni?' editor or at any rate as editor-in-chief, in which role he could push some hapless edi- tor around. Mr Montgomery may also see the attractions of such a plan.
I hope that Dr O'Reilly and the Irish do not. They have said that Mr Wilson is a stop gap, and have despatched Ben Bradlee, for- mer editor of the Washington Post, to drum up better candidates than those already on the short list. It will be difficult. But not because of the Independent's financial weak- ness which, though off-putting, is scarcely decisive. Many good journalists do not mind taking a risk in the right cause. The problem is the leading role played by Mr Mont- gomery and Mirror Group Newspapers. It is not surprising that people of quality are reluctant to be lured to the Independent after what has happened to Mr Hargreaves. In the end it may not help even if Mr Wil- son gives up the editorship. He will remain on the board of Mirror Group and Mr Montgomery will stay as the company's chief executive — unless shareholders should take fright at the company's losses resulting from its new television interests and its investment in the Independent and its Sunday sister. Operating losses on the two papers stand at about £10 million a year even after costs have been cut to the bone.
Neither Mr Montgomery nor Mr Wilson has any vision for the newspaper, though in fairness to Mr Wilson it has hardly deterio- rated since he took over. But there is no spirit impelling it forward. What is the point of it? Why is it there? Mr Montgomery has no answer to these questions. It would be inconceivable to him that the future for the Independent might be at the top of the mar- ket where it was launched. His only solution is to cut costs again, even though the paper's editorial resources are already pal- pably inferior to those of its rivals.
The Irish have apparently decided to go along with Mr Montgomery, accepting that cost-cutting should be the central plank of editorial policy. Dr O'Reilly has publicly said that the paper is about one price increase away from profitability. I very much doubt this. The effect of the recent cover price rise to 40 pence has been to reduce sales to an average of about 275,000 copies a day. Further job losses (30, not 50, are now spoken of) will not help. Unless Dr O'Reilly can find some way of asserting con- trol, not only in the choice of a proper edi- tor to replace Mr Wilson but in the direc- tion of the newspaper, the future is bleak.
Previous page
