Team spirit Sir: I would be glad if you would
allow me to correct two distortions which crept into Bill Grundy's article (30 August) on the Sun via, it seems, the UK Press Gazette.
The concern at the moment is not so much about the kind of editor we need as the credibility of the editorship itself.
The Gazette story on which Mr. Grundy based his remarks referred to a meeting which was held to discuss the difficult situa- tion that arose from Mr Maxwell's practice of announcing his editors before they were hatched. It was clear that anyone who now accepted the post would be his third or fourth choice and we considered that this was not the best method of inspiring confi- dence in the staff, the advertisers or the potential customers. It was purely in this light and not through any sudden conversion to the idea of wor- kers' control that the meeting considered that the most sensible solution would be for the existing staff of the Sun to elect an editor from either outside or inside the office. In this way he would at least know that he had the confidence of the majority of the journa- lists he led and was not the proprietor's last hope. But once elected—and this is where Mr Grundy's observations on the need to have one man in charge are unnecessary— he would edit the paper with as much authority—perhaps more—than any editor appointed under the conditions created by Mr Maxwell's haste.
He would, in fact, be removable only by a four fifths vote of the staff, it being agreed that any editor who commanded such little support for this to happen would not be able to function properly anyway. Even then, there would be at least a year before any such vote could be demanded.
These proposals, supported by many mem- bers of the, staff who were unable to attend the meeting, were sent to Mr Maxwell on 14 August, not as a demand but as a basis for discussion. With them went a request for a meeting. We heard nothing from him. David Nathan The Sun, PO Box 196, 2-12 Endell Street, London wc2
Previous page
