A Spectator's Notebook
WHEN THE PRINTING dispute began certain weeklies, includ- ing the Economist and the New Statesman, were sent
(abroad to be printed. They were promptly informed that so long as they did so they :--........., would be regarded as `black'; hey could not distribute copies through the °rrnal channels, and in the name of working- 'ass solidarity the Economist—which elected to ef y the ban—was chivvied from printer to printer °und the Continent (in the circumstances, to con- ?Ile coming out at all was a remarkable feat, on Inch the editor and his colleagues deserve to be ?ngratulated). The only explanation I heard 'yen for this treatment was that, though the (*onomist was not a party to the printing dispute, Printing abroad it was giving psychological aid Int comfort to strike-breakers at home. Feeble 4(31-1811 excuse though this was, at least the unions
'gilt have applied it consistently; yet when the
IPPage of ink supplies threatened to prevent the ational dailies from coming out they were given ol°n permission, on the grounds that they were I a party to the ink dispute, to get their ink tlnhlies from abroad. To judge by Fleet Street's lank silence on this episode, there was a tacit treentent that the newspapers should say nothing bout it : in fact it was left to World's Press News
Is own dispute-ridden condition) to report that newspapers were subsisting not (as had been
4ested) on a bottomless home 'pool,' but on
,
' made in France, which was suddenly found he 'not so black as it was painted.' Does this can there is one law for the Newspaper Pro- lelors Association and another for the weeklies?. would be interested to hear an explanation.
Previous page
