SOCIETY TODAY
Press
Ross McWhirter and a free press
Bill Grundy
Having lunch with Ross McWhirter is like sitting down to a banquet with a lot of people. Because Ross McWhirter is a lot of people. He is compiler of the Guinness Book of Records, he was the attempted suppressor of the Little Red School Book, he was an athletic Blue at Oxford, he served in minesweepers during the backend of the war, he is a journalist, he runs a 'fact and figure news agency, he was timekeeper and statistician for BBC outside broadcasts, he was successful in keeping Andy Warhol off television for a short time (would that it had been permanently), and he is the composer of the mostbanned advertisement in the history of Fleet Street. Oh, and by the way, he is an identical twin.
Set down like that it looks too much. And the plain fact is that, quite often, Ross McWhirter is too much. When asked why he thinks he should be the one who decides what we see on our screens, or what we read, he is wont to say, "Well, that's a fairly tough question", and then proceeds not to answer it.
But as far as this paper is concerned Mr McWhirter's biggest claim to fame is that advertisement. What Mr McWhirter did was to get together with a lot of people who felt as he did on the subject of trade unions — that they were getting too big for their boots. They decided that an absolute essential was to set up a printing works entirely free from the threat of being closed by industrial action, so that, come what may, a newspaper could appear, even if the whole of Fleet Street and the provincial press were to be shut down by strikes.
These things are easier said than done. And they cost money. The money was soon forthcoming — £65,000 of it. As McWhirter's backers, for reasons of their own, didn't wish to be named, he decided to take on the task of being the project's sole spokesman and organiser. He called a press conference and said just what he as up to. Then he drew up a full page ad asking for more money for the project. He sent it to the Times, and they, with the courage for which they are famous, rejected it. Other papers rejected it, too. A week or two ago I mentioned in this column that it had been destined to appear in the Director magazine, but some printing worker decided he didn't like what it said and it never appeared, even though it was listed in the index of the May issue of that journal. But readers of The Spectator will have read the ad, because we printed it. The Spectator is the only paper to have done so. In a sardonic comment on the courage of our noble free press, Mr McWhirter says "the rest of the press should notice that The Spectator still appears."
In a surprising way, the banning of the ad helped. Money came pouring in, with the result that McWhirter now owns a printing works, with its own stockpile of newsprint, and its own generators. It is completely self-sufficient. It will be run by non-union staff, and will be able to produce three million copies a day the next time there is a newspaper shutdown. Th,e Current Affairs Press, as it is called, is in existence, waiting for the day. And as can happen in cases like this, the day may be nearer than you think. Because people have been asking, "If we've got the plant, and we've got the paper, and we've got the ink, and we've got the men, what are we waiting for? Why don't we start producing a news-sheet now, without waiting for a strike?"
Nobody can object to the appearance of a new paper. Even the print unions, so often accused of being Luddite, tell me that they are in favour of more diversity in the press. They also tell me that to start a new paper costs so much money they think there should be a National Printing Corporation which owns the plant and hires it out to people who want to use it.
So they cannot possibly do other than welcome McWhirter's initiative. Wanna bet? I am prepared to go out on a limb and say that they'll do everything they can to sabotage the idea. Which is why I'm not saying where the Current Affairs Press is. Well, to be fair, I'll give them a clue. It is within a hundred miles of London. Which should keep them busy for some time, trying to track it down.
In fact, as more and more money pours in, the possibility of a new daily gets ever more likely. '1 he suggested date is early autumn. I should hope, though, that if and when it is published it doesn't just turn into a union-bashing paper. There is a lot wrong with the print unions in Fleet Street, as I never seem to tire of telling you. But there are quite a lot of reasons for their attitudes. After all, a trade union exists to protect the interests of its members. It is unrealistic to assume that they will therefore willingly co-operate in the introduction of new machinery which will put those members out of a job.
But it does get my goat a bit when I read, as I do in the UK Press Gazette, a story headlined "NGA 'no' thwarts plan for a new evening." What has happened is that a strike of NGA men against the introduction of £80,000 worth of new equipment has led the management of the Sharman group in Peterborough to say, "The strike means that we are no longer in a position to make plans for the projected evening paper." This despite a written guarantee of no redundancy for NGA members.
The new technology has got to come if newspapers are to survive, thus providing work for union members. "Natural wastage" provides a humane way of reducing manning levels. It is time the unions wakened up to the nature of the revolution they are still pretending hasn't happened. The new technology will not go away because they are ignoring it. But their jobs might.
Which brings us back to Ross McWhirter. Anybody who is planning a new paper at such a time needs all the help he can get. But even if you can't help, the least you can do is wish him well. Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of McWhirter.
Previous page
