Notebook
If the Government is heading for a 'sell- out' over the Falklands, as The Times seemed to fear in its editorial on Wednes- day, what will the Sun do then? It will be a hideous dilemma for the editor, whoever he may be. Having settled on 'jingoism' as a cheap substitute for bingoism', he will find it hard to extricate himself from this rut. So long as there are military engagements, however small, in the South Atlantic, the
front ' Page will present no problems. Wallop', 'Gotcha', 'Stick it up your junta' — there is a limitless supply of such i
headlines. And so long as there is a vulnerable British fleet in the South Atlan- tic, the Sun can continue to accuse Mrs Thatcher's critics of treason. But what if The Times turns out to be right? What if it is true, as it said in its leader, that 'Britain has shown herself more than willing to con- cede points of substance which, if accepted, would seem to have invalidated the whole exercise launched on April 3'? Against whom will the wrath of Mr Murdoch's idiotic little tabloid then be turned? To jun- ta will it be saying 'Stick it up your ? No, no. I am not suggesting what you think. There is, after all, Mr Murdoch's Peerage to consider. And the Sun is not celebrated for the consistency of its political Positions. The problem will probably pre- sent itself in more serious form to the Daily Express and the Daily Mail.
It was announced this week that Reuters news agency made a profit last year of £16.4 million, four times as much as the Year before. This makes Reuters the most Profitable news organisation in the country. And for the first time in 41 years, it is pay- ing lug a dividend to its shareholders. This is more interesting than it sounds, for Reuters is no ordinary company. Once it was a straightforward commercial enterprise, the Purpose of which was profit. But in 1944 it Was turned into a co-operative. In order both to guarantee its independence and ob- jectivity and to secure its future as 'the leading world news agency', its ownership Was transferred to the national and provin- cial Press of Great Britain. The Newspaper Publishers' Association, representing the national press, and the Press Association, representing all newspapers published more k an 15 miles away from Charing Cross, became its principal shareholders. Each to- Lay owns 41 per cent of the shares, the rest belonging to the news avers of Australia and New Zealand. The NPA and the PA in- fested no capital in the company. Nor was
anticipated that they would ever make money out of it. It was agreed from the outset that the owners must regard their respective shareholdings 'as a trust rather
than as an investment'. But the share- holders are also, of course, consumers of the Reuters news service and, as owners of the company, they are the people who decide each year how much they should pay for it. When the co-operative.was establish- ed nearly 40 years ago, the position was the exact opposite of what it is today. The news- papers were rich, and Reuters was poor. The British press, believing that Britain needed an international news agency, decided to club together to ensure Reuters' survival and growth. While they bore the risks of failure, they were never required to invest. Indeed, they made sure they obtained the Reuters news service on the cheap. As it is impossible to make money out of a conven- tional international news service, Reuters had to find other ways of covering its costs. Showing great courage and foresight, it decided to invest heavily in computerised financial services. This policy proved trium- phant. There is now hardly a major bank or business in the world which does not subscribe to one of these services which, at the press of a button, provide instant infor- mation about share prices and exchange rates in every important business or finan- cial market. These are the services which have made Reuters so profitable. The or- dinary news services it supplies to news- papers and broadcasting companies, and on which its reputation is based, now account for only 10 per cent of its revenue. Mean- while Britain's national newspapers have been declining. Most of them are losing money. So how tempting it must be to try to compensate for some of these losses by creaming off the news agency's profits! In this, the first year that they have awarded themselves dividends, the NPA and the PA stand to get nearly £790,000 each. It will be interesting to see where the money goes. The NPA comprises ten national newspaper groups, and presumably the dividend will
be split between them. But in what propor- tions? The contribution each group pays to the NPA is determined by the size of the cir- culations of its titles. The Mirror Group is the biggest, and Mr Murdoch's group is the second biggest. It is possible, therefore, that they will get the lion's share of the money. The net result could be that they will be obtaining Reuters international news service for nothing, or for less than nothing. The Press Association is a co- operative whose owners publish some 120 newspapers in Great Britain and Ireland. If split between all of them, the money would not amount to much. One assumes that it will go, instead, into the domestic news agency itself, which — in 1980 — lost £1.2 million. Whether or not the newspapers are justified in paying themselves this money, they will have completely changed the at- mosphere of the company. Working for Reuters used to be rather like working for the BBC — one was badly paid, but one felt one was serving a worthy cause. From now on it looks as if the efforts of Reuters' staff will be directed towards the enrichment of our incompetent press barons.
Afew days before he shot President Reagan in March last year, John Hinckley was turned away from home by his parents. According to his mother's evidence in court last week, they had turned him away on the advice of a psychiatrist, Dr John Hopper. Dr Hopper advised them that Hinckley, a 26-year-old college drop- out, should be forced to live on his own and fend for himself. So when this unbalanced, drifting youth returned to the neighbour- hood of his parents' home in Evergreen, Colorado, they refused to let him live with them. Having nowhere else to live, he decided to go away again. His mother told the court she had driven him to the airport 'nd that, during the hour-long drive, they did not exchange a word. As he was leav- ing, he turned to her and said: 'Well, mom, I want to thank you for everything you've ever done for me.' According to Mrs Hin- ckley, she replied: 'You're welcome'; but said it very coldly because Dr Hopper had advised her not to reveal any distress. She did this despite the fact that her son 'looked so bad and so sad and so absolutely in total despair'. This is a first-class example of the harm that psychiatrists can do. The demented Hinckley was obviously already at the end of his tether. He tried to go home, only to be turned away and to be treated by his mother in a completely un- natural manner. One can imagine the shock he must have felt. If she had behaved spon- taneously and according to her true feel- ings, maybe President Reagan would never have been shot. Dr Hopper has a lot to answer for.
Two weeks ago I promised three more Two by Ferdinand Mount before he left the Spectator to join Mrs Thatcher's staff at Downing Street. In the event, the article on the opposite page is his last.
Alexander Chancellor
Previous page
