MEDIA STUDIES
Why the Queen of New York would be better off without Blair's bauble
STEPHEN GLOVER
Tina Brown, the magazine editor, may be Britain's most famous export to Ameri- ca. Normally the 'Queen of New York' can- not sneeze without it being reported in the British press. So it is very odd that our newspapers made so little of the award Ms Brown received in the recent Queen's birthday honours. Much excitement was generated by the knighthood for the actor Michael Caine, the dameship for the novel- ist Beryl Bainbridge, and the MBE for the `television personality' Carol Vorderman. But the papers mostly ignored the CBE awarded for 'services to journalism over- seas' to Christina Hambley Brown, more commonly known as Tina Brown. The Times, Daily Mail and Daily Express missed the honour altogether; the Guardian, Inde- pendent and Daily Telegraph noticed it, but buried the news at the bottom of long lists of lesser names, which suggests that while some humble sub-editors had sussed the identity of Christina Hambley Brown the really big wheels were unaware.
We all understand the vagaries of hon- ours lists. Why, in this one, was Beryl Bain- bridge made a dame while her equally dis- tinguished (and somewhat older) fellow novelist Elizabeth Jane Howard had to make do with a CBE? But, granted the inbuilt injustices of the system, it still seemed an utter impertinence on the part of Tony Blair to offer my old friend Tina a mere CBE. The former editor of Vanity Fair and the New Yorker, and current supre- mo of Talk magazine, is not merely Britain's pride and joy in the United States. She also arranged extravagant parties for Mr Blair when he visited New York as an unknown leader of the opposition with an empty Rolodex. For all I know, it was Tina who threw Blair and Clinton together. That was no way to acknowledge what she had done for her country and the New Labour `project'. At the very least a dameship was called for. I understood why Tina had accepted the honour — Evelyn Waugh rejected a CBE and so never got a knight- hood — but it was very mean of the Prime Minister to offer her so slight a bauble.
On further reflection another thought began to form. Was Tina right to accept an award at all? Should journalists in the full flow of their faculties allow themselves to be patronised in this way? The honours sys- tem bestows recognition on actors, busi- nessmen and others who have toiled away in the far-flung reaches of the vineyard, and they appreciate being noticed. One can see why journalists should also yearn for this benediction. The trouble is that their role in relation to the government doling out awards is different from that of almost every other group. It may not be adversarial but it should be critical in the general sense of the word. A journalist who accepts an honour is liable to compromise his inde- pendence, at any rate in his own mind, which is presumably at least part of the gov- ernment's intention in awarding it.
There are, of course, exceptions. Few of us would have complained if, at the end of a distinguished career as an editor, Stewart Steven of the London Evening Standard had been given the KBE he richly deserved by the ungrateful John Major, whose trem- bling hand he had held through so many traumatic sessions at No. 10. Equally, it seemed pardonable that in the autumn of their careers John Junor and Peregrine Worsthome should have accepted their knighthoods. No one could really grumble when Bill Deedes, after stepping down as editor of the Daily Telegraph, was rewarded with a life peerage. The problem arises when editors and columnists in the heyday of their power are awarded gongs. The late David English, former editor of the Daily Mail, and Nicholas Lloyd, former editor of the Daily Express, received their knight- hoods from Margaret Thatcher long before giving up their editorships. Perhaps they didn't care if they were compromised. Plen- ty of journalists do not mind being identi- fied as openly partisan courtiers, and make no pretence at independence.
But Tina Brown would surely like to be different. Whatever you may think of her, she achieved a great deal at Vanity Fair and the New Yorker, raising circulation at both titles. Along comes Tony Blair, whom she would not have deigned even to talk to when the two of them were at Oxford, and judges that she is worthy of a CBE. It is a mildly insulting pat on the head. To be placed in the ranks of the Blairite foot sol- diery is to be patronised and compromised at the same time.
When Matthew Parris returns from his desolate island he will find that the sketch-writing world he has adorned has been transformed. Suddenly newspapers are taking Parliament seriously again. The old art of parliamentary reporting has already been revived by the Daily Tele- graph and other papers. Now the parlia- mentary sketch is also coming back into fashion.
Of course the Times's Mr Parris and the Guardian's Simon Hoggart, both men also of this parish, have brilliantly kept the flame alive. Now the Daily Mail has bought up the Telegraph's Quentin Letts, and is giving him a very good show. The Independent has discovered Simon Carr, who has spent much of his adult life in New Zealand. Mr Can is an old friend of mine, and so anything I say must be dis- counted, but his column on some days is so funny that it is worth buying the Inde- pendent just to read him. Perhaps the most seismic development concerns our own Frank Johnson, who takes up his sketch-writing pen again for the Telegraph in the autumn. One struggles for an his- torical analogy powerful enough to convey the significance of this event. De Gaulle returning from Colombey-les-deux- Eglises? My strong advice to Mr Parris is not to tarry too long on his island writing about seals.
When Rebekah Wade was deputy editor of the Sun she was said to have had a restraining effect on photographs of Page Three girls. The feature was slightly cleaned up. Now that she has become edi- tor of the News of the World, the boys at the Sun seem to be reverting to their old ways. With Ms Wade barely out of the door, they were organising a 'national cleavage competition'. The other day the paper carried an extremely lewd front- page picture of Kylie Minogue fingering her rear. And is it my imagination, or are the pictures of Page Three girls becoming bigger again? Oddly, the girls seem often to be called Rebekah, which is surely not a common spelling.
Meanwhile at the News of the World Ms Wade seems to have a different policy to combat falling sales. These are early days, but my impression is that the NoW has slightly less smut than it used to under its previous editor. The word is that Ms Wade intends to make the paper more serious and more political, and dramatic changes are said to be in the pipeline.
Previous page
