Sir: Your columnist Paul Johnson, in his homily on 'The
Observer's Honour', insists that the Observer should be 'taken out of Rowland's hands' while admitting in pas- sing that he welcomed Rowland's buying the Observer eight years ago. _ That is an understatement. In March 1981 some of us were trying to warn British politicians of the dangers of the Observer being bought by a man with such blatant and ruthless commercial interests in other areas.
Along came Paul Johnson (in your issue of March 7 1981) and assured us that
the economy needs more, not fewer Tinys; and that may well go for Fleet Street, too. . . . The two best guarantees of editorial freedom rests in competition, and in mutual
LETTERS
distrust or hatred between proprietors, of which there is plenty in Fleet Street at present.
No mention of honour, or standards, or professional integrity. Of course the prop- rietors, not least Tiny Rowland, were delighted by this green light from a former left-wing editor and member of a royal commission on the press. But can he please not lecture us about honour?
Anthony Sampson
27 Ladbroke Grove, London W11
Previous page
