THE PRESS AND SPORTING TIPSTERS.
LTO THE EDITOR OP THE " SPECTATOR.".]
Srn,-I have cordially to thank you for publishing my letter on this subject in your last issue, but I submit that your remarks entirely beg the question. You state :-
" Newspapers have a convention not to criticise each other, for which in ordinary cases there is a good deal to be said. We hold that this is one of the exceptional cases in which the rule ought to be broken. At the same time, we can understand the attitude of those who take a different view, and fully recognise that their action proceeds from no sinister motive."
I am in full agreement with your observations ; but you entirely lose sight of the fact that in this case no question of criticism arises. The simple issue is whether the Press are justified in suppressing the report of judicial proceedings because such report may be injurious to their own interests.
You conclude your remarks by stating that, "in any case, we do not ourselves feel bound by the etiquette of our trade." As a layman, may I ask this simple question : Whether the " etiquette " of the newspaper trade means that newspaper proprietors are entitled to falsify—by omitting essential details—reports of judicial proceedings appearing in their journals on the ground that if they gave a true report of such judicial proceedings the consequences might be injurious to House of Commons.
Previous page
