Non-Event
The chief non-event of Gilmour's campaign was also, he says, the product of the 'serious' press. At his press conference one day he pointed out that an advertisement inserted in a local Paper by the Liberals seemed libellous to him, but he told that paper's reporter that he hadn't the remotest intention of suing. His suggestion was simply that the paper's advertising manager should have a close look at any other such advertisement that came in. Under the headline, All-in wrestling succeeds cricket,' the Daily Tele- graph reported correctly if bewilderingly that Gilmour had said be 'would not sue' the local Paper. On this basis the Times felt able to an- nounce on the following day that 'we have had Mr. Ian Gilmour . . . making threatening noises at a local paper over a Liberal advertisement.' All the popular papers ignored this non-event. But the Times's attitude to the by-election was best demonstrated by its last attempt, which appeared the day after Lord Hailsham had spoken to the two largest meetings held by any of the parties during the campaign. A Liberal loudspeaker van, the Times reported, had gone up in smoke; Gilmour had had a puncture on icy roads on his Way to a meeting; Mr. Richard Crossman's train had broken down; Gilmour's very able Labour oPPonent had arrived muddy at a meeting. The Times also had room to drag in Gilmour's Mother-in-law and to report inaccurately an in- cident involving two Tory publicity men, but not to mention that Lord Hailsham had been anywhere near the constituency.
Previous page
