tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post7386746933160130360..comments2024-03-04T17:54:32.559+00:00Comments on Iain Dale's Diary: Mea CulpaIain Dalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03270146219458384372noreply@blogger.comBlogger43125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-70944742110089800312009-05-25T12:10:41.611+01:002009-05-25T12:10:41.611+01:00Iain said: Carl, I do agree with you. I can't tell...Iain said: Carl, I do agree with you. I can't tell you details about the sourcing for obvious reasons, but I didn't write it lightly. If you had had the same details I had, I suspect you;d have gone with it too."<br /><br />No - I would not. Even on my local paper, if I have something where the paper and I could get sued I either make sure I have some form of privilege or I second or even third source it. <br /><br />It's all fine and fun to have something heft to write, but it's dangerously easy to get carried away and forget the big question - can I get sued for this and could I stand in a court and have a cast iron defence. <br /><br />Good old fashioned journalism training would have made you stop and think, regardless of how good the single source was. <br /><br />I repeat, take some sincerely meant advice from a journo - double source, get in cast iron with some legal cover and always be prepared to fight in court. <br /><br />Or, you could just do as you regularly do, poo-poo the advice of those you don't like and swan along to the next car crash.Carl Evehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03930750600999601721noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-22336936709619300032009-05-22T14:27:30.646+01:002009-05-22T14:27:30.646+01:00anon
Having used "anonymous" sources myself, assu...anon<br /><br />Having used "anonymous" sources myself, assuming you have satisfied yourself they are bona fide, a problem can occur when the pressure is on.<br /><br />Sometimes a source will bottle. And there is nothing you can do but to apologise and look a bit weak. This is the strength of the MSM over the lone blogger. I have covered potentially explosive stories in years gone by in the MSM and if you work for a Newspaper, you have the advice and the back-up of an editorial board and the editor, and ultimately, the owner. I am not privy to Iain's position with the Mail on Sunday, but I suspect he had no such support. Correct me if I am wrong, Iain, but I guess you just filed the story.Wrinkled Weaselhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05291551539649118631noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-39645816631817561212009-05-22T12:38:35.797+01:002009-05-22T12:38:35.797+01:00Have you donated the fee you recieved from the Mai...Have you donated the fee you recieved from the Mail to charity?<br /><br />Why do you feel that your Labour "source" should be protected - given that the only thing they were a source of was a lie. Given that your mole works in No 10 or the Cabinet Office (otherwise why did you believe that they were in a position to provide you with accurate information?) do you consider it appropriate that a liar should continue in such a position - or do you perhaps want to keep them there for further use/manipulation?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-72376702277822610852009-05-22T10:25:31.895+01:002009-05-22T10:25:31.895+01:00You could always get your own back.
Watson is dis...You could always get your own back.<br /><br />Watson is displaying a libellous comment (#2) underneath the article. Mixing you up with a certain other bloggerAyayaynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-46018499013792678082009-05-21T23:39:40.304+01:002009-05-21T23:39:40.304+01:00Derek Draper's merry band of window-lickers seem t...Derek Draper's merry band of window-lickers seem to be running amok on this thread. Funnily enough, not a single one of them has actually put their name forward. As for Sunny Hundal and Chris Paul, I would take a Devil's Kitchen style view on these two - namely that they should go drown themselves.The Grim Reaperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05543130733645367498noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-11355168440647955012009-05-21T22:46:46.822+01:002009-05-21T22:46:46.822+01:00@Bardirect
I think that may be the worst legal an...@Bardirect<br /><br />I think that may be the worst legal analysis I've ever seen.<br /><br />It didn't even rise to the level of idle speculation, let alone informed commentary.Tonynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-86034876403250064312009-05-21T18:30:02.793+01:002009-05-21T18:30:02.793+01:00He wouldn't be entitled to damages just because of...He wouldn't be entitled to damages just because of an untruthful statement - it has to be defamatory and damage his reputation but what reputation do such MP's have now - zilch.<br /><br />I don't understand why the Mail in the current frenzy didn't fancy taking a punt on defending this one looking for disclosure of his e mail and cross examining him about his reputation or lack thereof.<br /><br />This suggests to me that the substantial award was rather modest.Bardirecthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12167919762034389133noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-53940519462668206122009-05-21T18:02:30.640+01:002009-05-21T18:02:30.640+01:00It took the Left Wing blogosphere to force a belat...It took the Left Wing blogosphere to force a belated apology. What a shame it came too late for you to bully an Old Soldier into removing a true comment I made on his blog, when you threatened him with libel.<br /><br /><A HREF="http://the-morningstar.co.uk/?p=702" REL="nofollow">Iain Dale Lies and Libel</A>jailhouselawyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03795278184797990706noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-43218119737491784332009-05-21T17:57:34.874+01:002009-05-21T17:57:34.874+01:00Wrinkled weasel: You should look at Nadine's comme...Wrinkled weasel: You should look at Nadine's comments if you want to see a heavily edited crop of praise singers. Read a few from "Rachel" and could hardly believe there was such a person.<br /><br />Incidentally it is quite hard to imagine what reasonable OT but negative comment anyone could sensibly make about Watson winning this case. Attacking or smearing him on such an occasion would be a bit off and rather counter-productive don't you think?Chris Paulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15679067503215414300noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-43190789926248145422009-05-21T17:53:44.277+01:002009-05-21T17:53:44.277+01:00Sorry Iain, I didn't say you did it after you knew...Sorry Iain, I didn't say you did it <I>after</I> you knew and nor was it my intention to suggest that. That would have been unforgiveable and I fully accept you would not and did not do that. <br /><br />The fact was you had been repeating it over and over again all day <I>before</I> you knew. <I>Before</I> you knew it was EITHER trur OR false. You didn't know either way but you repeated some hearsay. Often. That was my point.<br /><br />If my prose is unclear I apologise. In fact I can see it is. Substitute "had repeated" for "did repeat" to get my intended sense in better form. Apologies.<br /><br />Your source could have been Hazel Blears herself for all I care Iain you shouldn't have been so trusting in such a febrile atmosphere and you should now out your source. The pretenders had McBride cornered and Draper critically wounded and they were gunning for Watson too. Is clear.<br /><br />Nice to see the "as usual" smear coming out to play when you get just a tiny bit of deserved heat. Like Paul I regard you as a worthwhile read and a man breaking stories from time to time too. But you were way out of order that day. Which to be fair is not like you. Biased naturally. Not always introduced properly as a Tory naturally. But not usually a purveyor of unchecked yet highly specific "facts".<br /><br />No comment I see on your other claim - viz that there was proof that these smears had not been shelved.<br /><br />Word ver: "flounce", well "flouns" actually, but who cares about these little details?Chris Paulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15679067503215414300noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-68934513956426350662009-05-21T17:41:10.755+01:002009-05-21T17:41:10.755+01:00winctSeems to me that you really must now out the ...winctSeems to me that you really must now <A HREF="http://tinyurl.com/chrispLOL169" REL="nofollow">out the vicious smear merchant</A>. Which is what yourself and Staines claimed the venal lobby should be doing after all.Chris Paulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15679067503215414300noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-68897043684182087972009-05-21T17:28:54.617+01:002009-05-21T17:28:54.617+01:00Tom Watson has suddenly opened the floodgates on t...Tom Watson has suddenly opened the floodgates on the comments section of his blog, in reply to the reproduced press release.<br /><br />Do you know, all the comments are nice about him! <br /><br />He must really be a wonderful fellow, the kind that travels up to Fife, just to deliver a present - why he's a bit like the Milk Tray Man!<br /><br />I have not seen a critical comment on his blog at all and Iain, you get lots. What a decent all-round regular bloke he must be and what a rotter you are. <br /><br />He can return to the Commons with his head held high and when he does, I hope he gets the clap he so richly deserves.Wrinkled Weaselhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05291551539649118631noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-14846300938413239122009-05-21T17:18:14.887+01:002009-05-21T17:18:14.887+01:00"You made a mistake a huge error take it on the ch...<I>"You made a mistake a huge error take it on the chin <B>admit you were wrong</B>."</I> <br /><br />Golden_balls, take a look at the title of this post. <br /><br />Then see if you know anyone who speaks Latin who can help you with it...<br /><br /><I>"Frankly Iain I think you should have stuck two fingers up to Hundal and I******. Nobody gives a toss what they think, especially the latter."</I> <br /><br />Seconded.<br /><br /><I>"I didn't know that Tom Watson's reputation could be damaged further."</I> <br /><br />Oh, there's always more bottom in the barrel than you think, when it comes to NuLab...JuliaMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07844126589712842477noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-54723788653536337062009-05-21T17:11:52.182+01:002009-05-21T17:11:52.182+01:00Chris Paul, you are wrong, as usual. I did not rep...Chris Paul, you are wrong, as usual. I did not repeat the allegation against Tom Watson on any radio or TV programme at all after I found out it was wrong. In fact, to any journalist who phoned me about it I explained what had happened and they didn't run with it.Iain Dalehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03270146219458384372noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-10958131912982930342009-05-21T17:02:40.096+01:002009-05-21T17:02:40.096+01:00All very well Iain. But you did repeat this same s...All very well Iain. But you did repeat this same smear live on TV and radio several times. As did Nadine Dorries MP. And Paul Staines had to have the plug pulled him and an on air apology when he not only repeated similar but also smeared Peter Hain on that same day.<br /><br />Not to mention a general drip, drip, drip of smearage that is less specific but nasty for example about the health of the Prime Minister. When the behaviour you're attacking is stupid (but actually unrealised) smearing from McBride it seems quite extraordinary to get stuck in with smearage against 3rd parties, even with so-called reliable sources.<br /><br />As I recall you also repeated the claim that McBride and Draper had not shelved their stupid japes. Claiming they still planned to use the material even a few days before the revelations. As far as I know that claim has never been stood up. Perhaps you can apologise for repeating that?<br /><br />As we all know now even if we did not know then there is a hell of a lot of smearage going on within parties as well as between parties. If your supposedly high-up and reliable Labour source was "at it" smearing Watson you should surely now "out" that person and let them be kicked out of what position(s) it is they hold.<br /><br />Word ver : Mings xxChris Paulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15679067503215414300noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-9049518531283138562009-05-21T16:51:36.264+01:002009-05-21T16:51:36.264+01:00Iain ((((hugs))))Iain ((((hugs))))Katenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-7678420425127305812009-05-21T16:49:23.556+01:002009-05-21T16:49:23.556+01:00Tom Watson remains an odious all-you-can-eat curry...Tom Watson remains an odious all-you-can-eat curry smearer IMHO.<br /><br />They doth protest too much.Platohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07416276749202589235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-32842423046673734112009-05-21T16:46:21.193+01:002009-05-21T16:46:21.193+01:00Ian, yet again like your honesty. Let us all know...Ian, yet again like your honesty. Let us all know if you need a bob or two to keep going! (joke). I bet the Mail are going to keep an eye on him for ever more. I would if I was N.Ed.Lexanderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12289001945156383183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-88855948260675846032009-05-21T16:34:13.245+01:002009-05-21T16:34:13.245+01:00But what is it, exactly, that these left-of-centre...But what is it, exactly, that these left-of-centre bloggers are saying, Iain? <br /><br />"It was Iain's fault for believing what a member of the Labour Party told him."<br /><br />Right-o, chaps! We'll all take you at your word. We'll never believe anything a Labour Party members tells us, ever again. Is that OK for you leftwing bloaters, I mean bloggers?<br /><br />In the meantime<br /><br /><A HREF="http://thatsnews.blogspot.com/2009/05/thursday-afternoon-update-or-look-mum.html" REL="nofollow">"Look, mum, no talents!” says Gordon Brown</A>Thats Newshttp://thatsnews.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-14531088164095174302009-05-21T16:14:21.002+01:002009-05-21T16:14:21.002+01:00The thing is, that Tom Watson SHOULD have known wh...The thing is, that Tom Watson SHOULD have known what McBride was up to. It was his job to know.<br /><br /><A HREF="http://therantingkingpenguin.blogspot.com/" REL="nofollow">The Penguin</A>Hacked Offhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08016667577546745576noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-53700487300924333162009-05-21T16:14:09.958+01:002009-05-21T16:14:09.958+01:00We must wait till McBride needs some money, then w...We must wait till McBride needs some money, then we will maybe get the real story.<br /><br />Sorry for doubting Mr Watson, but reading his words, seeing his style and knowing how his boss works....well who can some of us for wondering...hmmm seems Mr McBride ran 10 Downing ST all alone...yet another unelected person running no 10.<br /><br />Hope we all remember Jeffrey Archer when the time comes..which I have no doubt it will..kasouhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10581410177492723605noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-3442831203374819982009-05-21T16:12:36.147+01:002009-05-21T16:12:36.147+01:00My memory may be faulty but was this the apology i...My memory may be faulty but was this the apology in which you accepted he wasn't actually cc'd but continued to suggest he must have known about them due to the proximity of his desk to McBride's?Jimmyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01542633492362670045noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-19034759344759156362009-05-21T16:10:35.570+01:002009-05-21T16:10:35.570+01:00I said I was horrified at what certain people had ...<I> I said I was horrified at what certain people had said about me and my motives.</I>People are going to question your motives if you mis-represent them, as you have done with me on several occasions now. It's karma baby.Sunnyhttp://liberalconspiracy.orgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-63209271008371487572009-05-21T16:01:25.306+01:002009-05-21T16:01:25.306+01:00This is a stunning story. I didn't know that Tom W...This is a stunning story. I didn't know that Tom Watson's reputation could be damaged further.Praguetoryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16520923731691837948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-32354994635890438672009-05-21T16:00:57.586+01:002009-05-21T16:00:57.586+01:00Thanks Iain for the explanation.
The question run...Thanks Iain for the explanation.<br /><br />The question running through my mind was why did that "senior Labour source" think they were right?HFnoreply@blogger.com