This article is in response to an article by Irish News Editor Noel Doran that featured on Letters Blogatory.

It was pleasing, if hardly intellectually stimulating, to find Noel Doran at last do something other than use the threat of legal coercion to silence voices he takes umbrage at. However, it has hardly gone unnoticed that he concluded his piece with a call for a robust piece of writing to be suppressed. I will not wait to the end of this current piece to tell him that is not going to happen. The article by Paul Campbell stays in place, and if wasting time suits him, Noel Doran can have a censor lawyer use up a paper mill churning out threatening letters by the tonne.

Mr Doran might not have witnessed much else that has been going on in front of his nose lately but he has seen the inanity of coming to Letters Blogatory to make his case when it was much easier for him to have done what he was repeatedly invited to do, make it on the relevant blog, The Pensive Quill. His excuse, rather than his reason, was that TPQ is vulgar and confrontational. It seems he has at last read the contributions by the partner of his journalist, Allison Morris. True, TPQ confronts censors and libel bullies. That much won’t change. If he fears being confronted by people not willing to roll over in the face of his threats, he should seek help for either his phobia or his bullying.

On the point of vulgarity, he may as well cite the idiocy of blasphemy. Regional accents used to be regarded as vulgar back in the day when only BBC English would pass muster. Things have changed: vulgarity is a matter of taste. TPQ does not concern itself with parliamentary language. A daily newspaper might feel it has to but that is hardly a reason for Mr Doran not to engage on TPQ. He spends enough time reading it so presumably is comfortable with the ‘vulgarity.’ Or does he read the vulgar bits with his hands over his eyes? Much more plausible is that what he finds vulgar is a public challenge to his penchant for censorship. In my view, the reason for his absence is that he feels more at ease in the company of those he considers to be from his own social milieu, those he might consider a cut above the rest. It is the attitude of a pompous snob, a social class thing. Too bad, we won’t be doing hoity-toity to facilitate him.

Noel Doran is not in a position to determine the credibility of TPQ. He is much too busy trying to maintain his own in a community of journalists increasingly perplexed by his bizarre behaviour and his resort to libel bullying as he labours valiantly, but hardly victoriously, to either shut up or close down a small blog which has raised serious questions about the conduct of the paper of which he is editor.

My wife Carrie Twomey, former editor of The Blanket, has with consummate ease swept aside his claim of contradictory behaviour in respect of the use of pseudonyms and his disingenuous intimation that he had only wanted to engage without any legal threat. There is no need for me to labour the issue and pull the same decaying tooth twice. People can look into the substantial cavity in the Irish News narrative and judge for themselves. In fact, people need look no further than the pages of the Irish News itself, where it runs anonymous letters, has a weekly column devoted to reprinting anonymous/unverified comments from readers, and frequently uses the by-line of “Staff Reporter”.

One of the most recent examples of the work of the “Staff Reporters” is the front page report on the murders of Kevin Kearney and Barry McCrory. A photo of Mr McCrory's broken-hearted and grieving family is prominent under the headline “Arms Cache Linked to Murdered Drugs Baron” while the article itself is based on allegations from un-named “informed sources” claiming that one of the dead men, Kevin Kearney, was “regarded as being the boss of one of Belfast’s most disciplined crime gangs”, and that he headed a “major drugs gang”. The Irish News also claimed that a weapons cache discovered in August belonged to Kearney’s ‘gang’. All of this may well be true; after all, the Irish News chose to publish it, so presumably they can stand over its contents. And, as they say, the dead can’t be libelled, can they? No irony lost here on the hurt feelings of the grieving family depicted a few days later at a funeral in another front page photo as they opened their morning newspaper and read of what un-named ‘informed sources’ and ‘Staff Reporters’ said about their murdered loved one.

That is how the news media works. Pen names, such as ‘Anonymous’ in the letters section, are at the Editor’s discretion. If the Editor deems that there is a legitimate need to protect the identity of an author, that identity will be withheld; the Irish News, and its Editor, stands over the content of the material in the act of publication.

Likewise with the Irish News’ popular weekly column, Off the Fence, which selectively publishes comments submitted by anonymous readers. From experience, the paper does not verify the identity of the callers whose words they print; anyone can call or text the paper, call themselves whatever they like, and the comments they submit are carried without any follow-up from the Irish News. “Real GAA Supporter”, “Shane from Belfast”, and “Lurgan Orangewoman”, are some of the names used. Occasionally, some comments are carried without any ‘name’ at all. Is it because the subject is Sport that this practice is acceptable to Noel Doran?

“Do as I say, not as I do,” appears to be the editorial guideline being advocated by Noel Doran on Letters Blogatory.

On numerous occasions Noel Doran has been asked to back up with evidential specifics the charges he has made. He has singularly failed to do so, opting to hide behind the vaguest of generalisations and seductively waving the cheque book at the censor lawyer. On the issue of the personal safety of Allison Morris, I am wholly confident she is under no threat whatsoever as a result of anything that appeared in TPQ. There is more chance of her being hit by one of those fictitious Hezbollah rockets she discovered in South Armagh. What may be under threat is her credibility. Perhaps that is what really irks Noel Doran. He has placed his trust in her and is sensitive to his judgement being called into question in the wake of some of her stories.

He claims that it would not be legally appropriate to go over the defamatory claims on TPQ. That is because it is our contention that there are none. As I have insisted time and again, what is demonstrably ‘misleading and false’ was his own journalist’s claim on this blog as to why she did not attend my appeal hearing in London.

Noel Doran seems obsessed with establishing what he believes to be the true identity of Paul Campbell. Had TPQ inserted ‘Staff Reporter’, ‘Anonymous’, or ‘Ardent Paul’ rather than Paul Campbell, would he have been satisfied? Not at all. His quest is for one reason: so that he can fire off another letter from a censor lawyer. He seeks to legally coerce Paul Campbell as well. I am indifferent to his efforts and have not the slightest intention of assisting him.

Throughout he has churned out a load of vacuous waffle rather than address the issue at hand: the actions of his own reporter regarding the interview with Dolours Price. Contrary to the professed belief of Allison Morris I had no objections to her interviewing Dolours Price. Had I such objections I would have raised them at the time rather than writing a piece that was in no way critical of what appeared in the Irish News.

The contention pertains not to Ms Morris’s interview per se but to what Ms Morris did with the parts of that interview which did not feature in the Irish News piece. It is my unshakeable belief based on what Ms Price divulged to me coupled with the timeline, that Ms Morris passed this on to Ciaran Barnes. Information that Ms Price claimed to have revealed only to me and Ms Morris appeared in the Sunday Life under the by-line of a friend of Ms Morris, the same friend who together with Ms Morris made baseless accusations against me to the NUJ. It would be defying logic to believe anything else. If there is an alternative explanation then Noel Doran is free to offer it rather than censor the narrative that questions his own journalist’s account. He need not tell me the tooth fairy left it for Mr Barnes.

My case is this: Noel Doran, like most other journalists familiar with the issue, knows exactly what happened with the Allison Morris material. But rather than deal with it he has opted to become a libel bully. Both he and the underhand cabal at the Irish News will be tackled every step of the way. It does not matter how many censor lawyers he employs or libel bullies he aligns with. The Pensive Quill will not be silenced.

The Goose, the Gander, and the Irish News: Response to Noel Doran

This article is in response to an article by Irish News Editor Noel Doran that featured on Letters Blogatory.

It was pleasing, if hardly intellectually stimulating, to find Noel Doran at last do something other than use the threat of legal coercion to silence voices he takes umbrage at. However, it has hardly gone unnoticed that he concluded his piece with a call for a robust piece of writing to be suppressed. I will not wait to the end of this current piece to tell him that is not going to happen. The article by Paul Campbell stays in place, and if wasting time suits him, Noel Doran can have a censor lawyer use up a paper mill churning out threatening letters by the tonne.

Mr Doran might not have witnessed much else that has been going on in front of his nose lately but he has seen the inanity of coming to Letters Blogatory to make his case when it was much easier for him to have done what he was repeatedly invited to do, make it on the relevant blog, The Pensive Quill. His excuse, rather than his reason, was that TPQ is vulgar and confrontational. It seems he has at last read the contributions by the partner of his journalist, Allison Morris. True, TPQ confronts censors and libel bullies. That much won’t change. If he fears being confronted by people not willing to roll over in the face of his threats, he should seek help for either his phobia or his bullying.

On the point of vulgarity, he may as well cite the idiocy of blasphemy. Regional accents used to be regarded as vulgar back in the day when only BBC English would pass muster. Things have changed: vulgarity is a matter of taste. TPQ does not concern itself with parliamentary language. A daily newspaper might feel it has to but that is hardly a reason for Mr Doran not to engage on TPQ. He spends enough time reading it so presumably is comfortable with the ‘vulgarity.’ Or does he read the vulgar bits with his hands over his eyes? Much more plausible is that what he finds vulgar is a public challenge to his penchant for censorship. In my view, the reason for his absence is that he feels more at ease in the company of those he considers to be from his own social milieu, those he might consider a cut above the rest. It is the attitude of a pompous snob, a social class thing. Too bad, we won’t be doing hoity-toity to facilitate him.

Noel Doran is not in a position to determine the credibility of TPQ. He is much too busy trying to maintain his own in a community of journalists increasingly perplexed by his bizarre behaviour and his resort to libel bullying as he labours valiantly, but hardly victoriously, to either shut up or close down a small blog which has raised serious questions about the conduct of the paper of which he is editor.

My wife Carrie Twomey, former editor of The Blanket, has with consummate ease swept aside his claim of contradictory behaviour in respect of the use of pseudonyms and his disingenuous intimation that he had only wanted to engage without any legal threat. There is no need for me to labour the issue and pull the same decaying tooth twice. People can look into the substantial cavity in the Irish News narrative and judge for themselves. In fact, people need look no further than the pages of the Irish News itself, where it runs anonymous letters, has a weekly column devoted to reprinting anonymous/unverified comments from readers, and frequently uses the by-line of “Staff Reporter”.

One of the most recent examples of the work of the “Staff Reporters” is the front page report on the murders of Kevin Kearney and Barry McCrory. A photo of Mr McCrory's broken-hearted and grieving family is prominent under the headline “Arms Cache Linked to Murdered Drugs Baron” while the article itself is based on allegations from un-named “informed sources” claiming that one of the dead men, Kevin Kearney, was “regarded as being the boss of one of Belfast’s most disciplined crime gangs”, and that he headed a “major drugs gang”. The Irish News also claimed that a weapons cache discovered in August belonged to Kearney’s ‘gang’. All of this may well be true; after all, the Irish News chose to publish it, so presumably they can stand over its contents. And, as they say, the dead can’t be libelled, can they? No irony lost here on the hurt feelings of the grieving family depicted a few days later at a funeral in another front page photo as they opened their morning newspaper and read of what un-named ‘informed sources’ and ‘Staff Reporters’ said about their murdered loved one.

That is how the news media works. Pen names, such as ‘Anonymous’ in the letters section, are at the Editor’s discretion. If the Editor deems that there is a legitimate need to protect the identity of an author, that identity will be withheld; the Irish News, and its Editor, stands over the content of the material in the act of publication.

Likewise with the Irish News’ popular weekly column, Off the Fence, which selectively publishes comments submitted by anonymous readers. From experience, the paper does not verify the identity of the callers whose words they print; anyone can call or text the paper, call themselves whatever they like, and the comments they submit are carried without any follow-up from the Irish News. “Real GAA Supporter”, “Shane from Belfast”, and “Lurgan Orangewoman”, are some of the names used. Occasionally, some comments are carried without any ‘name’ at all. Is it because the subject is Sport that this practice is acceptable to Noel Doran?

“Do as I say, not as I do,” appears to be the editorial guideline being advocated by Noel Doran on Letters Blogatory.

On numerous occasions Noel Doran has been asked to back up with evidential specifics the charges he has made. He has singularly failed to do so, opting to hide behind the vaguest of generalisations and seductively waving the cheque book at the censor lawyer. On the issue of the personal safety of Allison Morris, I am wholly confident she is under no threat whatsoever as a result of anything that appeared in TPQ. There is more chance of her being hit by one of those fictitious Hezbollah rockets she discovered in South Armagh. What may be under threat is her credibility. Perhaps that is what really irks Noel Doran. He has placed his trust in her and is sensitive to his judgement being called into question in the wake of some of her stories.

He claims that it would not be legally appropriate to go over the defamatory claims on TPQ. That is because it is our contention that there are none. As I have insisted time and again, what is demonstrably ‘misleading and false’ was his own journalist’s claim on this blog as to why she did not attend my appeal hearing in London.

Noel Doran seems obsessed with establishing what he believes to be the true identity of Paul Campbell. Had TPQ inserted ‘Staff Reporter’, ‘Anonymous’, or ‘Ardent Paul’ rather than Paul Campbell, would he have been satisfied? Not at all. His quest is for one reason: so that he can fire off another letter from a censor lawyer. He seeks to legally coerce Paul Campbell as well. I am indifferent to his efforts and have not the slightest intention of assisting him.

Throughout he has churned out a load of vacuous waffle rather than address the issue at hand: the actions of his own reporter regarding the interview with Dolours Price. Contrary to the professed belief of Allison Morris I had no objections to her interviewing Dolours Price. Had I such objections I would have raised them at the time rather than writing a piece that was in no way critical of what appeared in the Irish News.

The contention pertains not to Ms Morris’s interview per se but to what Ms Morris did with the parts of that interview which did not feature in the Irish News piece. It is my unshakeable belief based on what Ms Price divulged to me coupled with the timeline, that Ms Morris passed this on to Ciaran Barnes. Information that Ms Price claimed to have revealed only to me and Ms Morris appeared in the Sunday Life under the by-line of a friend of Ms Morris, the same friend who together with Ms Morris made baseless accusations against me to the NUJ. It would be defying logic to believe anything else. If there is an alternative explanation then Noel Doran is free to offer it rather than censor the narrative that questions his own journalist’s account. He need not tell me the tooth fairy left it for Mr Barnes.

My case is this: Noel Doran, like most other journalists familiar with the issue, knows exactly what happened with the Allison Morris material. But rather than deal with it he has opted to become a libel bully. Both he and the underhand cabal at the Irish News will be tackled every step of the way. It does not matter how many censor lawyers he employs or libel bullies he aligns with. The Pensive Quill will not be silenced.

15 comments:

  1. AM-

    Still cant get over the fact that
    Staff captain Doran has not written a public comment to the Quill or even that none of the Irish News reporters have done so-[ that I know of anyway ]-I am sure you would let them use the name staff reporter as they are used to it when they want to kick people on the Irish news-the Quill is read by most if not by all the media here-and I am sure they are having some laugh at the Carols that Noel comes out with-they cant touch the Quill-easy for me to say-
    but I think you know writing always wins over those who want to destroy the written words-

    DD-Doran and Dixie want ones banned-

    ReplyDelete
  2. Michaelhenry,

    hopefully not another letter from the censor lawyer for the staff captain term!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I don't think Dixie wants you banned Michael. He (like others) can't understand your blind loyalty to Gerry Adams..Not SF but to one man. Talk about putting your eggs in one basket..

    I agree with you Noel D. He should simply grace the TPQ and say his piece or contact Anthony & Carrie and say..'Sorry, I was wrong, you are right. Kudos to you Anthony..'

    Noel you can't defend the indefensible. It's a pointless exercise trying to and only takes up your time and wastes the McIntrye clan's time too..

    Just grow a pair of balls and admit you called this one wrong. It's as simple as that.

    Noel I get things wrong (sometimes daily), but I admit it. There is no shame in saying 'sorry'.

    (On the Kevin Kearney murder. Is that the same Kevin Kearney originally from Stratford Gardens)...

    ReplyDelete
  4. Great read.

    There is very little independent journalist reporting these days, most of it is public relations management.

    Noel Doran and the rest of manufacturing consensus through editorial payroll "staff journalists" today is pretty much is the MO of print media.

    Bearing in mind the editor selects his journalists, the journalist in return to maintain employment and culture of the organisation presents the news worthy report best suited to his editorial style. The only news reporting I truly believe today from mainstream media to be objective is the football scores from the previous day. The rest of the media coverage is commercially in line with the profit and loss report of the organisations advertising or possible funders balance sheet. This is a sad fact, worldwide.

    Back to Noel Doran.

    Hey, lets not forget he is the man accreditated with opinion forming catholic views, official PR for nationalists and I will only mention talking about the rosey pink slant on PSF and infamous "peace process". How long will they milk this cash cow, the politicians, media, government officials, businessmen and potential exporters and investors.

    Noel subjectively was pretty much using his position to influence or form opinion about the TPQ site and your goodselves. He should, he is Mr Irish news a "national treasure" to the nationalist, catholic community, stormount and executive. Sure he even was the first nationalist to speak at the recent Progressive Unionist Party conference. He must be a credible source for how all the nationalist people think.

    Maybe, for the sheep eople. Well his views, opinions and take on what is newsworthy, vulgarity, acceptable simply rank very little on my value system. He certainly does not speak for me either or I assume any other independent, rational, reasonable, thinking man or woman in relation to what he said about the site.

    He is terrified he cant control the media content, like all media print moguels, that is why they are out to isolate, discredit or discourage anyone from reading, contributing or taking a sneaky peak at the site by demonising the main authors on the site.

    If he could make it a catholic sin, he would. He knows that doesn't work anymore, with a new rational, independent thinking audience so he goes down another fear line, with legal issues, mis representation of truth and down right whataboutery.

    Sure, at least we may bring these issues to light here on the TPQ, knowing they will be printed objectively without subjective editorial censorship or the nod and wink manufactured consent brigade.

    Maybe, we should just accept the media material given and proceed with the sheep. Handy ole road, at the end of the day.








    ReplyDelete
  5. James,

    if he thinks he can put people off reading the site he is bound to be sadly disappointed. We are at all time high in terms of readership. Few would ever have known about the initial criticism by a blogger of Morris/Barnes only they decided to put the boot in, and before they knew it the shoe was on the other foot. Now what they initially want suppressed is known about by numerous people. Bad strategy.

    ReplyDelete
  6. (1/2)

    Dr McIntyre ;-),

    I had posted the following in response to Ted Folkmans comments when this piece first appeared on his website yesterday.

    As such lengthy writing taxes me and I am a little bored by this area of discussion I will not edit to make fully relevant to this posting of the article and associated comments but if anyone wishes to see the comments I was responding to along with this article they can read them on Mr Folkman's blog:

    http://lettersblogatory.com/2013/10/21/response-noel-doran/#comments

    --------------------

    Hi Ted,

    Thanks again for providing space on your blog for this topic again. I’ve added you to my Feedly reads specifically for your coverage on this. Though I have to admit your usual content is quite specialist and while an insight into topic areas I’m barely aware of sadly I am taxed by a standard of writing at least two education levels beyond my reading level.

    Whilst I’ve mainly followed this saga on Anthony’s and other sites I think I can keep myself within the discourse levels expected from your more refined and genteel comments area. Maybe it’ll become a civilising influence on the ragamuffins and ne’er-do-wells that comment on the Pensive Quill but alas I expect when the British jackboot failed to civilise these croppies a robustly policed comments zone might not be up to the job either.

    However, I’m rambling as is my wont and before even the smallest of medicinal tinctures, so I will address a point or two that your three comments immediately brought to mind.

    Did we read the same article from Dr McIntyre? (I call him Dr because whilst he says he doesn’t like it of course he does, what man doesn’t like his place on a pedestal)

    You have made three comments on the topic of pseudonymous comment. When I read the good Dr’s article all these points not only seemed to have been addressed but to have been the central thrust of the piece.

    Of course it would be idiotic to compare the use of a pseudonym by an author or commenter on a blog with the quite correct granting of anonymity to letter writers to a newspaper who have been the victim of sexual abuse. There is perhaps a small argument to be had over why victims of that crime are granted anonymity when making their points in public and not other victims, but that is a pointless conversation for another day on another blog.

    The Dr’s prescription to Mr Doran (if I knew his titles I would apply them) was that when he criticised the use of a pseudonym he should examine his own house and provided 3 examples where Mr Doran permits pseudonyms within his own publication.

    You have latched on to the sole example that few would disagree is a legitimate instance of providing anonymity and in no way comparable to the use of pseudonyms by a blog author or commentators.

    However, you failed to note the two further examples cited:

    the ubiquitous ‘staff reporter’ that appears not only within the Irish News but on it’s esteemed front page as the byline for lead stories which also use, quite legitimately, unnamed sources.
    the anonymous comment that is permitted weekly and in large amounts within the Irish News sports pages. Some may say sport is not news, and I’d agree – it is much, much more important than news.

    However, the anonymous comment on the Irish News sports page is often controversial, highly critical and sometimes abusive (though they seem to tone it down a little for the benefit of more fragile readers).

    The ‘staff reporter’ with their ‘sources’ is also a pseudonymous writing with unidentifiable and unverifiable content. Of course any person of sound mind would accept that Mr Doran on occasion would by necessity need to protect both his reporters and/or their sources by not identifying them. I would not seek to force Mr Doran to identify his ‘staff reporter’ or ‘sources’ I trust his judgement on these matters will be to protect one, other or both and not based on anything untoward. I would never think to question those judgements by raising them in a conspiratorial manner.

    ReplyDelete
  7. (2/2)

    The main difference between the Dr and the Mr is that one seems to assign an individual moniker to each author, whilst the other permits many to use the anonymity of a single ‘staff reporter’ byline.

    To me it seems permitting a pseudonym to a blog author would be well within the practices of most newspapers and indeed by assigning what I assume is a unique name Dr McIntyre is actually operating at an arguably higher level of integrity than the print media in ensuring each pseudonymous entry is seemingly attributable to a single individual .

    Now returning to pseudonymous comment, that has been part of the internet since it’s birth. Dr McIntyre has pointed out quite rightly that whilst The Irish News may having a reasonably strong position against it on readers letters, with exceptions, this does not apply to the entire publication.

    Being a man of simple mind and simple pleasures and a regular reader of the Irish News the sports page is my first port of call. It has long been the habit of the sports section to allow ridiculous, controversial, rude or borderline abusive comment to be carried within it’s columns. They’ve carried a rather irate contribution from myself after a disappointing managerial situation within a team I follow. They did not seek to verify my identity and permitted highly critical comment without any identity check under a clearly fake name. This is their norm not the exception.

    All these points seemed to be clearly made in the blog you have just carried and then commented on three times.

    The point seems very clear, that when Mr Doran is complaining about pseudonymous content he is perhaps unwittingly practicing hypocrisy. His paper is ‘guilty’ of the same actions he complains of on a much more regular basis to a much wider audience than Mr McIntyre.

    However, the point I’d like to raise high is that what Mr Doran doesn’t do is address the very substantial criticisms raised against him and his publication.

    He has brought what should be a discussion on serious allegations that his publication may have contributed to a major and perhaps irreparable impact on academic research and oral history gathering in conflict situations into an exercise in pedantics and distraction.

    There are very important and far reaching elements of this story.The by-line Paul Campbell is not one of them. Its a distraction and to be honest a tedious one.

    I’ve expended far too much of my vocabulary and time on this, I’ve little and like to keep it for more interesting and important matters so this will be my last comment on this quite ludicrous game of Where’s Waldo.

    I’m Waldo and so’s my wife.

    Any chance Mr Doran will deign to address the substance that has been put to him rather than this dog chasing a bluebottle sideshow which was interesting for a while, but quickly becomes slightly annoying?

    Regards,

    Kev

    ReplyDelete
  8. AM-

    Allison Morris has a new front page about ONH doing a fire bombing in belfast which is in the Irish news today saying that that group carried out attacks on police-[ when were these ]-and a significant
    number of paramilitary-style shootings-inside info there-
    But UTV news at six says the firebomb attack was carried out by
    the NEW ONH-[ another one ]I do hope old Fido is not harmed if a feud comes along-

    Frankie-

    " I don't think Dixie wants you banned "-

    It pains me that the Nazi in Dixie said yesterday that I had no right to an opinion and he was Surprised that mackers continues to allow my likes on the Quill-

    ReplyDelete
  9. Kev,

    appreciate the time you took to write that. Fully acknowlege that it taxes your patience. It is just an attempt to distract from the issue at hand. But you have addressed it so thoroughly there is no need for me to add to it. If I was Allison I would be feeling pretty gray at this point too given that her own goal on Letters Blogatory set it all off again.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I am not sure why Ted became involved in the issue other than he sees himself as a mediator although reading the back and forth he clearly holds bias.
    Don’t get me wrong I like Ted but he much like the Irish News have run out of steam and are down to nit picking.

    After reading the reply and scrolling through the comments I think Ted would be at a loss to come up with a viable answer to Kev O’Higgins. I haven’t been to Ted’s site today so am unsure if he did answer.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Anthony,

    Very droll. I must admit the appearance of gray comments on Ted's blog didn't distract me they just reminded me what colour elephants are and how this entire sidetrack is an exercise in distracting from one

    ReplyDelete
  12. To Tain Bo's question, the reason I invited the discussion of the Paul Campbell issue at Letters Blogatory is that I am interested in issues about anonymity on the web. I've been involved in discussions of online anonymity elsewhere, too, e.g., in online discussions concerning the ongoing Boston mayoral campaign, and I've policed the issue at Letters Blogatory, too.

    I don't see myself as a mediator, though I am guessing that I am one of the few people that manages to talk civilly with both Anthony McIntyre and Noel Doran about these things. I reject the notion that I am unfairly biased here, though I accept the argument that the stuff I'm interested in (the Paul Campbell anonymity stuff) is only tangentially related to the stuff folks here are interested in (the criticisms of Allison Morris).

    ReplyDelete
  13. Ted,

    I think what you have said is fair comment. I don't believe you to be biased. You have a view on this and an interest independent of what any of those involved might think. What interests you for your own reasons while not the crux of this dispute is legitimate from your perspective.

    I think the substantive questions you asked were directed towards Noel Doran, which he chose not to answer.

    We are always prepared to talk to all involved in this issue without prejudice. We see no benefit in speaking to those who resort to libel bullying in a bid to legally coerce us.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Ted,

    I don’t see Paul Campbell’s article as an issue and my point of bias would relate to the ongoing desperation on behalf of the Irish News nit picking over one complaint or another against the Quill.

    My inference as to your role of mediator is simple the Irish News decided to have you host their issues with Anthony McIntyre and if I am correct their reasoning being they view the Quill as confrontationally vulgar hence are they taking advantage of your civility and having their views aired on what could be called neutral territory. Which indirectly puts you in the position of mediator and in a sense you are out of your own interest in anonymity.

    Why indeed would you be interested in Paul Campbell if not for the inquiries from Doran and Morris demanding disclosure or clarification as to whether he is fact or fiction? By simple deduction in my opinion you hold bias as you wish to aid them in their wild goose chase.

    As a long time reader and commenter here I have absolutely no reason to dispute the identity of Mr. Campbell. There is zero evidence to prove he is a fictional character. On the other hand if I personally believed he was then I would have no problem at all in tracking down the ghost writer and would have no problem posting any factual argument to discredit his identity.

    It’s a poor case of the lazy cats wanting the pigeons to deliver themselves.

    I will give the Irish News some credit as war is vulgar and confrontational as an Irish Republican I find the Quill therapeutic a place to reflect and deal with the issues of the long dirty war.
    I have nothing personal against you, Allison Morris or Noel Doran naturally I will defend my points and defend the Quill.
    I would think the headline hunter’s time would be better spent chasing after legitimate news rather than inventing tales of how a small blog is pushing them around.

    I asked you awhile back here on the Quill if Allison Morris’s misrepresentations would be considered perjury under oath there was no reply.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Death throes of old media - mr. Doran should wake up to the fact that sitting in an ivory tower when the foundations are crumbling is not a great place to be.

    ReplyDelete