On that Newsnight program featuring Guido, Michael White and Jeremy Paxman, Guido questioned Michael's closeness to John Prescott having been at his 68th birthday. Michael immediately said he was not at John Prescott's 68th birthday and did not know he was 68!
Well, that is not true, He did know he was 68, as this extract of this article here shows.
Interviewing Prezza for the Guardian on the 10.05 out of King's Cross yesterday I was startled, not for the first time, by his resillient energy. It was his 68th birthday, which makes him eight years older than me and a good deal more energetic. Why hasn't he got any white hair, I found myself wondering? What's his secret? Pauline's cooking? Grecian 2000? Tracey? Croquet? A zeal for the public good?Well there you have it. Don't trust Michael White to tell the truth, because either he does not want to, or he can't remember what it is.
Hat tip to Guido,who posts his regrets here, and an anonymous poster on his blog.
14 comments:
Michael White is insufferable, what was the nonsense about Guido's rugby shirt? I guess Michael's febrile behaviour proves that the bloggers are discomforting the MSM. What was your assessment of the interview Benedict? I didn't think Guido was as bad as some of his critics are baying , though he wasn't great!
Micheal White is not a journalist he is a propagandist who propagates nothing but left wing views.
He is a stranger to the truth.
Smug MSM, Dapper Dan and Tom, thanks for the comments. I largely agree.
The thing that came out of it was that no one was able to disagree with Guido that the lobby is close to politicians, the only question is, is there another way?
Untimately if they all bandied together so that if one politican was not going to speak to X member of the press then the whole press were not going to speak to them, then politicians would have to like it or lump it. That is not going to happen though.
Perhaps, like Iain Dale, Michael White simply has a poor memory.
By the way, 'Guido' fibbed with a figure-fiddle that makes White's lie/error look rather tame by comparison. Check the transcript.
Guido 2.0, or rather Tim, for it is you is it not?
1. If I delete your post can you organise a boycott against me? I hear it does wonders for ones traffic.
2. Michael White either can't remember significant facts, or he is a liar, period. Both make him useless as a journalist.
3. The broad essence of what Guido said was incorrect, and was certainly more accurate than I did not know he was 68.
4. Could I possibly suggest you get a life? After all you must be able to extol the virtues of your own political philosophies? Or do you have none?
5. Describing people, even people like Guido with the language you do does more to your image
than to theirs.
It is. And Manic's profile and website make that perfectly clear. Please stop suggesting otherwise.
1. Manic will consider your request.
2. Manic bets that if you were put on the spot, you wouldn't be able to tell me how old one of your uncles was... even if you were in his presence on his birthday almost a year before.
3. "The broad essence of what Guido said was incorrect" - Manic agrees.
4. Manic believes strongly in free speech and open, honest debate.
5. Of course, you are correct - it has been Manic who has been hurling mindless abuse throughout the Dale/Staines affair, instead of dealing with the issues.
Tim, "It is. And Manic's profile and website make that perfectly clear. Please stop suggesting otherwise."
In what way did I make any other suggestion? I don't know nor do I care how many people you have using that moniker or which particular moniker you are using this week, hence asking the question.
"1. Manic will consider your request."
How kind :)
"2. Manic bets that if you were put on the spot, you wouldn't be able to tell me how old one of your uncles was... even if you were in his presence on his birthday almost a year before."
He did not have trouble remembering Prezza's age, he denied knowing how old he was at all. Look up the laws on misrepresentation. Previous knowledge is certainly evidence and denying it makes him look like a fool.
"3. "The broad essence of what Guido said was incorrect" - Manic agrees."
That was a typo, what I should have written was:
3. The broad essence of what Guido said was correct, and was certainly more accurate than I did not know he was 68.
"4. Manic believes strongly in free speech and open, honest debate."
No you don't. If you did you would make at least a half hearted attempt at being fair but instead you have magnified any error Guido made whilst trying to reduce the size of Michael White's. Doesn't look honest to me.
"5. Of course, you are correct - it has been Manic who has been hurling mindless abuse throughout the Dale/Staines affair, instead of dealing with the issues."
I am so glad there are some things upon which we can agree.
1. Manic lives to serve our future Tory masters.
2. White did one interview and wrote about it once. Guido wrote about the Guardian award again and again and again... and until recently had the relevant badge on the front page of his website. Also, 'Guido' was not suddenly confronted with a figure/fact and put on the spot... he produced it himself. Some casual observers might even get the impression that the use of the figures was prepared beforehand.
3. In that case, we disagree.
4. It looks to Manic as if White's lie/error is being used in some quarters to distract people from other highlights/aspects of the interview. As to comparative scale of the errors/lies, Manic is sure that we can safely agree to disagree and let your readers (and Manic's) decide for themselves.
5. Manic requests that you scan #1 in this entry carefully for sarcasm.
Tim,
"1. Manic lives to serve our future Tory masters."
Ah, good. I am so pleased you know your place.
"2. White did one interview and wrote about it once. "
I see. He has only every interviewed Prescott once? I thought he was connected?
"3. In that case, we disagree."
Fine with me.
"4. It looks to Manic as if White's lie/error is being used in some quarters to distract people from other highlights/aspects of the interview."
Exactly the reverse can be said as well.
"As to comparative scale of the errors/lies, Manic is sure that we can safely agree to disagree and let your readers (and Manic's) decide for themselves."
Yes lets.
"5. Manic requests that you scan #1 in this entry carefully for sarcasm."
I request you re read my original response to you for the same.
Out of mild interest do you think writing in the third person impresses people?
Is it just me who thinks its perfectly possible to honestly say "I didn't know he is 68" despite having written a blog that mentioned it almost a year ago. It was hardly the crux of the story was it? And I'm not suprised White was thrown further by the (seemingly baseless) claim he had been to Prescott's party.
White was pompous - but he was careful. Even on this (petty) aspect he was careful to say he didn't think he did, rather than a flat denial. Guido was reckless over Lord Levy's "trial", Prescott's party invites, Robinson as a source etc etc.
The fundamental point of the film raised some good questions - but the interview left me wondering if it was better to rely on careful, professional people who have to deal with the realtionship problems, or careless mouthy gits who are independent but unrealiable?
FFS...
Out of mild interest, do you think Paul Staines writing in the third person impresses people?
No wonder Manic has trouble detecting your sarcasm.
Anonymous,at 11.52, Yes I agree. It was the vehemence with which he denied it off the cuff.
I agree with a lot of what you say. I think Guido's biggest problem is that he does not do this sort of thing and got rattled.
He should have said he was now being careful because if charges were to be laid, it may be soon or some such similar formulation. I rate the odds of charges at better than 50/50 but I wouldn't say there was going to be a trial. Again he was rattled.
Tim, Guido does it from time to time to time in his main articles where it does not grate quite so much. This is comments which are in effect a conversation between you and I, and it certainly does not impress me.
Sorry, but you're wrong. Staines maintains third-person full-time on his website. The best one can hope for is his 'writing around' the deceit to avoid passages that might otherwise include phrases like "I think this" or "I have done that".
Quite often, he also maintains the charade in comments/conversation. Here's just one example.
He *also* insists on being addressed as 'Guido' at public gatherings and during interviews, even when those present know his name (the most recent example being Newsnight).
Manic makes no apologies for taking the piss.
(PS - When Manic enjoys face-time with other members of one online community or another, often there is an odd back and forth as people introduce themselves by name through habit, before realising that they need to use their nickname by way of introduction. At such gatherings, everyone will then return to using their real names after introductions are made... unless there's a sad bastard present who insists on being addressed by his chosen moniker all night.)
Sorry, didn't Guido say White went to Prescott's birthday bash? Sorry, I watched the interview and Guido wasn't so much on the back foot as legless.Everything from Lord Levy's 'trial', to Robinson's 'knowledge' of number 10's lotus notes system to Prezza's birthday, blew up in his face.The difference between gossip and facts I'm afraid.If I want to read gossip I'll read the blogs, and do...
Post a Comment