You see journalists portrayed on film and TV as unable to stop themselves from seeking the truth and exposing those in power, always looking for a scoop. It would be interesting to discover if he has been keeping quiet all this time to protect any possible pay-out from an employment tribunal.
Wouldn't that be self interest rather than the public interest?
But I'd be surprised if that was the case - he's won awards and written for the Guardian nearly three years ago, so was a proper journalist rather then an anonymous blogger or obsessive, ill advised campaigner.
Hi SBS. I sense a bit of sarcasm here, which is a pity. I liked your blogs a lot, but if you're going to go into the realms of unnecessary personal slights then you can't grumble too much if someone takes offence.
Like other people here, instead of taking issue with the message you decided to challenge the motives of the messenger. You could have used your intelligence (and you're clearly a clever bloke and a good writer) to pull apart what JS and TF were saying - but instead you went for a insulting pun and then downhill from there. You say that you 'fucked up' and offered an apology - but it sounds an awful lot like you begrudge having to do it.
Don't get me wrong - I hate the use of defamation laws to shut anyone up, but if your job depends on your reputation, then people are going to try to defend their reputation.
The pity of it is that if you'd written a criticism of the article that was a bit less personal, and then maybe invited Reid to comment on it, then perhaps we could all have really drawn something useful out of it.
Anyway, moving on, if you've got time have a read of this:
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/conte...ter-axed-coventry-telegraph-joins-rival-title
And note these two (non-contiguous) paragraphs...
But once suspended, I understand Reid launched a formal grievance alleging “bullying”, leaving one senior Canary Wharf boss so exasperated at the delays and counter-claims that I’m told he said – and I paraphrase – “just get it sorted, whatever the cost”.
"Regardless of the rights or wrongs, the quarrel has been damaging to the Telegraph, which currently has no editor, a demoralised staff, and the prospect of its washing being laundered in public at industrial tribunal – with Reid said to be uninterested in any pay-off to buy his silence."
Does that sound like someone who has kept quiet because they wanted a pay-off in their own self-interest, or does it sound like a person who wants the truth to come out regardless of personal costs?
Is it possible that just maybe, clever bloke that you are (and I mean that genuinely and without sarcasm), you've read this situation incorrectly?