letsallsingtogether
Well-Known Member
No nothing to do with criticising anyone, if you don't know you need to get your story right before you get on to your high horse.
Like I said not a place to post it.
My cronies? FFS, you're getting worse. Why did he ruin his own career? Tell me what he did to do that? IS it because he dared to criticise the council?
He was the subject of a gagging order which was public knowledge - so you clearly don't read very much.
Was he Grendel?
He suggests the CT & Journo's were not. He is probably staying quiet now as he is trying to go to tribunal, that's not a gagging order. If you have a better more accurate reference can you share it.
I have never met Les & I do not know him at all. I do not have a detailed knowledge of his work, so can only go on the things that caused me to sit up and pay attention. The one major thing was his article (PR Article in my view) when he interviewed JS. The bias in that made me see red.
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/coven...uggestions-paper-has-been-gagged-and-censored
To be fare to Les, I had him via Email about this at the time because I saw it (and still do) like you and his reply was he couldn't tell the other side of the story as AL was making no comment due to the council media ban on the subject. Which you can't really argue with.
Seems to me and this is just my opinion, that Les wanted to believe everything SISU was trying to get everyone to believe at the time about the smoking gun, heads will roll in the council, SISU will walk the JR etc. etc. and go with this angle in his reporting. I think his editor (and rightly so, given SISU didn't walk the JR, nobody's head rolled and there was no smoking gun) didn't buy it so wouldn't allow Les to go that route.
Is that a gagging order? I dont think so. Sounds more like an editor doing his Job to me.
Remember that girl who used to post on here for a Spell ..
My boyfriends a Journo and he's got a dossier that Is going to "smash em" ,sounds similar .
To be fare to Les, I had him via Email about this at the time because I saw it (and still do) like you and his reply was he couldn't tell the other side of the story as AL was making no comment due to the council media ban on the subject. Which you can't really argue with.
Seems to me and this is just my opinion, that Les wanted to believe everything SISU was trying to get everyone to believe at the time about the smoking gun, heads will roll in the council, SISU will walk the JR etc. etc. and go with this angle in his reporting. I think his editor (and rightly so, given SISU didn't walk the JR, nobody's head rolled and there was no smoking gun) didn't buy it so wouldn't allow Les to go that route.
Is that a gagging order? I dont think so. Sounds more like an editor doing his Job to me.
No, it was a gagging order.
No, it was a gagging order.
He didn't get into bed with SISU, that's a ridiculous assertion. At the worst, he offered a different interpretation on events - one that a number of people didn't much care for, and ever since then there's been a stack of bullshit seemingly implying he's been bought off in some way. That, frankly, is pretty offensive and in my book pretty cowardly.
If you don't like what he wrote, challenge it on it's merits with some evidence of your own - currently this is the equivalent of playing the man and not the ball.
As for why he left the CET, as I understand it the facts for that are coming up in a tribunal at some point.
The simple truth is, if want you want a free press, and for people close to things to offer an opinion, then sometimes you'll have to accept that opinion will vary from yours. You can take it on, and say why you differ, or you can hide behind the claim of bias or bribery or some other bollocks that saves actually having to make your own case based on the facts.
I met Les, not long after the JR, and we had a forthright debate about what went on the club. We differed hugely on some things, but what I picked up from it is that what he actually cared about was what was better for the City and CCFC, rather than what looked better for the council. On that basis, he was to some degree saying that doing a deal with SISU, however repugnant, might be the best way forward.
Personally, though I differed in some parts, I could respect and understand that point of view. He certainly wasn't a SISU mouthpiece in my eyes.
As for him no longer working at the telegraph, that's to no one's benefit. You need journalists who are willing to look beyond the accepted facts and properly scrutinise things, especially political decisions. (I'm not suggesting for a moment by the way that Simon Gilbert doesn't try to do that too). Maybe the tribunal will offer some real clarity as to what happened at the CET.
Depends on your definition of "get into bed with SISU". Nobodies saying that he's been bribed by them, but clearly he was entirely biased in their favour. That is NOT a ridiculous assertion, that is blatantly the case to anyone who can read.
I got to the bottom of his last interview with Joy and thought "fook me, that almost read like it was written by Les Reid...oh look, it WAS written by him, LOL!" It was essentially a SISU press release. As were most of his latter articles for the CT. THAT'S why he gets a hard time: he has a reputation that he's worked very hard to cultivate. He deserves it every bit.
Essentially those shouting that it's good to "have a different point of view" basically agree with his anti-local government adjenda-one that everyone who liked your post share. Don't try and pretend that it's because he's actually been any good at his job for the last year or two as all he's done is spout SISU-line bollocks. He doesn't "care for the City": he ideologically opposes local government and that perfectly suits the SISU angle. He's obviously a SISU mouthpiece, how on earth can't you see that?
Wheres the link???
I was under the impression trinity group made a load of redundancies and he was one of quite a few that lost their job.
I think and I maybe wrong that some thought the editor may have got rid of him because the editor was friendly with the council. However I think it was the council who defended Reid when it happened. So I don't see that as correct.
He left their employment last month which is interesting isn't it given that everyone was wondering what had happened to him.
He was still employed and I assume paid until October
Yes because the telegraph have done an article about it....Wheres the link???
He didn't get into bed with SISU, that's a ridiculous assertion. At the worst, he offered a different interpretation on events - one that a number of people didn't much care for, and ever since then there's been a stack of bullshit seemingly implying he's been bought off in some way. That, frankly, is pretty offensive and in my book pretty cowardly.
...
As for him no longer working at the telegraph, that's to no one's benefit. You need journalists who are willing to look beyond the accepted facts and properly scrutinise things, especially political decisions. (I'm not suggesting for a moment by the way that Simon Gilbert doesn't try to do that too). Maybe the tribunal will offer some real clarity as to what happened at the CET.
You do need that, and FWIW never had an issue with his reporting.
He did however seem to get sucked into the trap of responding and retaliating to criticism (fair and unfair) on twitter and the like that maybe didn't reflect well.
His use of the word 'grilled' was also somewhat misplaced!
Yes because the telegraph have done an article about it....
Didn't he say it without challenge the same day the editor left?
https://twitter.com/Lesreidpolitics/status/523171152953618432
This comes after writing no articles or no tweets for months and the same time a the editor leaving.
I would say that was gagging rather than "go and report on mavis and her potato patch because you are in my bad books"
So because he said so on his own blog it must be true...
He did get a grovelling apology off that POM blog I seem to remember.
Nobody who wants to be taken seriously should be in Twitter though.
Was it a specific gagging order though or was it perhaps that having been disciplined by his employers then placed on gardening leave and got the lawyers involved the legal advice to him was that any comments etc could prejudice his case? Is there still a tribunal case to follow? or has it all been settled and that's why he is free to comment? We don't actually know do we.
One thing this whole (SISU/CCC/ACL) saga has led people to do is to look for conspiracy round every corner....... quite a sad place to end up really.
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.
I would have thought if anything it would help his case to expose any "smoking gun" proving that he was right and his employer was wrong.
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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?