November 6th, 2012

NUJ’s Two Fingers to Members

Increasingly isolated NUJ boss Michelle Stanistreet has unilaterally announced the union’s support for state regulation of the press. Somewhat unbelievably not asking members first, Stanistreet blustered:

“We believe that if we are to achieve independent, accountable regulation it needs to be underpinned by statute enabling a framework for a new body to be established with clear terms of reference and a structure that involves journalists and civil society as key stakeholders.”

Just who are the “we” she was speaking for remains unclear. Certainly several prominent journalists have expressed their disbelief that such a decision would be made without balloting members first:

How to lose members and alienate yourself…


  1. 1
    Kebab Time says:

    urg – journos

  2. 2
    Anonymous says:

    God awful, do as we say not as we do lefties. They really are the fucking pits.

  3. 3
    Badly Packed Kebab says:


  4. 4
    Anonymous says:

    Stasi bitch!

  5. 5
    1984 says:

    The NUJ has no more legitimacy than any other organisation. If they don’t like the NUJ then quit and start another union.


  6. 6
    london man says:

    State control is no way regulate the press. The libel laws regulate the press. I worked for an embassy as a PR but could not get union membership due to their statsi rules. A new union is sequired.

  7. 7 says:

    The state is the emasculator of press freedom. Unions are their knives.

  8. 8
    None of the above says:

    Does Stanistreet live in a council house like most other £150k pa Union leaders?

  9. 9
    Engineer says:

    “Key stakeholders” eh? How about the general public as ‘key stakeholders’? After all, it’s us the journalists are supposed to be informing, and on our behalf they are supposed to be investigating and exposing wrongdoing.

  10. 10 says:

    We should not forget that Leveson is about how information was gained not the publishing of it.

  11. 11
    Terrible But True says:

    ‘Just who are the “we” she was speaking for remains unclear.’

    It’s a unique thing.

    Ask the BBC, who speak for the nation, by all accounts… well theirs… which no one else can hold them to, despite being a nationally funded, unelected, £4 billion per annum media monopoly.

    So it’s always fun when the 4th estate suddenly includes ‘us’.

    ps: Nic ‘One source close to the prime minister told me’ Robbo’s at it again (as his mods take out post with defamatory links… to the Guardian:

  12. 12
  13. 13
    ÁC1 says:

    Press is the First completely green industry.

    They’ve been recycling PR releases as news since day one.

  14. 14
    Sir Dando Tweakeshafte says:

    Well if a key stakeholder would be so kind as to hold the stake steady, I have a stout mallet.

  15. 15
    ed martin says:

    its as though german unions were demanding a new hitler

  16. 16
    Kumberland says:

    Socialism in Action


  17. 17
    Broadsword calling Danny Boy says:

    Jackals – all of them!

  18. 18
    truth says:

    Can anyone explain why television should be subject to statutory regulation whereas newspapers don’t? Does it prevent television from carrying out investigations like that which put away the evil care workers?

  19. 19
    Chavtasitic Benefits says:

    I think the ‘we’ she was referring to was her extra chin(s).

  20. 20
    Tay King-dePisse says:

    Maybe she had better deed-poll to Michelle “Qu*eerstreet,” because that’s where she’s going to find herself if she keeps this shit up. (I make no other innuendos of any kind– gotta be careful nowadays, yeah?)

  21. 21
    Koba says:

    Unions are the enemies of the people

  22. 22
    Anonymous says:

    If it’s anything like state regulation of the banks then they’ve nothing to worry about.

  23. 23
    Anonymous says:

    Is it because tv comes into peoples homes, while you have to physically go and buy a paper?

  24. 24
    David B says:

    It shows that the Unions and Labour think that the solution to every problem is more government, which means more tax, which means more civil servants

  25. 25
    Snapper John says:

    Sorry to let the truth get in the way of a good story, but the NUJ is asking for an independent press regulator, not state control. See:

  26. 26
    Fuct says:

    I left the NUJ last year when our ex dear leader took a 45k fucking off fee when he knew the finances were fucked. The the “election” debacle … Lack of transparency over expenses……. Now this.

  27. 27
    jrand says:

    Especially the dilly cow in the picture, she speaks for no one but herself. Standup for press freedom burk.

  28. 28
    Anonymous says:

    The NUJ has been out of touch with it’s members for years.

  29. 29
    CHRIST ON A BIKE! says:

    If you want to know the true political motivation behind any really bad idea, just look at the people who support it. NUJ, like every other Union, is run by Marxist fvckwits. Tells you that the Left believe that a state regulated press is a good idea, why? because it means that news dissemination will more likely support left-wing orthodox opinions, guarantee the even more rapid demise of the press and the even greater dominance of broadcast news, that is dominated by their old chums at the BBC.

    Except Mr Savile may have put something of a very large spanner in the works, as far as the cuddly BBC are concerned.

  30. 30
    CHRIST ON A BIKE! says:

    “independent” means appointed by politicians, in government!

  31. 31
    Tax is theft says:

    Looks to me like somebody wants to see the end of a free press and that the state regulation – a role which will be handed to the BBC in the interests of *impartiality (ha ha ha!)- will be the final arbiter of what can and can not be published.
    Be afraid….. be very fcuking afraid…

  32. 32
    Anonymous says:

    Is it even worth mentioning that you can’t actually have statutory regulation of the press? The definition would have to either be incredibly wide (taking in anyone who posts news, even on facebook) which would be defeated easily by everyone ignoring it as there isn’t enough money to enforce it or the definition would fall solely on print and maybe some other traditional outlets online which is INCREDIBLY EASY to sidestep. Yes it would mean the end of lobby hacks and being invited along on trips but instead you’d have people calling themselves something like news aggregators instead of journalists, and they’d get the news another way. Another way that isn’t regulated of course. Happens all the time in other professions, which is why it’s only used for a few that want it and can pay for it.

  33. 33
    Monty's python says:


  34. 34
    M says:

    I’m sure the national union of peadophiles would offer their support to the boss of the NUJ !

  35. 35
    Upshot creek says:

    I choose to buy television licence……don’t you!

  36. 36
    Feeling down says:

    Most journal,s especially them at the bbc are right up the lefts arses and deal in propaganda , I don’t sympathise with them at all.

  37. 37
    Telegram for Mongo says:

    First what?

Media Reader

Newspapers No Longer Willing to Toe Party Line | Roy Greenslade
London Live to Cut 20 Staff to Buy in More Content | Press Gazette
Telegraph Revealed Auschwitz 3 Years Before Liberation | Telegraph
Mirror Hacking: 50 Legal Action Claims | Press Gazette
45 Mirror Group Stories Linked to Phone-Hacking | Press Gazette
We Must Not Call Charlie Hebdo Killers ‘terrorists’ | Telegraph
Page 3 and the Art of the Self-Pity Statement | Guardian
Here is What a 7 Way Debate Sounds Like | BBC
Poll: Sun Readers Want Page 3 to Stay | Business Insider
The Sun: An Apology | Press Gazette
More Women Prosecuted For Telly Tax | Mail

Rising Stars
Find out more about PLMR AD-MS

Boris on British Jihadis. Apparently based on MI5 intel:

“If you look at all the psychological profiling about bombers, they typically will look at porn. They are literally w***ers. Severe onanists. They are tortured. They will be very badly adjusted in their relations with women, and that is a symptom of their feeling of being failures and that the world is against them. They are not making it with girls, and so they turn to other forms of spiritual comfort — which of course is no comfort.”

Tip off Guido
Web Guido's Archives

Subscribe me to:


AddThis Feed Button

Guido Reads

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,715 other followers