The FT: 'We print fiction'
This is shocking. And it's bad news for journalism that more people don't think it is. A national newspaper has finally admitted, on-the-record, officially, that it makes stuff up. And no, it's not a redtop or the Daily Mail. It's the Financial Times...
Briefly, here's what happened. The FT's writer Lucy Kellaway wrote an agony aunt column in which some of the anonymised details seem to closely match a minor sex scandal in the City last month at insurance giant Aviva.
The Daily Mail picked up on it, reporting that 'avid followers of scandal within the Square Mile quickly put two and two together and came up with. . . the Aviva triangle.'
And so Lucy Kellaway stepped in with a brief statement in which she made it clear that there was no connection to the Aviva scandal, and that she had in fact written the entire letter herself. That's OK then.
We've all been there. Who hasn't been tempted to call it a day on the vox pops a little early, 100% secure in the knowledge that neither readers nor news editor will be able to tell the difference? Who hasn't been tempted to conjure up an anonymous second source with the perfect quote that puts your killer story in exactly the right perspective?
And yes, sometimes, in some places, it happens all the time. Agony aunt columns are a regular offender. Letters to the editor, when the letters page is due and you're short. FleetStreetBlues once knew a journalist - a top-class, investigative journalist, who would never dream of cheating on one of his top-class splashes - who confessed to having made up an entire column of NIBs when he was working a local paper. In the process he got a bit carried away, and accidentally fabricated a minor crime wave in a sleepy rural village, sparking panic among the residents.
It happens. But it really, really shouldn't. As journalism struggles to come to terms with the 21st century, the one thing we've got going for us is that we print facts. And opinion, sure, but it's honestly held, up-to-date, exclusive and fact-based opinion.
The idea that in an age where the sum of all human knowledge is sitting at the end of our keyboard, members of the public will pay to pore over content - agony aunt column or otherwise - that some hack has dreamt up the day before to fill their space on the page is unrealistic, and frankly insulting.
And worst of all? It undermines public confidence in journalists when we have never needed it more. The FT employs a lot of fine journalists who write some of the best, most insightful stuff out there. This morning, there's no reason why their readers should believe any of it.










