LETTERS Silent union
Sir: I do not wish to comment on Paul Johnson's account (9 May) of the printing unions' refusal to allow the Observer to print a book review by me or to let its readers know that they had done this, except to say that I think he is too hard on Donald Trelford; an editor whose prop- rietor will not support him is in an impossi- ble position. But there is a quite different aspect of this business which I think needs airing.
Whatever else the printworkers' action was, it was undoubtedly an act of cen- sorship — censorship of a journalist writing in a newspaper. You might think (I put it that way because / certainly wouldn't) that even the present leadership of the National Union of Journalists would make, at the very least, a statement of protest and condemnation, not on my behalf (though I have been a member of the NUJ for more than 30 years) but in defence of the freedom of the press. Unfortunately, there are too many people on the NUJ's Nation- al Executive who would like nothing better than to see a complete end to the freedom of the press. I suppose they might as well start with me; in any case, no official voice of the NUJ has been raised.
Bernard (Ile Winslow Man') Levin
London W1
Previous page
