NEWS EMBARGOES
SIR,—The Public Relations Officer of the B.M.A. casts doubt on Mr. Inwood's claim that competent newspaper men could have extracted the " salient items " from the B.M.A. plebiscite results " in ten minutes at most." He may be interested to know how one provincial evening newspaper managed on that difficult afternoon when the B.M.A. changed its mind and lifted an embargo that should never have been imposed. Within twenty minutes of the release we went to press with a new front page, setting out all the essential features of the results in clear and readable form. This was done by two experienced sub-editors, who ignored the confusing " accompanying statement " sent out by the B.M.A. and concentrated on the tabular matter. No doubt many other provincial evening papers did as well ; but no thanks are due for help received from the B.M.A.
We are asked to believe that the embargo was imposed " for the con- venience of newspapers generally." Which newspapers ? The leading London mornings ? One would imagine that after the fiasco of V.E.-day, all P.R.O.s would have learned not to try to embargo history. The B.M.A. plebiscite results were handed over at 11 a.m and should have been released at that time. Newspapers appreciate the courtesy of advance information and will respect an embargo related to a definite act of dis- closure to those entitled to the first information. They do not appreciate arbitrary embargoes imposed to please a few newspapers whom a P.R.O. for some reason wishes to favour.—Yours faithfully,
H. R. G. WHATES, Editor.
" The Birmingham Mail," 38 New Street, Birmingham, 2.
Previous page
