PERHAPS THE Daily Express is cross because it doesn't have
as finger in the commercial television pie. This is the only reason that I can imagine behind its pompous attitude towards those people who voted against Commercial TV but now take Part in it. While Mr. Herbert Morrison is praised for refusing to appear on Commercial TV—a decision which will, says the Daily Express, earn respect—people like Mr. Michael Foot and Mr. Tom Driberg on the Socialist side, and Lord Hailsham on the Tory side, are 'perverse' because they take part in CTV programmes. This is an argument that I find very hard to follow. When Mr. Foot was editor of the Evening Standard, did he accept Lord Beaverbrook's opinions about newspaper proprietorship? Was Mr. Driberg-Hickey supposed to 'believe' in all that Lord Beaverbrook stood for? If Lord Hailsham takes a brief from the Transport Commission, is he under- writing nationalisation? As Lord Hailsham has himself asked, is it improper. for Tories to travel on nationalised transport? Professional journalists and publicists have the right, and in- deed the duty, to make use of any legitimate channels avail- able to them. Surely it is pure nonsense to suggest that because Lord Hailsham considers that Parliament made a political error about the control of the alternative programme, he should not make his views known on it, or earn anything from it. Unless there is something far wrong with my reasoning, the Daily Express view is a pretty silly (not to say totalitaridn) one.
Previous page
