This entry was posted on
Thursday, March 26th, 2009 at
11:51 am and is filed
under Old Media.
You asked me to email you if I was unhappy after speaking with Derek Lambie about the Dunblane matter and/or if I felt there were issues yet to be resolved.
Well, the only real communication I’ve enjoyed with Derek Lambie involved that editor trying to dismiss my every concern with an unsubstantiated claim about a single issue:
He has not engaged in any form of conversation with me since, despite a quite specific and reasonable request that he confirm or deny having changed his Facebook status to “Derek Lambie is in the process of legal action against bloggers”:
He has also failed to respond to my email about his apology, which is widely-regarded to be little more than a cynical face-saving manoeuvre, and is far from the end of the matter as far as I’m concerned (not least because there are still so many unanswered questions that Derek Lambie seems determined to avoid):
I have a few questions for you about your Dunblane article and apology:
1. You claimed; “Where possible, we have spoken to the families involved and
given them a heartfelt apology.” Have you spoken directly to all of the
survivors named/targeted in the original article and given them a heartfelt
2. It has been claimed that Paula Murray contacted some or all of these
people seeking story material (e.g. an interview or comment), but was turned
down, and responded by using what she could from their social networking
profiles. Allegations of malice aside, is there any truth to this?
3. When Paula Murray was seeking a story specifically about Dunblane
survivors, was she operating under your instructions or those of another
4. Do you still maintain that Elizabeth Smith was knowingly speaking of
Dunblane when she gave the quote(s) used in the original article?
A simple yes or no on each will do for now… or you can continue to be
difficult and uncommunicative (like when I asked you a fair and reasonable
question about an alleged legal threat and you saw fit to ignore it).
If you could convince Derek Lambie to at least issue a formal ‘no comment’ on any/all of my recent questions, I’d be extremely grateful, as his current game of covering his eyes and pretending that I cannot see him is becoming tiresome.
PS – On an unrelated matter, could you please have a quiet word with any relevant managing/political editor(s) operating under you and provide me with a list of stories on extremism or terrorism that are based in whole or in part on claims made, evidence presented or research conducted by Glen Jenvey (or Michael Starkey or a ‘Richard Tims’)? I’ve included a link to what I suspect are recent examples: