Sunday Business Post loses Editor

national | arts and media | opinion/analysis Wednesday October 27, 2004 23:51 by Michael Hennigan - Finfacts.com

Some years ago, when I worked in a Swedish multinational, it issued a communication from HQ which read: 'Mr. X has asked to be relieved of his position as President of Y Division (the biggest in the group)..We wish Mr. X well in his future career.'

Mr. X of course go a pay-off to keep his trap shut and agree to a 2 yr non-compete clause. He was soon forgotten and the usual self-serving tripe about 'Group culture' continued to be peddled as if nothing had happened.

The foregoing is par-for-the-course in commercial operations- use company funds to ward off sniffers of dirty linen. 'Commercial confidentiality' is the pat excuse but what is interesting is that media organisations generally behave no differently.

Today, the National Union of Journalists expressed surprise at the shock departure of Ted Harding from the editorship of the Sunday Business Post.

Ted Harding replaced founding editor Damien Kiberd in November 2001.

The NUJ said that Thomas Crosbie Holdings, which owns the newspaper and the Irish Examiner, and the Sunday Business Post's management have refused to disclose the reason's for the editor's departure.

The NUJ said it had received explicit guarantees from Thomas Crosbie Holdings, of the Sunday Business Post's editorial independence at the time of the newspaper's acquisition in 2002 and is now seeking an urgent meeting with the company.

The newspaper's site makes no reference to the departure of Ted Harding. It's news not fit to print!

It's bizarre to observe mainstream media organisations pleading for greater transparency in public affairs and bemoaning the restrictions which have been put on the use of the Freedom of Information Act, in recent years.

All mainstream organisations behave in a similar manner irrespective of the system of ownership. I recall reading a Vincent Browne column in the Sunday Business Post last year querying about the jurisdiction where Tony O'Reilly pays his taxes. What struck me at the time was that Vincent chooses his targets well. He would hardly raise questions about the Crosbie family in their own paper.

The general rule is that internal information on a media company is published by a competitor. Perish the thought that 'commercial confidentiality' would be endangered!!