Now let us all praise famous men. “[His] power is far less fleeting than mere politicians. He has seen prime ministers and governments come and go and sits in judgment upon them. He helps bring governments down and dispenses justice with a flourish of his hand upon a set of proofs. That supreme being is Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre”.
The quote comes from another editor, Dominic Ponsford at the UK Press Gazette. But it could, in truth, have come from many friends – and quite a few foes – of Dacre. For, as Boris and Gove and Farage tumble from the top of the Brexit heap, so Paul Dacre remains in place. You may or may not think that the Mail won it on 23 June. There’s plenty of sketchily rehearsed argument on either side. But you have to acknowledge that Dacre, with his railings against greedy elites and harpings on Project Fear (natural successor to Frankenstein Foods), hit the precise notes that brought Leave victory. Oracle or echo chamber? It doesn’t much matter, because he’s still there and still triumphant.
Except, perhaps, that the fruits of victory are beginning to look a trifle wizened. Here are the seasoned observers of Enders Analysis on UK media prospects.
“So far, 2016 has been a wretched year for UK news publishers with a marked acceleration in the decline of print display advertising revenue. We predict a decline of 15% this year, and our central case forecast assumes the same scale of decline in 2017.”
What difference does Brexit make? It subtracts as much a 10 more revenue points to coming ad decline. It drives more nails into the coffin. It wipes hundreds of millions off Daily Mail and General Trust shares. It turns a wretched year into a hideous one. Is everybody in and around the Kensington atrium happy, then?
You couldn’t expect Jonathan Rothermere to manifest much enthusiasm. His heart and his business interests were best served by the Mail on Sunday’s Remain line. Dacre won: the big boss lost – and so, perhaps, did Paul Zwillenberg, Rothermere’s choice as incoming group chairman, an American digital wizard and chum who may not become instantly enraptured by a 67-year-old autocrat of Daily Mail print wisdom pursuing policies that do the empire no good.
In one sense, of course, the legend of the “supreme being” still lingers here. Paul Dacre is no meek lackey. To the contrary, he’s obviously independent. He paddles his own canoe upstream. He once turned down a big job offer from Murdoch. But the problem with a one-man operation, often against the grain, is that such shows can’t run forever. Will it be two or more years before Brexit actually happens? Will Dacre – whose health isn’t great – still be in charge hitting 70?
He can choose his new deputy (Gerard Greaves from the Mail on Sunday) but he can’t turn him into a new Dacre – too cussed for cloning, too robust to succumb to the suits of high office. He won’t, as revenues slither further this autumn, be in pole position to decide the Mail’s fortune. The world-busting but still unprofitable website isn’t his baby. His editor-in-chief authority doesn’t cross the atrium. Did he climb aboard the May bandwagon a tad too quickly, leaving a pensive Sun to play catch-up? Are second thoughts of vulnerability creeping in? Don’t doubt the shock and awe – the political clout – Paul Dacre still commands. But also remember, perhaps, that all political careers end in disappointment.
■ William Rees-Mogg, once editor of the Times, was a magisterial figure prone to repeated thunderous pronouncements – most of which rapidly turned out to be wrong. He was, variously, Mad Mogg or Mystic Mogg in Private Eye parlance. Rival leader writers used to wait to find out what William thought before advocating the precise opposite. And now? Here’s his beloved son, Jacob Rees-Mogg, telling Telegraph readers that “Michael Gove would be a prime minister as great as Churchill and Thatcher”. Ah! The decades roll away. That’s Moggnificent.
■ Why conspiracy theories come adrift: the Mail voted Leave with all its might, and Andrea Leadsom is Leave’s PM contender. But its forensic Saturday job on Andrea’s shifting CV claims was as comprehensive a compilation as you could wish. Murdoch hailed Brexit, but his Times voted Remain – and kept the tape running while it talked to Leadsom about the supreme glories of mumhood. Who on Earth thought that disputing that “despicable” but dead-accurate tale was a good idea? Who’ll believe the next dodgy denial?
You can’t always write the script of automatic support. Dacre’s paper still turns over stones. And reporters from papers across the spectrum have recordings, will travel.
What will happen as the reach of papers and newsrooms withers, when “national” news means broadcasters, US-owned sites and blogs? Fewer tapes, fewer questions, fewer transcripts, fewer answers; and more shifty, shifting yarns.
