First, a bit of background. Last month I published a letter of complaint sent to the Evening Standard by Lee Jasper, Ken Livingstone's former equalities adviser. Jasper was unhappy with two articles written by Andrew Gilligan in which he returned to the attacks he and the Standard had made with such vehement frequency during last year's mayoral election campaign. I published the letter because I thought Jasper's side of those stories deserved a wider hearing.
The Standard soon responded. I received a short email from their PR company expressing mild displeasure that I'd made a piece of private correspondence public and disputing Jasper's claims. This email was also sent to the Guardian's Readers' Editor, who deals with complaints about newspaper and website content. She thought it was reasonable for this response to be added to my post. I thought so to: indeed, had it been sent only to me I'd have added it willingly, and probably more quickly.
The Readers' Editor then received a second, much longer response, this time directly from the Standard. It had copied to her a letter to Jasper setting out in detail why it believed Gilligan's stories about him were accurate and justified. The Standard wanted the Readers' Editor to require me to publish that too. She thought this unnecessary, and I agreed. However, I did consider that my readers might be interested in reading this second response from the Standard, especially if it were accompanied in turn by any response to it by Jasper.
In consultation with superiors I decided to wait until the Standard had desisted from asking the Readers' Editor to require I publish its letter to Jasper and then consider doing so as a matter of editorial choice, with Jasper being offered the opportunity to contest its contents. The plan was to return to the issue after I came back from my Easter holiday. However, the Standard pre-empted this when on 30th March it published both Jasper's letter of complaint and its detailed reply on its own website. Having done this, the Standard contacted the Guardian again, this time asking if I would link to that page on their site.
Lest there be any doubt, my decision to do so is precisely that: my decision. Neither the Readers' Editor nor anyone above me at the Guardian has told me to do it. I took that decision after asking Lee Jasper if he did indeed wish to challenge the Standard's defence of its stories about him. Had he responded in the negative I would have been less inclined to link to the Standard, but Jasper was keen on the idea. I told him I would be happy to publish his side of the argument here or to link to it on his own website if he preferred to post it there. He chose the latter option.
And so....read the Standard's defence of its Lee Jasper stories here. Read Lee Jasper's rebuttal of it here. As for me, I'd now quite like to end my blog's role in hosting this debate. I don't like to over-dwell on media disputes, tempting though it sometimes is. That said, dear readers, your considered comments are always welcome.
