It used to be Fleet Street lore that the Daily Telegraph covered every story regardless of its implications. Not any longer. As I pointed out yesterday, it failed to carry the report of the Express Newspapers' capitulation to the McCanns (probably to avoid offending Richard Desmond).
Now it has spiked a review, by the luminous Lynn Barber, of the Bill Deedes biography because - heaven forfend - it mentions that the old boy disliked the Barclay brothers. A whole chapter in Stephen Robinson's book is devoted to that fact, which was omitted from the Telegraph's serialisation.
Furthermore, a reference to Deedes's feelings about the Barclays in Peregrine Worsthorne's review for another Barclays'-owned title, The Spectator, was also cut. Worsthorne has formally complained to Spectator editor Matthew d'Ancona.
I have first-hand experience of censorship under the Barclays regime. They seek to control what does and doesn't get published in the Telegraph titles. What's that I hear? They own them, so why not? Fine. Then let them admit the fact in public. And why won't they do that? Because that would undermine the credibility of their papers.
Instead, like all interfering proprietors, they - and their minions - go on denying the truth in order to fool their readers and the public into believing that it is editors who make all editorial decisions.
