Today is the closing date for journalists to enter the George Orwell Prize, one of the highest honours that can be bestowed on political hacks. Previous winners include Polly Toynbee, David Aaronovitch and Jenni Russell (let’s draw a veil over the fact that Johann Hari won in 2008). Indeed, I'm not too modest to point out that my Telegraph blog was long-listed for the Orwell Prize for blogging. However, I won’t be entering this year.
The problem is, the Orwell Prize is administered by the Media Standards Trust, the same body that launched the Hacked Off Campaign. It seems pretty clear to me that the present aims of Hacked Off – namely, to see all of Leveson’s recommendations implemented in full, including the statutory underpinning of a new, independent press regulator – would not have found sympathy with Orwell. Indeed, I don’t see how the Media Standards Trust can, in good conscience, support Hacked Off and continue to invoke Orwell’s good name.
There are three reasons why I believe Orwell would have been against implementing Leveson in full. (To read more, click here.)
Re: Why George Orwell would not have wanted to win the Orwell Prize
Posted by Hugo on 10-01-2013 18:29:
You are being quoted with relish by the national review, some conservative american paper - but you dont say Orwell hated the popular right-wing press - the national review is making out he would like the Sun - and the 'left' orthodoxy, note the quote marks - was the Communist/Stalinst orthodoxy or the Soviet Union admiring 'left' anyhow- he was a democratic socialist - I'm sure you understand this but you are careful what you gather from Orwell. Chicanery - you censor the left wing Orwell.
RT @GoodWifesGuide: A Good Wife should remember Sun is bath night, bubbles, candles, chocolates & his favourite drink. Be prepared to join … (24 minutes ago)
