I first heard about it at around 8.30am yesterday morning on the Today programme. “Tony Blair will be giving a speech on Britain's role in Europe in Oxford today where he will say…”
The speech-reported-before-it-is-said must be one of the most depressingly symbols of modern media politics. It goes right to the heart of what news is – and what it should be. Newspapers have always been broadly supportive of the definition that news is “what you don't know”. If you haven't heard it, it is therefore news.
But the printed media and television now spend more of their time breaking this definition that following it. The rise of the Internet and the endless cost-cutting means that rarely does anything appear on TV or in a newspaper that people haven't already heard.
The editor of the Independent recently outlined how newspapers have to change the modern Net era to become “viewspapers” – informed comment and analysis of events – in order to remain relevant.
It is perhaps not surprisingly then that the pre-speech is so beloved of old media – and of government. Not only does old media get exclusive “news” through their priviledged channels but government gets coverage of a speech which it may well not do if it made reporters actually go to an event and sit through it.
In fact, it may be a mere formality that the speech is given at all. And I am certain there have been times when, once the media coverage is achieved, the speech itself has been quietly shelved.
Nonetheless, I still remain resolutely of the view that a speech is not news until it is said by the person in question and the words that it is claimed will come out their mouth are heard in public.
As such I decided to go along to Mr Blair's speech to see if he turned up at all, and to see if what he actually said corresponded to the “what he will say” as reported in numerous newspapers.
[Telegraph: Europe 'offers new hope for Britain'
BBC: Blair 'optimistic' over EU future
Reuters: Blair urges Britons to embrace Europe
Scotsman: Blair hails future of Europe
And plenty more…]
Having trawled through all the stories though, there was no mention of where and when Blair would be giving this speech. In fact, only a few reports mentioned Oxford at all.
So I trawled the Internet – and found nothing. I went through all of Oxford University's news and events sites and found nothing. Which sounds a touch ludicrous as it had been announced all over the national media.
So I went to the Downing Street website. And found no mention of the speech at all. Surely it had to actually be happening? I decided to call the Number 10 press office – but there is no phone number anywhere on the site.
So I dig out my media directory, find the number, and call. After talking to the switchboard and being connected to a press officer, I am amazed when the press woman simply refuses to tell me where or when the speech will be happening.
I'm not allowed to attend because it is for lobby journalists only and the venue is already fuly booked. Even so, I ask, where will it be and when? She refuses to say because only lobby journalists are allowed to go and the venue is booked up. This is barmy.
So I call Oxford University's head of press. She tells me that there is a speech but that Downing Street has put out an operational note telling the university to send any requests to the Downing Street press office. I need to talk to them, she isn't allowed to tell me anything, she explains.
Democracy – or cabal?
At which point, I started wondering what exactly is going on with this country's democracy. Here we have a widely trailed speech by our leader about Britain's role in Europe and yet the only people that will ever hear it will be a select group. The people's representatives – the press – at this event comprise solely of the same individuals that follow every other niggle of Downing Street.
The potential for corruption in this system is enormous. The journalists that rely for their livelihood on close connections with Downing Street are the only people that are allowed to attend. These same people have already reported what is in the speech. Can we honestly expect an accurate reflection of what goes on and what is said?
These reporters – who are expected to cover every other business of Downing St – will sit and listen to the speech knowing full well how Downing St wants the speech to be relayed to the wider world. To divert from this remit will incur the displeasure of people that the reporter has to then go to every day for other stories. Is one small speech on the EU worth making their lives any harder?
This is a self-contained world.
And if your question is: so what? What is the great risk here? Well, you have to ask: why would Downing Street seek to protect this self-contained system by refusing outright to provide details unless it was in its own interests? The government is actively protecting this system of information control. While this may not matter some of the time, on this occasion it is doing so on an important speech that will given widespread public attention.
The answer, or rather excuse, given to this over-the-top secrecy is security. Tony Blair is undoubtedly a terrorist target thanks to the Iraq war. But the security argument is a convenient fallacy. I am a registered journalist and a UK citizen. I would have been perfectly willing to provide whatever details the authorities asked for in order to demonstrate my identity. But I wasn't asked, and I wasn't going to be asked. No one was welcome.
This isn't the only big question over security though – as the rest of the evening made clear. In fact I have come to the conclusion that this security has the direct effect of undermining our very democracy – but more of that later.
Touring Oxford
Being told you are not even allowed to know where an event is taking place or when, is pure anathema to someone like me. So I set off around Oxford.
Clearly Blair's arrival would be preceded by security. Plus, no doubt, the priviledged journalists in swish cars, and possibly European diplomats. So I noted down the most likely locations for a speech on Europe and embarked on a walk of Oxford. I figure if there was a heightened security presence on a building, or a series of Mercedes, Jaguars etc that I'd be on the right track.
The Oxford Union – the university's debating building – was very unlikely to be the location as news would have leaked by now that the prime minister was coming. But I strolled past it anyway. Nothing.
Equally, nothing on Broad St – where the Bodelian, Sheldonian and various colleges are – plus a vital car route into the centre of town. Nothing on Holywell Street. Longwall Street – which skirts town and connects up lots of colleges, including the Politics and International Affairs department – was more interesting.
There was certainly alot of middle-aged self-important men in flash cars zooming around. But then that is the Oxford University of the 2000s. Universities are now international “brands”and it's all about marketing and money. As such, under the new management at Oxford University, these flash wankers – for want of a more abusive description – have started sticking their nose in everywhere and riling the old Dons.
I checked out South Parks Road – where the university is building its controversial animal housing centre – and St Giles – the main street in and out of north Oxford. And the back of the high street – a cosy, quiet location leading to the back of more colleges. Nothing.
In the end, I realised that the speech must be at least after lunch and decided to head back home. But then I had a brainwave and called the local newspaper the Oxford Times. I was planning to get some shots of Tony Blair arriving today, I told the newsdesk – perfectly true – could it tell me where and when he'll be?
Fortunately Downing Street hadn't got to them and I finally found out the location – St Anthony's College on Woodstock Road at 5pm. St Anthony's has the European Studies centre, so I called up and asked if I could attend. I was told there were no spaces.
I've been to St Anthony's twice for student “bops” so I felt fairly confident that I could get a picture of him arriving, perhaps even yell a question.
As I cycled past The Randolph hotel at 4.20pm, I was immediately certain it was his car parked directly out front, with another car with security in. I thought of getting off and strolling into the hotel with my camera. But I wanted to get pics of him arriving at the venue – as evidence that he actually gave the speech – so I foolishly decided to cycle on to St Anthony's.
The place had a medium police presence. One police van on one side. About four police at the front. Another four on the side and about another six strolling around the neighbouring roads. There was no more than mild interest by passers-by.
Since everyone had been so up-tight about divulging details, I decided it best to stay out of sight. So I pitched myself behind a low wall that covered both the front and side entrances of the college where I could get some good snaps of him walking into the building. I moved to get a view of the road so I could see any cars arriving.
Around ten-to-five there was alot of bustle and men with earpieces strolling about so I prepared my camera – and nothing. Then at five o'clock I could hear the applause of the hall as Tony Blair's clearly entered.
It was freezing cold but annoyed that I've somehow missed him, I decided to go for a stroll around the college. At the very back are two fortified gates with four vans – two police, one BBC, and another which could have been media or police but had a satellite on top and loads of equipment inside.
This was the only place that I couldn't see from my vantage point so the prime minister must have entered here – which was odd as it was a small road and a small gate. So I went to the local pub, had a pint, and headed back to the back gate to sit and wait and this time make sure I get a picture as some kind of proof of this weird world.
More later…
