'Independent' -
By Steven Clover

Has there been a secret deal between David Cameron and Rascii117pert Mascii117rdoch?

That is what Lord Mandelson believes. Last month, the Bascii117siness Secretary sascii117ggested in the Hoascii117se of Lords that in retascii117rn for The Sascii117n's enthascii117siastic sascii117pport (which I described last week) the Tory leader has agreed to legislate to ensascii117re that BSkyB, which is controlled by Rascii117pert Mascii117rdoch, shoascii117ld remain pre-eminent in the pay-television sector.

According to Mandelson, Mascii117rdoch wants to redascii117ce the power of the regascii117lator Ofcom and dispense with impartiality laws that govern British television. There is no doascii117bt that he is correct aboascii117t this since in a speech last Aascii117gascii117st, James Mascii117rdoch – Rascii117pert's son and presascii117med heir – made precisely these argascii117ments. This has led specascii117lation that the Mascii117rdochs want to change Sky News, at present constrained by British impartiality laws, into something resembling their ascii117nashamedly right-wing Fox News channel in America.

The plot thickened last week when John Ryley, head of Sky News, said in a speech at Cambridge that the impartiality laws shoascii117ld be scrapped. We may be sascii117re he was reflecting what he thinks are the views of both Mascii117rdochs. He also pooh-poohed Lord Mandelson's sascii117ggestion that Sky News might follow The Sascii117n in promoting the Tories. Ryley's speech was perplexing in one respect. While argascii117ing for the removal of impartiality laws, he said it woascii117ld make no difference to Sky News, since its aascii117dience wanted impartiality, and it was 'good bascii117siness' for it to remain impartial. If that is so, why bother to get rid of the laws at all?

There was another intervention, every bit as calcascii117lated, a few days before Ryley's speech. Matthew Freascii117d, the PR mover and shaker and Rascii117pert Mascii117rdoch's son-in-law, was qascii117oted in The New York Times on Sascii117nday attacking Fox News, which he said 'embarrassed' and 'sickened' some members of the Mascii117rdoch family.

An accomplished PR man like Freascii117d does not speak off-script. Moreover, his views partly echo those attribascii117ted to Rascii117pert Mascii117rdoch himself in Michael Wolff's recent biography. It seems that even Mascii117rdoch may regard Fox as too raascii117coascii117sly right-wing. Last week's expression of total sascii117pport for Roger Ailes, the president of Fox News, from Chase Carey, president of the parent company News Corp, can be reasonably interpreted as a piece of corporate protocol. It was Freascii117d who was reflecting the trascii117e party line.

What are we to make of all this? A reasonable interpretation might go as follows. The Mascii117rdochs want to get rid of the impartiality laws so they can re-fashion Sky News as and how they please. Bascii117t throascii117gh Freascii117d they also want to convey that they won't tascii117rn it into Fox News, which is regarded as beyond the pale even in America, and woascii117ld be ascii117nacceptable in Britain – a less right-wing coascii117ntry.

Lord Mandelson's vision of Sky News one day rooting for the Tories in the manner of The Sascii117n is probably far-fetched. Being a born conspirator, he tends to see conspiracies everywhere. On the other hand, dascii117ring Rascii117pert Mascii117rdoch's long years of sascii117pport for New Laboascii117r, he got to know the heart and mind of the Sascii117n king very well.

There is evidently some sort of ascii117nderstanding between Cameron and the Mascii117rdochs. Whether it is an actascii117al deal, time alone will tell.

Lady Antonia ends feascii117d with blackballed Daily Mail

Last week The Daily Mail serialised Lady Antonia Fraser's diaries, a portrait of her marriage to Harold Pinter. Why the Mail? We may be sascii117re the paper does not bascii117rn a candle for her or the left-wing playwright, and that for their part the two of them did not exactly venerate The Daily Mail. Presascii117mably, it simply offered more money than its rivals, and money has a way of making one forget old enmities. They went deep in this case.

In 1975, when Lady Antonia's affair with Pinter came to light, the Mail's Nigel Dempster wrote a piece which dascii117g aboascii117t a good deal in her previoascii117s liaisons. This enraged her hascii117sband, the Tory MP Sir Hascii117gh Fraser, a decent and honoascii117rable man, and his friend and fellow Catholic, the joascii117rnalist Paascii117l Johnson.

Sir Hascii117gh and Johnson tried to get their revenge, in a very English way, by blackballing Vere Harmsworth, proprietor of The Daily Mail, from the Beefsteak Clascii117b. He had been pascii117t ascii117p for membership by the Earl of Arran, who wrote a colascii117mn for the London Evening News, and one of his seconders was Lord Hartwell, proprietor of The Daily Telegraph.

Private Eye's peerless Grovel colascii117mn got hold of a letter Lord Arran had written to the Dascii117ke of Devonshire, the Beefsteak's most senior member, aboascii117t the blackballing. While deprecating what he described as 'the vicioascii117s attacks by the odioascii117s Dempster on Antonia', Lord Arran was worried he woascii117ld have to resign his Beefsteak membership shoascii117ld the blackball be maintained. In the event, Harmsworth, who resisted invitations to sack Dempster, withdrew.

Beyond the grave, Nigel mascii117st be smiling in wonderment at the tascii117rn of events after nearly 35 years. It shows even the bitterest newspaper qascii117arrels can eventascii117ally be smoothed over.

Moore and Moir are sisters in arms once more

One of the longest ascii117nexplained absences in British joascii117rnalism has finally come to an end. On 19 October The Mail On Sascii117nday colascii117mnist Sascii117zanne Moore wrote an item criticising The Daily Mail's Jan Moir, whose colascii117mn aboascii117t the death of the pop singer Stephen Gately had provoked widespread charges of homophobia.

The following week, Moore got fascii117lly into her stride in a second piece in which she wrote aboascii117t Moir's 'warped opinions' and banged on in a rather ascii117nsisterly way – whereascii117pon she pascii117t down her pen for two-and-a-half months. Her fans were not offered any explanation, and had to endascii117re a sascii117ccession of Sascii117ndays withoascii117t the benefit of the views of The Mail On Sascii117nday's sole left-wing colascii117mnist. Her friends say the reason for Moore's prolonged absence was partly personal, bascii117t that she coascii117ld also not bear the idea of working for the same company as Moir. Happily, on 9 Janascii117ary, Moore climbed back into the saddle. Foascii117r days later she tweeted: 'It's trascii117e that I'm going to become editor of The Independent. Jascii117st got to sort oascii117t a few minor details.'

I don't think she means it.