The mystery of a vanishing story about Boris Johnson’s wife once again confirms the fusion between the political and media classes distorting British democracy, according to Hardeep Matharu

Another scandal made headlines this weekend – or did it?

The ‘Carriegate’ case was the story that apparently wasn’t.

The revelation by The temperature that Boris Johnson wanted to appoint his then mistress Carrie Symonds to a £100,000-a-year chief of staff job when he was Foreign Secretary was quite the scoop.

Published in early editions of his Saturday newspaper, Simon Walters’ story relied on claims first appearing in the biography of the current Prime Minister’s wife by his Tory counterpart Lord Ashcroft – but backed them up with three other sources. MailOnline followed suit and published an article based on The temperature room. But then the story disappeared.

It was not printed in later editions of The temperature or on its website and the MailOnline the article also disappeared. No explanation of where he went was offered by either editor, while Walters told the New European that he was sticking to the story. A spokesperson for Carrie Johnson later told the Guardian that the claims were “completely untrue” – but that did not explain why an official disclaimer had not been provided to Walters before publication when he requested it.

The exact details of what happened may remain a mystery, but not the symbiotic relationship between Boris Johnson and the country’s most influential press barons.

As Brian Cathcart has repeatedly observed in these pages, in recent years Britain has seen the culmination of a merger between its political and media classes.

‘Bungs’ for BillionairesDominic Cummings exposes Johnson’s Cash for Content scandal

Adam Bienkov, Sam Bright and Brian Cathcart

Spearheading the Vote Leave ‘revolution’, Boris Johnson and Michael Gove – rumored to be planning to take over as CEO The temperature according Signing time columnist Peter Oborne – are the journalist-politicians who have been propelled to power largely thanks to the support of their friends in the right-wing press.

Having made it all the way to Downing Street, all of their social and professional media connections paid off. They, in turn, generously paid for that loyalty.

Dominic Cummings recently confirmed just one example.

Tweeting that Johnson had personally negotiated ‘COVID bungs’ for struggling newspaper titles during the pandemic – which he says were later disguised as ‘subsidies’ – the former chief adviser to the Prime Minister spilled a story Signing time reported two years earlier. Of no interest to anyone in the established media.

Despite this newspaper’s attempts to find out, we still don’t know how many millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money went to the newspapers. What we do know is that the same newspapers that received the money were largely supportive of an administration that was mired in levels of scandal and corruption unprecedented in modern British political history.

This raises the question: do we have a free press or a paid press?

Following Cummings’ tweets, I contacted the editor of a reputable online publication that is not generally considered to be part of the circle of “mainstream” titles, to publish an article explaining why the rest of the media had remained silent on Johnson’s bungs for the billionaire. press barons and how such a close relationship between the media and the press remains dangerous for our democracy. I did not get any answer.

But the lockdown-breaking holiday ‘Partygate’ scandal in Downing Street has shown that the press can hold power to account – whenever it wants. Whereas ITV News and the Mirror conducted this reporting, the ensuing investigations and the ramifications for Johnson’s government with the public meant he could not simply be ignored by right-wing headlines or broadcasters such as the BBC. But Partygate was not the first, and arguably the most egregious, of this administration’s scandals.

Whether it’s the economic costs of Britain’s hard Brexit; the government’s “herd immunity” approach at the start of the coronavirus crisis; Russian interference in the UK; or the oligarchic cronyism displayed around donations, contracts and access – so many big issues are not properly exposed by influential elements of the established press because it is not in the government’s interest to do so. TO DO. The interests of the government are the interests of these newspapers. Even though they claim that everything they do is motivated by the public interest and, in the name of freedom of the press, they go completely unnoticed.

What Carriegate has simply confirmed is the enormous influence these newspapers have on what we as citizens do and don’t find out about our government.

And when they decide that keeping the Prime Minister in power is no longer mutually beneficial to them, he will be sent. Whether it’s because of a new scandal they’ve picked up for the occasion or because his day-to-day leadership failures come to a head with the public. And Johnson will accept it.

Because, as Carriegate has shown: scratching your back is a normal day at the office for the Prime Minister and his hacks.

OUR JOURNALISM DEPENDS ON YOU

Signing time is funded by its subscribers. Receive our monthly print edition and help support independent, fearless journalism.