The National Union of Journalists is staging a conference this week on how journalists should respond to the rise of the British National Party.

The far-right party’s recent successes in the European and council elections have posed a dilemma over how its activities should be reported.

While some editors have taken the view in the past that all publicity is good publicity, and that therefore ignoring them is the best option, others such as Paul Horrocks of the Manchester Evening News, have sought to confront the party’s ideas head-on.

Now the union is calling on its members to join the debate, beginning with an event at its London headquarters on Thursday evening.

“The BNP’s election victories have brought a new urgency to questions about how journalists should report fascists and racists,” said a statement on the union’s website.

“There is a danger that racist ideas that ten years ago would have been considered unacceptable could become part of the daily business of politics.”

One editor who has recently blogged about the dilemma is Keith Perch of the Leicester Mercury which has just seen the election of a BNP councillor on its patch in Coalville.

“Until now, we have mostly ignored them, but I sense that we have reached a tipping point and that it makes more sense now to challenge their policies and be sure that those voting for them know exactly what they are voting for,” he wrote.

“I blogged about this dilemna – to report or to ignore – previously and received a reasonable amount of feedback, almost all of which came down on the side of reporting, with the notable exception of someone employed full-time to worry about social cohesion who felt that it was still best to ignore.

“With the election of a BNP county councillor, we have decided that we cannot ignore the situation.”

Comments

Roy (16/06/2009 07:53:46)
Since when is it the NUJ’s job to ‘decide’ which views and ideas are acceptable or not? Do journalists have such little respect for the public that they now feel the need to abandon basic principles of fair reporting and regulate what the electorate can read?
This behaviour is disgraceful.

GBGONEMAD (16/06/2009 08:35:15)
Roy, you are right. The NUJ should be looking at journalists and photographers’ plight who are getting run into the ground on a daily basis.

Keith (16/06/2009 08:50:13)
I stopped buying newspapers about two years ago because I want to read honest unbiased reporting and not some unionised journalists doctored version of the news.
Nowadays all my news come from the tv and the internet and is taken with a heavy pinch of salt.

chris g (16/06/2009 09:01:42)
I get a bit fed up of the those pontificating about who the public should vote for. The whole point of democracy and free speech is that you should be able to have choice on who to vote for. I’m not a BNP supporter, but if the media and mainstream politicians continue to harp on about their racist ideas it will only draw people further to extremism. By all means challenge but don’t thrust your views on someone else. It causes wars and resentment.
http://www.plenty2say.com

john (16/06/2009 09:07:05)
The whole idea of journalists getting together to decide how to slant the reporting on the BNP brings to mind the soviet commissar holding a meeting on what the party line is to be on a particular subject. As an American who was close to several old school hard bitten San Francisco newsmen, the idea that these NUJ types should profane the air or the press with the obscenity of calling themselves news reporters boggles the imagination. A reporter as opposed to a propagandist, reports what his subject says accurately which is a concept none of theses marxist obscenities apparently have never heard of. Don’t worry though this article of your which you so boldly put in your trade journal will be wide spread. The BNP will make sure every British household gets a copy of this, because I have never seen a document that so incontrovertibly reveals your total lack of professional integrity.

Stan Mason (16/06/2009 09:14:54)
This is a disgrace. I can’t believe it’s happening in the UK. The NUJ is dictating how the news should be skewed. I also wonder why no journalists have spoken out about this attempt to undermine the democratic process. And while we’re at it – why does the NUJ have such contempt for the BNP? The Labour party lied to drag the UK into an illegal war which has cost the lives of over 500,000 people. How many people have died because of BNP policies? I can only assume the NUJ is OK with mass murder.

Onlooker (16/06/2009 09:17:52)
You wouldn’t hear a peep out of the NUJ if the BNP were an extremist left-wing organisation. Why ? Because much of the NUJ leadership harbours extreme left-wing views itself – one of the reasons I and many others tore up our union membership cards years ago. The NUJ has wasted so much of its members’ loyalty and goodwill oiver the years on pointless left-wing campaigns, that now – when it is genuinely needed to fight for its members – it is virtually toothless and discredited.

Joan Walters (16/06/2009 09:26:31)
How should journalists respond to the election of BNP councillors and MEPs? Answer: with the current wet liberal, Marxist mind set of journalists, you cannot. The pro multicultural, pro multiracial, pro “everything unBritish” ethos of the media means that all of you are incapable of dealing professionally and fairly with BNP MEPS, AMs, councillors, officials or even ordinary members. It’s in your genes, that’s why you have become journalists and not taken proper jobs. Don’t worry, the dole queue beckons for many print hacks as advertising revenues diminish and papers fold – BNP journalists will start to rise and take hold in the new digital media, you lot are finished. You have upset far too many readers with your vile rhetoric and biased reports.

Fatsod (16/06/2009 10:01:40)
Strange this. First of all, I fail to understand how the BNP is a far right organisation, bearing in mind their socialist credentials on their website, even the ‘send them back’ part is evocative of Old Labour. As for racists and bigots, I hardly think a bawhair off 1 million voters can be described as such, and that amount cannot be written off as a lunatic fringe either.
As for the NUJ, well they should be able to report objectively, but I daresay they will not.

Karl Chappell (16/06/2009 10:15:38)
Why should these so called editors be able to vent their own personal message of hatred just because they have the power of print behind them. I would have thought editors would be more suited to the job if they did not let their political leanings interfere with fair reporting.

CD (16/06/2009 10:20:56)
You guys, you crack me up. one minute you’re complaining about the ‘Marxist mindset of journalists’, the next you’re saying how socialist and Old Labour you are. Make up your minds, will you?
Hitler had some nice socialist, anti-corporate ideas, didn’t he? And how did that one turn out again? Oh, in a big holocaust. Though you might not have heard about that as you seem to think it’s “a total lie” (quote: Nick Griffin): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6X8QQwU00Jk

Colin Cox (16/06/2009 10:35:23)
It is simple for anyone to discover the truth about the total bias of news reporting. Simply search BNP in a news search engine and you will have great difficulty in finding an unbiased balanced article about the BNP.
Why are our opponents so affraid of us and why are they so affraid of letting the individual decide for themselves? They feel the need to dictate to the people how to vote. Wake up Britain and decide for yourself!

lee (16/06/2009 10:58:15)
Will the NUJ also apply this rule to Marxists and other far left types?

Mark (16/06/2009 11:49:39)
narc
and CD are typical of the intolerant, narrow-minded left/liberal bigots who run our society. Anyone who deviates from the state ideology is automatically a Nazi and their views must be suppressed. To all these intolerant types I say – are your views so empty of logic and facts that the only way you can win an argument is by suppressing the opposition?

Rhory Fraser (16/06/2009 11:50:58)
As a former journalist, I am ashamed at the grotesque bias of the coverage of the BNP. 1m people voted for the party because they are sick of the effective omerta on the subject of mass immigration.
If the State-funded Trotskyists of the so-called ‘Unite Against Fascism’ ever dared to stand under their own banner, how many votes would they garner?
It is called democracy and the only political party undermining that process with its funding of egg-throwing anti-democrats like the UAF, is the Labour Party.
I am not able to use my real name on this article for fear of reprisals from the militant left.
Holdthefrontpage is attacking the wrong people

CD (16/06/2009 11:57:29)
Oh, and cheers Mark, I’m absolutely delighted – you’ve just proved my point completely. You’ve done the typical BNP thing of accusing anyone who disagrees with you as left wing. That narrow-minded view just shows your black or white (if you’ll pardon the expression) outlook of the world. So thanks for that – keep on spouting that rhetoric and do my job for me.
Perhaps you think the British Legion are a bunch of liberal bigots too?

Alan (16/06/2009 13:10:44)
I look forward to how you plan to deal with the ‘Fall of the Labour Party’! All you are doing is contributing to the journalists who are out of work – newspapers are closing – why? because people can’t trust you any more!

Mike Giggler (16/06/2009 13:13:30)
Surely the BNP aren’t as black as their painted?

Mike Giggler (16/06/2009 13:28:16)
Affraid? Oh no, the Gruniard are here!!

CD (16/06/2009 13:32:41)
Hey, I was quoting them verbatim, spelling error and all. I wouldn’t want to misquote the BNP and change their message in any way, would I? That would just be biased.

FAST WOMAN (16/06/2009 13:59:41)
Giggler: ‘Surely the BNP aren’t as black as their painted?’
It’s they’re, NOT their. Much worse than affraid, I’m afraid.
Memo to self: you’ve got to stop subbing the comments on this site.

Claire (16/06/2009 14:02:44)
With more and more of the British population becoming disillusioned with politics at the minute, maybe this could be an opportunity to focus on and simplfy the policies of ALL political parties. Think of it as a campaign to get voters back to the ballot box, while ensuring they know exactly what they are voting for.

Arthur (16/06/2009 15:03:58)
Just like Stalin eh, you loony lefty fascist freaks!
Twenty million murdered in the gulags and torture chambers invented by Lenin.
How many did Mao do? Pol Pot etc?
The truth is ‘waysist’ is it?
Well ok, we’re all ‘waysists’ now!
And? ……..

Angharad (16/06/2009 15:13:53)
Challenge BNP policies, you say.
Well, yes, lets do that.
Here they are for all the world to see:
www.bnp.org.uk/policies/
Go for it.
Then lets examine the NUJ’s policies.
By the by, I don’t remember the NUJ standing for election. Perhaps the ballot forms were so long and folded up that people couldn’t find them. Like Eukrap.

Peter Wesley (16/06/2009 15:29:56)
This is a typical example of the hypocrisy of the white liberal establishment as it struggles to keep a lid on its own latent racism by projecting it onto the white working class.

Lickyalips (16/06/2009 15:35:15)
Does anybody else see the irony of the NUJ acting like the fascists they accuse the BNP of being?
Since when has democracy been subject to their approval and on their terms only.
Must be something to do with the treasonable ‘Common Purpose’ Marxist ideology factory.

CD (16/06/2009 15:47:50)
Guess what? In a roundabout way, Angharad makes a genuinely good point. How should the media treat the BNP? By doing exactly what’s mooted – challenging and analysing the BNP’s policies. Just like they’ve done here: http://www.bloggerheads.com/archives/2009/06/fisking_the_bnp.asp#comments
I’m sure the Great British public will make up their minds once and for all once they really know what they’re voting for.
By the way, probably best not to go to the BNP website directly, otherwise you’ll just end up as another statistic in dear old Nick’s propaganda machine when he rabbits on about how many people have visited it, as though everyone who goes there actually agrees with what’s being said.