Talk:John Kampfner

The article needs to be rewritten in toto... it is basically a poorly written jab at Kampfner... not all well documented. Even the first few paragraph lack cohesion or logic...

I hope that is OK to do a major reshuffle and axing of silly material.

Paulo

yes, it's ok. but let's all be careful about criticising each others work. This page certainly needed work and you have contributed to that. I think we need to try and adopt an approach which encourages people to contributs and where we are all respectful of each others contributions.

OK?

--David 15:14, 2 September 2007 (BST)

Removed sections

Unable to locate this in the source…

Much of his work for Editorial Intelligence has been to tell us how great other people in Editorial Intelligence are.

source not available

One decorative use of this – was the Foreign Policy Centre (FPC), which has close ties to the intelligence services, is funded by mercenary companies (working in Iraq) and is largely pro-war and pro-government. Kampfner joined with John Lloyd and Stephen Twigg to reinforce the FPC's line at the Fabian Society's "Britishness" Conference.

source no longer available

Note that the New Statesman was a former Hobsbawm Macaulay Communications client The NS has described Editorial Intelligence as a small, self-referential clique comprised of press, TV, public relations, publishing and politics clones.

Removed for just now

Kampfner is only mentioned very briefly in the source… might be worth considering if we want to keep this bit. If yes, then this piece could do with a bit of reworking/rewording (including referencing)…

This came after a bit of a falling out over Lloyd's promotion of the wholesale adoption of neo-conservatism. Part of the gymnastics of those mysterious commentators who claim to be left-wing but hold no discernible left-wing views are that after their somersaults they must land on the side of whoever holds the reins of power.

Parts of this piece don’t appear to be substantiated by the sources. It could also do with a bit of clarification (ie making clear what it is that this part is trying to convey)

Although he has written on the news management of the Iraq war by the US and UK, in reviews Kampfner uncritically promotes both the FPC and the Centre for European Reform (CER) – both run by Mark Leonard and both of which are, amongst other things, engaged in "public diplomacy". The CER's Charles Grant returns the reviewing favours by praising Kampfner in Prospect magazine. Here we read some of the mildest rebukes of Blair and indeed Mr. Bush to be committed to paper:

George Bush often displays a similarly Manichean worldview, which may be why the two men get on as well as they do. Both Bush and Blair are instinctive politicians who attach great importance to personal relationships.

Kampfner and Leonard trade favours by reviewing each others' books in the NS or the CER respectively. You can even catch Leonard and Kampfner doing the rounds at Jewish Book Week

This sentence needs referenced

Kampfer has often repeated the notion that Gordon Brown is some kind of left-wing Saviour, or measurably different, and that things, once again, can only get better.

whilst this might be the case… I’ve removed this bit for now as it is along the lines of opinion & speculation(re the bit at the end) and the quotes draw more heavily on the interviewees views rather than Kampfners

In several respects his work is a pointless read – soft left without a critical edge. Here is the last paragraph of an interview with Patricia Hewitt:

"The leadership that both Tony Blair and Gordon Brown have been giving on these global issues, but now with Tony in particular around terrorism and the relationship between Islam and Muslim communities and the rest of the world, that leadership is superb." One thing Patricia Hewitt cannot be accused of is failing to see the bright side.

There is not much else to the piece. He doesn’t pose any challenging questions.

Here is the end of his interview with Gordon Brown:

"It is strange when politicians urge protesters to urge the politicians to do more, but that is the state of play as Gleneagles approaches. Brown heaps praise on Oxfam, Christian Aid, other non-governmental organisations and church groups, and – inevitably – Bono and Bob Geldof. He welcomes the forthcoming marches in Edinburgh and elsewhere, urging that they must be "properly stewarded" to ensure that "nothing happens which prevents us from focusing on the issues". And he says: "Already what people have done and said outside mainstream political activity has made a huge difference. The changes wouldn't have happened without the dialogue with NGOs. Millions of people have now taken up the issue. The challenge for Gleneagles is to build on what's happened so far."

The "interview" with Brown is better described as an opportunity for Brown to state his position without being challenged. The last paragraph of an 'interview' with David Miliband:

There is something endearingly timeless about his politics. I suggest that, unlike many around Blair circa 1997, Miliband could not have been accused of trying to be fashionable. "I don't think I've ever been accused of being faddish," he says. "I'm more Marks & Spencer than Ted Baker."

Kampfner's literary agent's website suggests one possible reason why Kampfner's is so friendly:

On return to London, he joined the masonic world of the political lobby at Westminster, first as Chief Political Correspondent of the Financial Times and then as political correspondent and analyst for the BBC Today programme.

The Lobby Rules effectively prevent journalistic objectivity. The trade off for access doesn't seem to be worth it for the reader: it's a living for Kampfner, but it may help to inhibit a critical stance.

Unable to locate source for this bit

The process whereby Kampfner can imagine that (again along with Leonard etc.) fronting something like the Progress "national conference" introduced by the Tony Blair MP and the Peter Hain isn't the establishment is part and parcel of Kampfner's mind set:

These quotes are taken from copyrighted material which explicitly states that permission must be sought

January 2005, Power for a Purpose, a NS Special Issue by Kampfner and Peter Wilby:

"As Tony Blair headed for a third election victory as Labour Party leader, John Kampfner and Peter Wilby "in a comradely spirit, offer him a draft manifesto, Power for a Purpose, designed to transform him into a proper social democrat while keeping his party in office."

The presentation has a long list of bullet points, but the reality is that it was put together from the usual sources, as revealed by this sentence at the very end of the article:

"Thanks to the Institute for Public Policy Research, Social Market Foundation, Fabian Society and Demos for assistance."

Kampfner’s involvement with the Fabian Soc is included on his page… I’ve taken this bit out as I think that to say he’s part of a clique needs more substantiation than his taking part at an event. He’s also no longer with EI

Kampfner is part of a slightly larger clique than EI, such as this gathering at The Fabian Society:

"Tim Garton Ash, Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, Ed Balls, Hazel Blears, Shami Chakrabarti, Nick Cohen, John Denham, David Edgar, David Goodhart, Tristram Hunt, Tessa Jowell, John Kampfner, Jude Kelly, Sadiq Khan, David Lammy, John Lloyd, Gordon Marsden, Shahid Malik, Ed Miliband, Fuad Nahdi, Tom Nairn, Trevor Phillips, Tariq Ramadan, Sir Iqbal Sacranie, Zia Sardar, Ben Summerskill, Gisela Stuart, Stephen Twigg, and more..."

this bit needs some clarification of what it’s trying to convey & how it’s being backed up from the sources

Kampfner's position's are usually parallel to those of the aforementioned public policy New Labour think tanks. But this goes both ways, e.g, the NS's "Edge Upstarts", "KnowledgeBase" launched in 2006, in which the principals of Demos, a number of social entrepreneurs and venture philanthropists and Kampfner were judges.

"It will be a database of information for anyone in the social enterprise or practical learning sectors – and something to which anyone will be able to contribute."

1st sentence needs backed up/referenced and Big Issue bit needs a reference too & how does it link in? Info about Leadbetter might be moved to his own page

Kampfner has ensured that the New Statesman has lent itself to propagate the statements, host conferences, stage competitions, and provide a platform for the "Third way" think tanks, and politicians. Kampfner's fellow judges are Garry Hawkes the former chairman and chief executive of Gardner Merchant and director general of Sodexho Group , Nigel Kershaw of The Big Issue, "a leading social entrepreneur and advocate of social enterprises that offer business solutions to social problems" . The blurb also notes that "In 2005, The Big Issue's UK editions generated £12m in cover sales with around £7m going directly to homeless and vulnerably housed vendors." Spot the discrepancy there. Charles Leadbetter of Demos is also part of the jury and is introduced as "one of the world's leading authorities on innovation and creativity in organisations". This is the same self-serving introduction used by Leadbetter found elsewhere .

This bit needs referenced & substantiated/clarified (as it stands it appears to imply that Billy Bragg, Red Pepper, War on Want and others should also be considered indistinguishable from the right?)

Just as the meaning of the word "scoured" is traduced above, Kampfner is part of the "the centre" which is basically indistinguishable from the right. This is all too apparent in a conference, organised by Compass, which argues it has:

"speakers from a wide range of political opinions – including government ministers – such as Ed Balls MP, Derek Simpson of Amicus, Helena Kennedy MP, Jonathon Porritt, Hazel Blears MP, Stephen Twigg MP, Richard Sennett, Shami Chakrabarti of Liberty, Greg Dyke, Neal Lawson, Polly Toynbee, Jon Trickett MP, John Harris, Billy Bragg, Oona King, John Kampfner and Fiona Millar who'll be joined by ministers, MPs, trade unionists and leading figures from across the democratic left and the wider progressive community."

And,

The organisations it involved include The Fabian Society, Renewal, Tribune, New Politics Network, The Co-operative Party, NUT, Electoral Reform Society, Age Concern, Liberty, Green Alliance, Amicus, Red Pepper, Shelter, Make Votes Count, IPPR, Soundings, Friends of the Earth, New Statesman, Unions 21, Citizenship Foundation, nef (new economics foundation), POWER, Centre for European Reform, Forum for the Future, Foreign Policy Centre, Fawcett Society, Demos, Centre for Global Governance, Young Foundation, and War on Want.

Kampfner’s quote needs a source/ref & argument that book isn’t critical could do with strengthening/elaboration (or is it a quote? If so needs a source)

The book doesn’t take a critical stance, and it actually imputes pure motives to Blair. Kampfner states that Blair "acted in good faith", which also happens to be the position of the FPC.