British ambassador's 1969 letter and The Irish Times

Madam - May I apologise for certain remarks I made about your newspaper on Newstalk 106 on Monday evening?

Madam - May I apologise for certain remarks I made about your newspaper on Newstalk 106 on Monday evening?

Madam - May I apologise for certain remarks I made about your newspaper on Newstalk 106 on Monday evening?

I was wrong to say that The Irish Times had not published any of the allegations made in 1969 by the then British ambassador, Sir Andrew Gilchrist, about a conversation he had with your paper's former chairman and current president for life, Major Thomas McDowell.

I now know that the substance of these allegations was carried by your paper on January 27th, 2003 in a story headlined "Major McDowell rejects UK envoy's claim".

READ MORE

As a teacher of journalism students I stress the importance of factual accuracy, so I am embarrassed by having made such a mistake.

That said, however, I stand by my belief that The Irish Times's record in this matter is hardly beyond criticism. When Gilchrist's letter was released by the British Public Record Office in January 2000, the paper was guilty of self-censorship by failing to publish its contents, especially the claim that Major McDowell referred to his editor at the time, Douglas Gageby, as a "white nigger", and that he was happy for Downing Street to direct or, at least, influence your paper's coverage of the North. Surely this was of importance to your staff and readers.

These sensitive claims remained secret until discovered by Jack Lane of the Aubane Historical Society three years later. He reported his discovery to you, but nothing appeared until the allegations in the Gilchrist letter finally appeared in the Sunday Independent. Next day, you then published the McDowell denial story mentioned above which, in the light of the previous cover-up, was surely an inappropriate way to report the matter.

The implication of the blanket denials is that the ambassador was lying to his chiefs at the British Foreign Office and the matter can therefore hardly be said to have been resolved to anyone's satisfaction.

I have long been an admirer of The Irish Times and, in my capacity as a media commentator, I have often made public statements which hailed your paper as one of Europe's best. But I have to say that this episode has stunned me.

By any objective journalistic criteria, the involvement of a newspaper controller in affairs of state, especially in talks with the representatives of a foreign country, required much greater candour from a paper of record. - Yours, etc.,

ROY GREENSLADE,

Ramelton,

Co Donegal.

Madam, - I would like to correct a possibly unintentional error in a letter from David Alvey, publisher of the Irish Political Review (April 19th).

Mr Alvey wrote that a letter in 1969 from the British Ambassador to a Whitehall official concerning the then owner of The Irish Times, Major Thomas McDowell, was "released into the public domain in 2003". In fact the letter was released into the public domain in the British Public Records Office in January 2000. It would be correct to say that that it was first published in 2003 in the Irish Political Review.

The Irish Times apparently deliberately ignored this letter. The Irish Times published a story on other letters in the PRO file concerning the ambassador and Major McDowell in January 2000. The letter that was suppressed contained racist references, attributed to Major McDowell, directed at a former editor of The Irish Times, Douglas Gageby, and contained a request from Major McDowell for guidance from 10 Downing Street on editorial control of The Irish Times. Gageby was referred to as a "renegade or white nigger".

After attention was drawn to the letter in the Sunday Independent in late January 2003, The Irish Times responded once and once only with an anonymous article that attempted to kill off interest in the story. Further discussion was, it would appear, closed off.

The censored letter is reproduced on Indymedia.ie. The Irish Times has yet to adequately discuss the import of the letter and, more seriously, explain why disclosure of the letter was suppressed in January 2000.

Readers of Ireland's newspaper of record demand answers. - Yours, etc.,

NIALL MEEHAN,

Offaly Road,

Dublin 7.

The contents of the letter in question were published in The Irish Times on January 27th, 2003, as soon as its existence was drawn to my attention. - Ed., IT.