The Blogger Mister GuF: Fiercely Independent or Party Stooge?

Former Labour minister and party chair Ian McCartney tells a tale of a meeting with a schools careers master. Ian was an ambitious youth. Typically careers teachers go beyond miserable and pessimistic and consider "crushing" to be the best for all concerned. They told him he should become a joiner. And he did ... he joined the Labour Party. And he stuck with it.

Paul Staines has been quite a joiner too. Sometimes it appears as if he has been a member, an activist, a co-conspirator with most of the political entities that exist. A joiner but not a sticker. He has been a Conservative Futurist. But now he's apparently no more than a fellow traveller. He claims to be fiercely independent. And every now and then he slaps a tory ass, instead of a Labour one. Good cover.

But he's a Tory asset. And questions of his independence are important ones.

Now, I don't know the answers to the question I'm about to put. It is only a question. I'll not pre-judge it. But, I'll share my own thoughts on such a story as this one.

Supposing I was a blogger like Fawkes, inexplicably popular, with a billion readers every weekend, and all that goes with that. Not Labour any more after the unfortunate incident of the Jury team candidacy, but solidly committed to seeing the back of the Tory filth that were ruining the country. And fiddling or lyring as Rome burns.

Investigating a suspected Conservative plot to attack Labour people - not sanctioned from the top, just some boozy middle aged but not yet grown up ex-Conservative Future hacks acting alone let's say - and one of the conspirators - who was full of it but frankly did not know his RSS from his BeBo - had accidentally copied me in to the attack lines with several generations of call and response. Careless drunken ramblings probably. Pretty unlikely to ever see the light of day for argument's sake, but dynamite stuff. Even the thought crimes. What would I do?

I believe that my action ahead of any publication would be TO CHECK/NEGOTIATE WITH LABOUR PEOPLE WHICH NAMES AND WHICH ALLEGATIONS COULD BE SHARED (a) at all, for instance to provide a clue as to the enormity of it all with potential MSM publishers and (b) in the public domain.

I could DRIVE A HARD BARGAIN because I was somethingly independent. And being SHORT OF A FEW BOB I'd probably publish and be damned if they didn't co-operate. So they would. But I'd MAKE MORE MONEY and they'd GET MORE POLITICAL BANG if it was a joint effort.

Fawkes is not a monster. Well, he's a beer monster, and a drink-drive monster, and a tax-avoid monster, and weasel worder, sleazer, bankrupt and yada yada. But he's not a self-fragging grenadier who'd not take some measures to protect himself first, and his own side second.

Assuming this (Fawkes =/= Monster) to be correct I believe Fawkes'd probably do the same. Negotiate with the named parties or the Conservatives as an entity if the named parties gave them attorney. Negotiate on who should be named, and in connection with which alleged activities. If nothing else this "consent" would provide legal protection and also at least dampen the charge that Staines - or his partners - was himself doing the smearing.

This is why I think Nadine Dorries MP is a fool who has "gone to the danger" and that she would have little or no chance of a successful legal action as a result.

But following this through it would follow that the Tory politicians and connections who have been named by Fawkes and/or by those who procured the stories from him would have been consulted. They would have had the opportunity to influence the content, and the strategy, and "the grid" for the story. Rehearsing their response days, perhaps weeks ahead of publication.

MY QUESTION: Is Paul Staines fiercely independent or a party stooge?

Perhaps Paul Staines could now explain in detail his negotiations with the Conservative Party and with any and all of those individuals named in the Red Rag emails. Including but not limited to who he talked with, when he first talked with them, and whether the Conservatives (jointly and severally) took guidance from him on how the matter would be handled, or he took guidance from them?

Thanking him in advance for his co-operation.