139: Page 94 LIVE

In a world-first live show broadcast from the Cambridge Literary Festival, the team answer all the most pressing questions about Private Eye. Is there a future for print? Which cover caused most cancellations? Which of Ian's fallen enemies does he secretly miss? And much more. 

Episode Transcript

Maisie (00:00):
Page 94, the Private Eye Podcast

Andy (00:03):
Hello, and welcome to another episode of Page 94.
My name is Andrew Hunter Murray, andthis is a very exciting, rather special
episode of page 94 for us because for thefirst time in the many years that this
podcast has been in production, we havegone live, we've gone electric, we've
gone to the Cambridge Literary Festival.
this is a recording of a show that weput on at the Cambridge Literary Festival

(00:25):
about a week ago, and it's a formatthat we call.... Many questions, which
is definitely legally safe and won'tbaroque any, copyright claims against us.
So these are questionsthat, the audience sent in.
These are questions that camein, the room on the night.
These are questions that frankly,we've always wanted to be asked, and
we were disappointed nobody else had.
So it's me.
It's Adam McQueen.
It's Helen Lewis.
It's Ian Hislop.

(00:46):
We started off by asking Ian, theeditor, how he thinks the first year
of the labor government is going.
Take it away, Ian.

Ian (00:54):
There was a very brief honeymoon period and we thought to start with,
'cause the comic device for, the late.
Tory Governments was theWhatsApp group in which they were
incredibly rude about each other.
And we thought this was abrilliant bit of fiction.
And then the Covid inquiry revealedthat this was just documentary.
and this is how government's now done.
So we thought, oh, we'll keep thesame device and see if it works.

(01:17):
And then immediately you findout that, this Labour Cabinet
works by WhatsApp group.
and the actual meetingsare equally, equally toxic.

Helen (01:28):
Everybody's on what?
So Robert Genrich added everyonein his entire phone book, basically
to a WhatsApp group this week.
Yes.
Did you read the story?
Why was this?
pure supposition because he wantedto do some leadership plotting and
hit the wrong button, I presume.
Okay.
And was like, delete, delete, But thenSarai Vine, equally male co on Sunday
columnist, male columnist starteda huge WhatsApp group with all of

(01:49):
her media chums for her book launch.
And then about five of them havealready got columns out of it.
If you see this, it's extraordinary.
It's like what would happen if youadded everybody who has a newspaper
column to the say WhatsApp group?
They'd all get a column out of it.
We've just found this sort ofperpetual motion like machine
for British journalism.
Oh, great.
I don't think there's

Adam (02:05):
anything more humiliating than being publicly revealed
as one of Robert Jen's mate

Andy (02:10):
awful fee for libel, great libel case.
He claimed it was a ma. He isrunning the London Marathon.
He claimed he

Ian (02:16):
is and he said he, he had to contact all these people because
he was trying to raise money forcharity, which the Conservative
party is now technically a charity.
but, I think, he's doingit for the greater good.
No, I don't.

Andy (02:32):
Okay, so mixed report card, it sounds it's very early.
I should, I just wanna, do a little,devil's advocate thing there.
It's extremely early and God, itfeels like a long time isn't I know.
It does.

Adam (02:43):
Trump's been in three months.
That feels like alifetime now, doesn't it?
Yes.
It is a sentence for me.
Yeah.

Helen (02:50):
Yes.
I think the balance argument isthat whoever got in would've faced
a really tough puzzle, right?
Of the fact that there areintractable problems with the economy.
We just had a very high wave immigration,the Boris wave, which is traditionally
what politicians have done when theywant to juice the economy a bit.
But it doesn't seem to have doneeverything that there was hoped to be.
So you've got the situation in whichpeople are both grumpy about the

(03:12):
high immigration, but also grumpyabout the lack of economic growth.
And, that would've beena problem whoever won

Ian (03:18):
right.

Helen (03:18):
That last election.

Ian (03:19):
Yeah.
But the, whoever won might have beenslightly better at politics than secure.

Helen (03:24):
A harsh but fair judgment on No,

Ian (03:27):
I'm, not trying to be harsh.
It just seems to be that.
Some of the things that he did,many people could have said,
why don't you not do that?

Helen (03:35):
I mean, I

Ian (03:36):
think that the winter fuel allowance, I'm just guessing I'm
not an expert, but maybe don't startwith punching tensioners in the face.

Andy (03:42):
Yeah.
Save that one for build up to it.
Yeah.

Applause (03:44):
Yeah.

Andy (03:45):
okay.
I think, unless anyone has moreon that, I'd love to move on to
our next question 'cause we've gotso many questions to get through.
Yes.
Format is many questions.
this one's a bit more ofan Irish one actually.
it's, are you still being sued?
And if not, why not?
Because Ian, you have a reputation as themost sued man in British legal history.
Yes.
But there seemed to have beenfewer huge court cases recently.

(04:07):
are you doing something wrong here?

Helen (04:11):
have you, mellowed?

Ian (04:12):
Yes.
No.
they did change the libel laws, largelyas a result of a number of spectacular.
Cases, all of which I lost.
the guidance over libel change completely.
in the old days, public bodiesand councils, you could sue
and get your employer to pay.
fire chiefs did it.
Policemen did it.
Local councils did itpolitic, everybody did it.

(04:34):
Because there was no risk to youthat changed suddenly, people's
reputations weren't quite sovaluable to them after all.
so the numbers went down there.
Then they changed the sentencingguidance after a brilliant case
involving private eye losingagainst the wife of a serial killer.
other people tended to loseagainst, celebrities, people
like we lost to Sonya Sutcliffe.

(04:56):
but the rules were changedafter that because.
If the juries were just coming upwith absolutely bonkers figures.
then the internet happened,which again, was news to me.

Adam (05:08):
he's talking about two weeks ago as well.

Ian (05:10):
But essentially it means everybody is libeling each other all the time online.
and the whole climate changed.
publications, having, been givenmore license by the changes in the
law, were just way behind the plot.
Everybody else online, wasessentially being unpleasant
to each other all the time.
So our main problemsnowadays are confidentiality.

(05:31):
Any deal involving a public body andthe government, it's confidential.
They can't possibly tell you anythingabout it, so you can't get through there.
privacy, anything about anindividual, it's private, so
you're not allowed to know that.
and anything otherwise.
Interesting.
There's usually a court order on, lastyear we spent vast amount of money
challenging draconian orders about Lucy.

(05:53):
Let me, and about nine months later,finally we were allowed to actually print,
something about what the experts had said.
Or rather hadn't said in court.
So we are still wasting ahuge amount of your money.
I want to make that absolutely clear.
if you are a subscriber or you're a buyer,but it's less fighting it in the court.

(06:14):
those days sadly, have gone

Adam (06:16):
how much of your time is spent negotiating?
'cause a lot of it's moved toahead of publication, hasn't it?
Yeah.
And how much, what conversations do youhave with the lawyer are ahead of time?
How much notice you takeof what the lawyer says.

Ian (06:27):
a huge amount.
Adam,
you can imagine a lot of itis basically they're saying
you can't possibly say that.
And we're saying, how can wesay that, in a better way.
So if the original copy probablydelivered by the three of you
said, he's a tremendous crook.

(06:47):
Can we say he's a well-knownnorthern businessman?
Who could we have in mindand, that tends to work.
I think

Adam (06:59):
one of the biggest payouts that the or biggest legal troubles that
private day ever got into was long beforeall of our time back in the seventies.
And it was the James Goldsmith case

Ian (07:07):
Yes.

Adam (07:07):
Where we were, a blizzard of Ritz, over a hundred writ.
And he sued the distributors andhe sued the news agents and he sued
the printers and he sued absolutely.
Everyone tied up in court cases for,years and years and a lot of that centered
over the use of the word obstructing.
He said it was all that Lord Luke,unbelievably, and the role that
Goldsmith and John Aspen, all thatkind of Claremont Crowder had in,

(07:29):
helping Lord Luke to escape afterhe murdered his, children's nanny.
and that's not libelous.
no.
That's it.
And he's dead anyway.
Not libel.
Lu Luke.
He's, officially dead.
He's, yeah.
but the phrase that he used was, policehave met with obstruction and silence.
From this group of people, atwhich point the lawyers pounced,
I think it was Carter Ruck.
It usually is Carter, isn't it?
Carter Ruck and said, hang on.

(07:49):
Obstructing the police in the course oftheir duties, that's a criminal offense.
You've clearly heinously accusedour client of a criminal offense,
which was not the intention at all.
So it can be as much as justyour one word that Yeah.
Can make a hell of a difference.
Can't I?

Ian (08:01):
I should say our case in those days, and certainly when I was editing,
we were frequently sued by Carter Rock.
. Peter Carter Rock and Company, thewell-known solicitors, and private.
I didn't help its case by intentionallymis printing their name every week.
so it appeared as Carter fuck.

(08:21):
and Peter Carter Rock, who's avery senior and serious figure,
rang up and said, you are pathetic.
I do not want to appear in yourmagazine as Peter Carter fight.
I said, absolutely, Peter.
It won't happen again.
So next week it was Peter Farter.
K.

(08:43):
It's very grown up stuff at private eye.

Andy (08:49):
here's an interesting one.
Ha.
Have any of you ever regrettedworking for private Eye, Adam?
Can, you ask me again atthe end of this evening?

Helen (08:59):
I did have a moment when I, my first day and everybody took enormous
pleasure in telling me about thebriefing you'd had about if anybody
tries to break into the office, youshould try and stab them with a pen.

Applause (09:09):
Yeah.

Helen (09:09):
And the first time someone told me this, I thought they were
trying to be helpful and about afterthe fifth person had told me this,
I began to realize it was a sortof hazing that I was going through.
and everybody in the art was trying toput this sort of terrible fear into me.
Yeah.
But apart from that.
I have to say, one of the thingsthat I always thought before I joined
Private Eye was it was a little bitlike Willy Wonka's chocolate Factory.
And not the

Andy (09:30):
children disappear all the time.
That's the

Helen (09:33):
But it's, but it, because it's got such a kind of law about it, but actually
because it doesn't have bylines in it.
It emerges in this way that you don'tlike I wanted to see behind the curtain.
I just thought that wasall really exciting to me.
and so when I did the swaty thingof, I read both of Adam's books, his,
50 years on sale at all good books.
We go terrific books.
Thank

Applause (09:53):
you.

Helen (09:54):
But I think that's one of the things that's nicest
about, private eyes that.
Actually the, office looks like it'sgrown organically from the ground, but it
has got, this kind of like a rainforestgot this kind of ecosystem that you
would never planned from the start.
Does this make, am I beingwildly offensive here?

Ian (10:09):
does make sense?
Yes.
And accurate.
Yeah.

Helen (10:11):
But I, I think that's one of the things, it's, got such a distinctive
taste to it that actually, I justdon't think I've ever found it.
That, which is what makes me not.
Ever regret having started therebecause it's, it is a unique thing in
British public life, and I just thinkthat's what people like about it.

Adam (10:26):
When we had our, 50th anniversary, back in 2011, the v and a amazingly did an
exhibition all about private eye, and thecourse senior creator came in and said,
what I really, want here is to establish,know the whole atmosphere of the
office, the, kind of feel of the officeand lots of other sort of VNA people
who are used to dealing with ancientparchments and sculptures and things.
We don't really get what youmean here and after, while he.

(10:48):
He just grabbed a load ofpaperwork and just threw it on
the floor and said like that.
And that's basically ouroffice is what it's like.
Yeah.

Ian (10:56):
The question did, do you ever regret when the wind screen
shattered behind me in a taxi, onOxford Street and on police appeared.
I thought, this isn't great.
'cause the taxi driverthought that we'd been shot.
but then I had a mar marvelous momentwhen the policeman said, is there anyone

(11:17):
who might bear a grudge against you?
And I thought, yeah, all But itwasn't, it was a demy and as.
The other thing about workingat PT is your colleagues
are always very supportive.
And my friend Dick Newman, thecartoonist said, oh, very exciting.

(11:38):
You were attacked by a deist.

Andy (11:44):
here's one for you, Ian.
Which of your fallen enemiesdo you secretly miss?

Ian (11:49):
Robert Maxwell was.
amazingly good copy.
he was not a good man.
Yeah.
I think, that's, not libelous nowhe was obsessed by private diet.
There's always someone who'sobsessed by the magazine.
I'm usually some very, rich businessman.
It was Robert Maxwell.
It was Jimmy Goldsmith.
Asil, Nadir Ed.

(12:10):
Mohamed Ed.
actually Ed, I was once at an eventlike this and a boy who was about 18,
he got up and said, would it embarrassyou to know that there's a relative
of Mohammed Fayed in this room?
I said, doesn't embarrass me.
Embarrass him.
Yeah.
Quite.
So if there is anyone in Fair enough,

Helen (12:33):
There's something about that era of like magnificent monsters

Applause (12:36):
Yeah.

Helen (12:36):
That I always feel has happened more widely through public life in
the sense that I think social mediahas made everybody more self-aware.
So as a journalist, when I go out in myother job for the Atlantic, going and
interviewing people, it's such a delightwhen you meet somebody who is just like
living their life unselfconsciouslyand telling you things rather than
what I think lots of us end up doingnow, which is feeling that we're
acting constantly as our own PR firm.

(12:56):
Yeah.

Applause (12:57):
And so I

Helen (12:57):
think that there are, let's be honest, no shortage of
massive bastards still around.

Applause (13:02):
Yeah.

Helen (13:02):
But unfortunately, they tend to be more protected by
walls or boringly bastard.
Do you know what I mean?
there's, I quite feel quitenostalgic for the era of the,

Andy (13:12):
Extreme wealth and eccentricity obviously go together
very neatly, and maybe the era isslightly coming to a close where.
It's an aspirational thing toown a newspaper for example.

Adam (13:23):
that's where we've lost the press proprietors.
the other one that I really missed in thestreet shame pages is Richard Desmond when
he was in charge of the Daily Express.
and there was this glorious thing,Francis Wehow I worked with, and I,
we would do, it was a very standardkind of format to stories where the
express would do some sort of, or, andWeum who had a column in the Express
would do some formulating thing aboutthe morals of society and disgusting

(13:43):
BBC allowing swearing and smart on.
And we'd just go straight to the,the television X listings, which
was the pornographic channel thatRichard Desmond owned at the time,
the proprietor of the Daily Express.
And there was France and I were quiteready to say, I'm looking at porn
and, this website will come.
But it was, he was one of thosereally enormous characters.

(14:03):
And I do feel we've lost, yeah.
A lot of, we have.
It has to be said.
We have still got Yevgeni Leviev.
That's true.
And he is

Andy (14:10):
magnificent.
Copy the last of the new.
Entry of that field, Yeah.
And I think if you are that, if youare, if you're so wealthy, it's a
similar thing to Elon Musk maybe,where you're so wealthy, you'll.
You are no, you pass throughbeing protected by balls because
you're just putting out therethe maddest possible stuff.
You can,

Helen (14:27):
there's also a trend, which is that the most free you can
possibly be as somebody who can sayanything without any consequences.
And no one can ask you totake any responsibility.
And that I think is the, Trumpistappeal in the us There is like
a zone on the other side ofcancellation where it's just no one.
Can stop you.
This is what power looks like.
The power looks like sitting allday scrolling on your phone, on

(14:47):
the loo, going, oh wow, the Mao,and like the, as if that's what
Alexander the great aspired to.
But, I, yeah, I, just think that, amagazine like Private Eye, I think it
helps when you've got a vivid enemy.
Yeah.
Is an encapsulation of bullying powerand private eye stands up to it.

(15:07):
And that's how I think people wantsomebody to stand up to the bullies.
Yeah.
Yeah.
And, that's what, whenjournalism is, campaigning.
Journalism is good.
It does, it's a, it's and,sometimes it stands up to them by
blowing a raspberry in their face.
It just making them look ridiculous.

Adam (15:20):
Yeah.
Yeah.
The problem is, it, the great thingis when they get obsessive about it,
fired, nicked our rubbish, didn't he?
Yeah.
He literally had someone stealingthe rubbish from the office.
Yes.
So that he could print it in his rival tous, which was called punch at the time.
yeah.
Yes.
I

Helen (15:33):
remember you saying to me that nothing in was more
annoying to you than the fact thatRupert Murt doesn't really care.

Ian (15:38):
No.
It's incredibly offensive of himto sit there week after week.
Just ignoring.
Yeah.
These jokes, which I find rude, many ofwhich he's seen many times now, must have

Applause (15:52):
really annoyed him,

Ian (15:54):
yes.
'cause they have, they've had a good run.
Yeah.
but again, he's, he'sstill terribly good copy.
Yeah.
partly 'cause he's discoveredthe secret of eternal life,
which is good, as a press baron.

Andy (16:09):
is there a future for a print magazine in a digital world?
Sorry to, make things somber.
If he says no, now we're really

Helen (16:18):
mean TikTok only.

Ian (16:19):
Yeah.
Yeah.
I think there is, yes, obviously.
I, believe in print, private Eye now sellsmore copies than we did 20 years ago.
I was editor then as well, so Ican't blame the useless editor.
there is something magic aboutprint, which I believe in.
I believe in broad sheets, broadcasting,again, we, have 50 cartoons now, about

(16:43):
in every issue, which I ramped up during,the pandemic just on the grounds that.
A people need, something to laugh at.
but b, they are so brilliant andthey don't work anywhere else.
You need to see them, you need to seethem on the page, and they're fabulous.
so people say, oh, you are very nicheand you've failed to go digital and.
all those other accusations,but we are still there.

(17:06):
our circulation now is biggerthan most sort of newspapers.

Helen (17:10):
I think that's the thing.
I don't think there is necessarilya future for the daily newspaper
that's printed on newsprint and isat the petrol station four court that
doesn't necessarily fit into people's.
Lives.
The thing I most appreciate about amagazine is that it, you can finish it.

Andy (17:24):
Yeah.

Helen (17:24):
And I think that is the experience that maybe people want,
I dunno about you, but I feelvery burned out by doom scrolling.
And there is, again, like yousay, the other thing about a
magazine is it has, a grammar anda rhythm to it that is familiar.
when you read Private Eye.
Street of shame is always gonna be here.
And then you get the jokes and thenthere's In The Back and, maybe you
don't read all of it, but you know thatthere's a kind of, somebody has sat down

(17:46):
with all the information in the worldthat week and said, here's the bit of
it that we think you should look at.

Ian (17:51):
the, but people now talk about, curated news and I just
think, doesn't that mean edited?
Yeah.
and the whole idea of, oh, we've gotall this thing and we curate, that's

Adam (18:03):
just.
Choosing stuff.
I have a lot of conversations withobviously journalists on other papers,
and the big thing at the moment, thedigital stuff is they say, what's really
taking off is we're getting people tosubscribe to newsletters and it's the best
of the day's headlines and the stories.
And we put them together and we sendthem out in a newsletter every morning.
It's... you've invented thenewspaper, that's what you've done!

Andy (18:22):
But that is a thing.
there's a, the website Substack wherepeople write their own newsletters.
you do a Substack, I, andthere's a, it's a bit like sort
of 17th century Pamphleteer.
You're getting a strong sense ofthe person who's behind it, what
they're choosing to prioritize, Oh.
I think people seem to like that a lot.

Helen (18:38):
That is, and the podcasts Fair, which again, is about very strong
personalities, it will remind you nothingso much of a sort of like Alexander
Pope writing some anonymous pamphletabout how his great rivals got syphilis.
that's, very much the toneof lots of those podcasts.
So I think human naturedoesn't change all of your

Andy (18:54):
substack and it's, it's

Helen (18:55):
really useful.
My substack is entirely about whichof my enemy secretly have syphilis.
Yes.
But I do think an ongoing account,

Adam (18:59):
I think one of the secrets is that Private Eye hit on this
formula of sometimes quite hardcoreand depressing kind of new stuff.
But if you look just slightlyto the right, there's gonna be a
cartoon that's gonna make you laugh.
And the relationship, between the hacksand the cartoonist is, always good.
'cause we appreciate the cartoonsand the cartoonists appreciate
that we give them nice sort of grayframe around them that we sets.

Ian (19:19):
cartoonists depend on journalists, particularly the topical cartoonists, to
give them an angle, to find things out.
it's, very interdependent.
yes, the news is depressing,but it isn't depressing.
If you look at it this wayand that, that is the idea,

Andy (19:34):
just to keep with other publications and other organizations.
So reach is, newspapers stableis having a very hard time.
The Telegraph is completely inlimbo and can't be sold to anyone.
Is the British media in generalin a healthy state right now?
No.

Adam (19:50):
Certainly a lot newspaper, media.
bits.
the, weird thing about the Telegraphis the telegraph was making enormous
amounts of money, which is why, that fundbacked by the UAE were willing to pay.
they overpaid massively600 million for it.
But there is still money to be made.

Andy (20:04):
No, but not the question, is it not, is it making lots of money?
Is it in a healthy state?

Adam (20:07):
Nobody needs to be,

Andy (20:09):
I'm speaking as a working journalist in terms of

Adam (20:11):
journalists getting paid is quite important.
Yeah.
you could go back over.
We, we literally declared thedeath of journalism a few issues
ago in street of shame, didn't we?
And just put a black Yeah, I was awayparticularly depressed that week.
I think a blackboard board around thepages, but actually I think you could
probably go back through most of the 63years or whatever we're at now, of the
eye and, conclude that that, everythingpretty awful at any of those times.

Helen (20:34):
There's a lot of slop around now if you look about 50 years ago there was,
the information was much more tightlycontrolled and that meant that there
was a sense of a shared culture anda shared kind of set of conversations
that had its own problems, not leastat the kind of people who, were in
charge of what those conversationswere all pretty much looked the same.
Yeah.
Things are now much more rancorous again,I do think it's a bit more like the 18th
century now, like it is just more peopleshouting at each other often in vile ways.

(20:59):
Riddled with misinformation,but that does mean that there's
a certain kind of liveliness.
To the conversation and actually for allthe, yeah, I think we've talked a lot in
the magazine about the kind of declinein some of those traditional newspapers.
There are some real success storiesof things that have started up in
the last five or 10 years that arecommissioning stuff, paying journalists,
like how unheard the critic politics,Joe, as we say, all the things on,

(21:22):
Substack, and, huge number of the newsagent's podcast has managed to make
its case as an independent format.
There are still lots of people doing.
Journalism, but just the model hasreally changed the idea of having
a big warehouse where you have.
You keep, I worked at the Daily Mail for along time, so you keep 500 people captive
and miserable and make them produce news.

(21:42):
That was the daily mails model.
I think that has ended and, it thingsnow tend to be smaller and more nimble.
There are more kind of skiffsand fewer, tankers basically.

Adam (21:51):
But what I would say that's happening on a smaller scale.
On a bigger scale, the really oddthing that newspapers have done as
they've gone more and more digitalis that they all seem to be going
after that same clickbait market.
most, oh, I'm not gonna bangon about reach 'cause I write
about 'em every single fortnight.
But the male at the moment, had two verydistinctive, very, successful things.
It had the Daily Mail newspaper, which waskind of Paul Dakers vision of the world,

(22:12):
which a lot of people went along with.
And it had the Mail Online, which wasSidebar Of Shame and bikini photos
and, on, all that kind of thing.
And actually they've put them togethernow and, that both of those I think, have
suffered in that process and just becomeslightly worse versions of themselves.
And it seems very odds to me that, ifyou go back 20 years, the telegraph was

(22:34):
absolutely the paper of kind of peoplewho wore glees and barber jackets and
green wellies and that was their audience.
The mail was.
Which had, its very kind of, amore, more suburban, not quite
as well off kind of thing, butvery well defined kind of market.
Yeah.
And in the way they've allgone, oh, we've gotta go online,
we've gotta appeal to everyone.
They've ended up, none of themreally appealing to anyone.
And you end up with them just pumpingout this sort of, it's not even,

(22:56):
it's not even click back that'sattempting to be news anymore.
the, big success story at the momenton the, daily mirror as, Far as their
bosses are concerned is cleaning hacks.
And you think, it's literallylike this, amazing product.
We'll clean your sink.
and this, is what's gettingbig, hits on their websites.
And this is the paper that 40years ago was Paul Foot's paper.
John Pilger was on there reportingfrom the killing Fields in Cambodia.

(23:18):
You just think, really?
Yeah,

Andy (23:19):
really that's where we're going with this you can't go back
to the fifties where eight in 10people bought a daily newspaper.
Those days are not coming back.
And I think in terms of.
informing an entire population, which ismy benchmark, is not in a healthy state.
You, it is all very well havingsub substack writers who, might
have some thousands of subscribers,but in terms of telling like 70
million people what's going on.
So they're informed to makedecisions and exposing scandals,

(23:42):
for those 70 million people.

Ian (23:43):
But, and then this is the impetus from.
Social media, isn't it to saydon't trust the mainstream media.
Trust me in my bedroom.
the problem about.
British papers trying to caterfor an American audience, partly
'cause there's more money there.
So they go online and the advertisingand the cliques come from men in
Nebraska, , whose interests aren'tthe same as people in Guilford.

(24:08):
which is why you getinto the culture wars.
And they're saying, do you knowwhat's happening in Canadian
mixed women's hockey team?
No, I don't.
I really don't.
And that sort of thingseems to me we just.
It just moves over.
So you get what are essentiallyAmerican debates and you look at it
in your paper and you think, what?
What?
Why is this in here?

(24:29):
Elon Musk says, most ofBritain is a no-go zone.
If you go out of your house, you'llbe attacked by women in hijabs with
machine guns retweeted in Britain.
Yes.
That's what's

Andy (24:42):
happening here.
Just go outside.
on the, like the New York Times aswell, they seem to love the idea
of Britain as this like drizzlyplague, riddled, like broth island.
How was you, right forthe Atlantic as well?
It's just this miserable, like theyseem to get a real kick out of it.
Why?
Why do they like that?

Helen (25:01):
I think it's a bit like the way that now there are only certain
ethnicities you're allowed to have asvillains, and for them, they're still
allowed to be mean about Britain.
Because in their minds, Britain isthe kind of origin country that's very
rich and riddled with aristocrats.
So they, there's a sort of weirdtwin effect about the fact that they,
basically, the British shows thatlike middle America consumes are
the great British Bake off, right?

(25:22):
Downton Abbey and the Crown.
and then the social media view ofBritain is, as you say, creeping Sharia
and And so they, they believe that the,basically that Britain is high click
castle, but surrounded entirely bypeople in hijab stabbing each other.
It's really, it, is really fascinating.
Yeah.
But it is this idea that this is one ofthe few places that you're allowed to look

(25:44):
down your nose at if you're an American.

Andy (25:46):
Wow.

Helen (25:46):
And I think that the.
The verse happens here.
You have people who are very snootyabout Americans as if they're all used
car deals men in Pensacola, right?
As if that is, by a, byword for being uncultured.
And I think that there's a feelingthat we're both on the same playing
field and therefore we're allowedto be mean about each other.
And the really tragic thing isthere's so much richer than us.
It's just so much richer than us.

(26:08):
I can't even begin to tell you.
You walk through an Americancar park and the cars are three
times the value of cars here.
the houses are three times bigger.
But nonetheless, there is this beliefthat in some way, having a go at
Britain's and saying that they'vegot bad teeth and live in a swamp.
New York Times actually referred tothe concept of living being swamps
in Britain, that this is punching up.
It's fast.

(26:28):
It's completely fascinating, butyou're exactly right, Ian, about.
America Brain.
Carla Denny of the Greens wasactually saying, why is out here
people talking about gender, whenthe price of eggs has gone up?
The price of eggs hasnot gone up in Britain.
It's gone up massively in the USbecause of a huge bird flu outbreak.
so what you are getting is you aregetting British politicians who are.

(26:49):
and this is clearly I, this was the firsttime I'd really seen it on the left.
I knew it was happening on the right.
Who are getting their talking points fromnot just Fox News, but the kind of online
sphere around it, and then just tryingto drag those and map them onto Britain.

Andy (27:02):
Just quickly on the swamps thing, is it possible they're talking about f.
So I'm very well aware thatyou have drained them and I am
looking forward to going to the, I

Helen (27:13):
really think you should go to Florida and, go, this is a
charming little fe we've got here.
There all these littlealligators in the fe.

Adam (27:20):
Can I ask you a question in about subscription cancellations?
Yeah.
Because when you do one of thosecovers or those cartoons and we
get lots and loads of, and cancelmy subscription immediately.
Yeah.
Do they actually canceltheir subscriptions?

Ian (27:30):
the data isn't clear.
There is a certain suggestion that theydon't cancel before the next issue in
the hope that their letters are in.
Then they frame that one and putit on the, in the downstairs, Lou?
Yeah.
Yeah.
the Boris Johnson, legacycover, which was just a picture
of a huge overflowing toilet.

Applause (27:50):
Yeah.

Ian (27:52):
created quite a lot of trouble.
A lot of news agents wouldn't sell it,and a lot of our readers were really
cross, but again, They threatenedvast amounts of cancer subscriptions,
but they didn't materialize.
the one about Gaza recently, we put athing on there saying, this is a warning.
There may be some Chris criticism whois Israel in this magazine, and huge

(28:16):
number of people said they would cancel.
But then looking back on it, I justthink it was a statement of the obvious.
An understatement.

Andy (28:25):
we'll come to of these questions really shortly, But just a very quick one.
How do I get my letter into private eye?
I'm speaking as a subscriberhere, not as a hack.
what's the policy on whatletters get in and what don't?

Ian (28:36):
Are they interesting?
are they funny?
have we got something wrong?
do I need to correct this?
is this just a point of view?
I didn't like this.
Sometimes that's funny.
Sometimes it's not.
it's a bit arbitrary.
is the truth 'cause we getan awful lot of letters.
I get quite a lot from Ev, Yev, Guinea.
Lev.

(28:59):
but then they're notaddressed dearer either?
No.
You went into

Helen (29:03):
a grandfather off with him?
I think I did.
The only times it's ever happened.
A grandfather.
What did, your grandfather do?

Ian (29:09):
Yes.
his was in Stalin's cabinet.

Helen (29:12):
Yeah.

Ian (29:13):
which I suggested meant he was a bit Russian.
Bit Soviet.
Dare you.
Yeah.
Anyway, he got very, cross with that.
and I think being referredto as Lord Lover Duck,

Applause (29:27):
I think

Ian (29:28):
child, it's not respectful,

Andy (29:31):
is it?
let's, have a really quick onethis just in case you've got one of
these that you think is, important.
What's the biggest story inBritain like right now that's not
getting the attention it deserves?
The new post office.

Adam (29:44):
Oh God.
I'd have to say T side.
And I know we've been banging on Bennettforever, but and there are a few admiral
exceptions of people who've caught ontothat story, but that's, that I really
feel is one that's gonna run and run.
It's got the smack of those seventiesscandals, the T down Smith and
Paulton and stuff about it, hasn't it?

Helen (29:59):
I'm just surprised by the fact that there are so many lying around
on the floor waiting to be picked up.
I was reading about in the Timestoday about the fact that businesses
have been offered all these taxcredits by the government to do AI
research and development, and it'sworth billions and Let me shock you.
Sometimes when people do AI research,it's not the highest quality, it's them

(30:22):
pissing about with Google, basically,and I just thought, I bet you could
go and find out incredible examplesof that program being defrauded in
the way that the Covid bounced backloan program was defrauded in the way
that you have Michelle Monde and PPE.
I think one of the things I love aboutRichard Brooks who did the T side is that
he's just got an incredible appetite for.

(30:43):
Stories of financial fraud, whichare so hard to bring to life.
And, so few journalists havethe kind of tenacity to do them
and the ability to go and sit.
he went up to D side andpoured through accounts.
And I just think that, so thereis such a problem about the fact
that so many scandals in Britainare essentially quite boring.
I think Ben Gold Egger oncesaid they're projected by a

(31:04):
tedium shield three miles thick.
And I think that's really troublesome,like when it's, when there's a scandal,
it involves vivid personalities.
Those can involve people suing you andthat's one different type of problem.
But something like offshore tax havensis another different type of problem
to tell that story in journalism 'causeit's lots of people you've never heard
of stealing large amounts of money.
Through very boring and complicatedmeans they're paying a lot to, how

(31:27):
the hell do you hold that to account?
And those are the stories that Ithink are probably undercovered,
those kind of financial fraudswhere it's not one amazing crook,
it's just some low rent people.
Just creaming money out of our, yeah.
Off the, that could be used to pay forour roads and schools, essentially.
Yeah.

Ian (31:44):
I agree with all that.
I think they're all there.
But I think the, lobbying thing, again,we've got a lot of very good, younger
journalists who are very, they're,still shocked at the fact that a
company invites a said MP to come tosome jolly, to come some freebie, and
they literally ask a question about it.

(32:04):
Yeah, two weeks later in the House ofCommons, they stand up and they deliver.
Yeah.
And I'm older than, but Istill find that shocking.
someone, invites, a minister ora junior minister to their event.
And, the younger journalists say,I presume there was a workers
representative there and a member of thetrade unions and, uk No, there wasn't.

(32:27):
No, there was just the drinks company.
And the minister and the gamblingrepresentative and the mp and
no one else that's lobbying.
Yeah.
and it's partly why the lay partydid so badly early on, you just
thought, cause my colleagues and I getdragged in front of select committees
occasionally and say things like, whycouldn't mps not have a second job?

(32:50):
They all go, oh, for God's sake.
and could they not accept the tickets?
Maybe could, they buy them, payfor their own pay data tickets and

Adam (32:59):
boxes at Wimbledon, that sort of thing,

Ian (33:01):
or not go,

Andy (33:03):
Anyway, this is terribly shocking.
Oh, that's a nice note to anothercapacity to remain shocked.
I think it's important we shouldcome to some audience questions now.
Yes.
We've got, just over five minutesleft, I'll do a sweep across the
room, so we've got one over here.

Audience (33:16):
Is there a story that you've not been able to
publish but you do know is true?
And if so, what is it?

Andy (33:27):
And I remind you we're live streaming this at the moment.

Applause (33:30):
Yeah.

Ian (33:31):
No.
If I absolutely think astory's true, it's in there.
and it's really flattering that peoplethink we've got a huge bank of stuff.
we haven't, we getting press on Monday.
I

Helen (33:43):
think that, yeah, if you've got one, do, yeah.
I think there's a related thing,which is a question that we all
face now, which is how much shouldyou report on misinformation?
So there's been, for example, allover the kind of right wing internet
sphere, there is a, this luridsuggestion that Ki Star is having
an affair with Lord Dally, right?
That he hasn't actuallyjust taken money from.
Absolutely zero basis to this.
Absolutely.

(34:03):
And they seem to bebased on faked pictures.
And the point about it is, actually inthis day and age, if you found out that
a politician was having a gay affair,poor people would be a bit like Oh,

Andy (34:13):
good for him.

Helen (34:14):
Yeah.
Yeah.
He never looked like a snappy dress,so I didn't know he had it in him.
but it's, it's the sense that likethey're keeping something from us.
And actually it's very hard to knowas a journalist how to deal with that.
I'm not.
The reason we're not reporting thatstory is not because we're all in
a cozy club where we sit together.

(34:34):
It's just because it's bollocks.
But how do you deal with that?
Because all the way through.
We've had this assumptionthat you shouldn't amplify
this misinformation, right?
You shouldn't give credenceto false things by reporting
'em and talking about them.
That can be really damaging.
But you get to these stages where thisstuff is coming up in focus groups, right?
This is happening.
Normal voters who aren't thatengaged with the news are
hearing about this kind of stuff.

(34:55):
Ahead of the riots.
This was a huge problem.
And so there's a reallydifficult decision to make.
we're not sitting on storiesthat we know to be true.
We're sitting on lots of storiesthat we know not to be true, and
trying to think how responsibly tocommunicate that information to people.
That's actually the reallydifficult thing now, I think.
Yeah, and

Andy (35:11):
I would just add to that, there, there, are sometimes details that you
would really like to get into stories,but for legal reasons you can't and a
story might appear looking a bit opaque.
And there, there is sometimes.
Even more to it than, than you've read,but that's, yeah, it's not, being,
and there, there are basic laws of

Ian (35:28):
contempt, which, you know.
Yeah.
Tommy Robinson hasn't quite got his headround, which is about ongoing, cases and
that may, and there was a brief periodof super injunctions and many of which
we did try and challenge and again.
You're in any doubt whether we'rewasting your money, we are, by

(35:49):
spending it on legal fees totry and overturn these things.
but again, Adam had, a list of them andthey are very, few now, aren't they?
Extremely few, yeah.
In

Adam (35:58):
terms of super injunction, none that I know of going on at the moment.

Ian (36:01):
See, again, but I would say

Adam (36:02):
that about 80% of my job as a hack on private eye is,
establishing that stories aren't true.
And the 20% always going.
And I would have to say at this point Iwas asking you that question about how
the conversations goes with lawyers.
'cause I've been sat in on a few ofthose and I have to say if he in syncs
something is true, whatever the lawyeris saying, it does tend to go in.
In the safest form it can and properly,

Ian (36:22):
Yeah.
Moderated.

Andy (36:24):
Let's go into our last question here

Audience (36:26):
in terms of the private eye lunches.
What are some of your mostmemorable moments over your time
as editor and just wider, any, youguys have been to them as well.
So

Helen (36:34):
for anybody who doesn't know the Private Eye Lunch is a
tradition of fortnightly, gatheringsused to Where did you start?
Was coaching horses, photos.
Coaching

Adam (36:41):
horses originally.
Yeah.
Which was a, horrible pub that we usedto hang around in with horrible food.
She was added to its charm, didn't it?

Helen (36:48):
And then it moves on.
It served a yogurt cherrysoup as a, what was it?
It was, do you remember that?
That was the worst thing I've ever take.
what, apart from, yeah.

Ian (36:55):
Okay.
The food's not the main issue

Helen (36:58):
now.
It's, now it's lovely.

Ian (36:59):
The,
point is that we invite.
influential people and journalistsand, other people who tell
us things and, inform us.
And usually this is on a fairly gentle,gossipy, bantering nature, but sometimes
it just falls right in your lap.
We invited John Hemming, whowas a liberal mp, to lunch and.

(37:21):
It'd be fair to say he, he did hit thebooze fairly heavily and he turned to me
in front of a table full of journalistsand he says, oh, I'm in terrible trouble.
And, my girlfriend's pregnantand I haven't told my wife.
This was before.
The starters of it was just,

(37:45):
you've never seen a dash for the.

Andy (37:51):
Superb.
there's one question from the stream,which I thought I'd just throw in.
What should we all be doing to getmore people reading private high?
Buy them a subscription?
Yeah.

Helen (38:00):
that's route one, but it does all work.
Probably,

Ian (38:04):
spread the word.
it's still incredibly good value.
you get 50 cartoons, which areincredibly funny, even if you don't
wanna read the stuff around them.

Helen (38:11):
the other thing I would say that I never realized was a
thing that you can do, but youcan often contact the cartoonist
and ask them to buy the original.
And they loved it.
I've got the private, I did a firstdraft of difficult women, which is, my
poor husband who made me a lot of tea.
Me going, oh, can I have coffee instead?
but I, and I got, and I've got theoriginal for that and it's in my
house at home and it's really, it'sit's just a really lovely moment.

(38:34):
And I know that, as you say, there'sa kind of cottage industry of
redrawing them in certain cases.
But there are like that, thata bit about valuing the stuff
that's in the mag, I think.
And, every year there are Christmascards and things like that.
So the merch, I would also say isa way of supporting private line.
I've got David

Adam (38:49):
Ziggy Green's seen and heard, thing that he did when he came down
to the phone hacking trial where Ispent eight months and he came in for
one morning and just sketched awayand did something far better than any
of my s that's in a frame on my wall.
Weirdly, weirdly, no one's ever askedme to write out one of my journalistic
stories and send, verse from that I

Ian (39:05):
should say that.
You can't always get theoriginal from the cartoonist.
one of our cartoonists did a ratherbeautiful drawing, of Crisp Be odi, who
was, shorting the pound during Brexit.
and he drew a picture of Crisp Be odi.
basically, shafting Britain and Oierang up and said, I love your work.
I'd like to buy the cartoon.

(39:25):
He cast his phone back saying, youcan't, I don't admire your work.

Andy (39:33):
Superb.
I think on that note, I'm sosorry, but we're outta time.
We gotta bring it to a close.
The very final question, will the fourof you be signing books after this event?
Yes, we will.
Any books see there?
Each other's, anyone else's is fine.
We'll sign this.
Absolutely.
that brings to a close thefirst incident of page 94 live.
Thank you so much to allof you for being here.

(39:53):
Thank you for those of you streaming,and thank you for listening at home.
Goodbye.
Thank you.