Navigation

Letters Blogatory
by Noel Doran on September 30, 2013

The Blog of International Judicial Assistance | By Ted Folkman of Murphy & King

Noel Doran On The Pensive Quill and Anthony McIntyre

Noel Doran is the editor of the Irish News in Belfast. A US blog on international judicial assistance may not often be asked to consider the curious story of an Irish writer who does not exist, but regular readers of Letters Blogatory are unlikely to be surprised by the latest twists in the case of Anthony McIntyre. Anthony, lead researcher on Boston Colleges much discussed Belfast Project, offered a perspective on his bizarre decision to publish personal attacks on an Irish News journalist under an invented by-line, and I am grateful to Ted Folkman for the opportunity to respond. It seems to me that the basic credibility of Anthony and his blog, The Pensive Quill (TPQ), is on the line, and I feel that the areas where he has contradicted himself, and failed to observe the basic standards which he and his websites have set out in the past, can be readily identified. I should acknowledge from the start that I have attempted to directly engage with Anthony on these matters, only to find him find him immediately referring me to his lawyer (see his August 22 email). We can obviously both rely on solicitors, if that is his wish, but my preference has always been to reach a voluntary agreement on the removal of offensive material from TPQ. This is standard practice for responsible bloggers, and is exactly what Anthony did on the last occasion when I pointed out that he had published a defamatory article about The Irish News 16 months ago. Anthony has indicated that he intends to take a different approach this time, and

says he regards himself as a victim of censorship, although I believe it would be much more accurate to say that presenting misleading and indeed false allegations, without any discernible form of research, has very little to do with freedom of speech. I do not think that at this stage it would be legally appropriate to go over the defamatory claims which have appeared on his website, and, unlike Anthony, I am certainly not going to refer to perceptions about anyones private life. Instead, I will concentrate on the strange circumstances surrounding the appearance of one Paul Campbell as the author of another extremely hostile piece about The Irish News which surfaced on TPQ. Paul was introduced simply as a guest writer, as regularly happens on TPQ, and Anthony subsequently went out of his way to insist that his new contributor was an important figure. Anthony used his website to lambaste the work of the Irish News journalist Allison Morris and said in a comment to his post: not one f#$! do we give. It is the Battle of the Blogside and we are up for it. And with writers like Paul standing at the ready we will be there to the end. It was only after a series of online challenges that he finally admitted the truth Paul Campbell, the writer with whom he was standing shoulder to shoulder in what was portrayed as a great struggle, is not a real person. Anthony still continued to defend his use of the pseudonym and maintained resolutely that he and Paul Campbell were two separate individuals. Responding to a query, Anthony said (in a later comment to his post), If you think the author was part of the TPQ team (as) either me or my other half (Carrie Twomey)that would be a gross mistake. I always write under my own name; she under hers or Rusty Nail. The author was a guest writer wholly external to TPQ but obviously writing for publication in TPQ and on those grounds would be within their remit to talk to whoever they like as TPQ. This unusual form of words could only be taken to mean that Paul Campbell, whoever that person may really be, had carried out the research and interviews for the article which eventually appeared on TPQ. However, a simple check with Hugh Jordan, the Sunday World journalist quoted

extensively in the Paul Campbell piece, immediately confirmed that the only person who had contacted him was not a guest writer wholly external to TPQ but Anthony himself, specifically requesting that a comment should be forwarded to his own email address. This was an enormous u-turn from the firm position taken on the use of deceptive by-lines when Anthony and Carrie Twomey edited another website, The Blanket. In a 2003 piece headlined Nameless, Faceless, an apology to our readers: have the courage to stand over what you say, Carrie made her feelings on the practice clear. She wrote:

It has come to our attention that a recent contributor to the Blanket, Adam OToole, is in fact a pseudonym. The Blanket has a long standing policy of not publishing anonymous articles, and of discouraging the use of pseudonyms, especially in polemical articles that attack named persons, unless there is a legitimate reason for needing a pseudonym.

Carrie concluded: In knowingly deceiving us he also deceived our readers and because we took him at face value ultimately we are at fault for publishing his deceit. Whatever else may be said about the Blanket, a Cowards Corner is something we have endeavoured since day one that we would never become. It is plain that the Paul Campbell piece, which used a pseudonym to attack a named person, is precisely the kind of article which Carrie found so repugnant when she and Anthony edited The Blanket. There is little point in approaching Anthony through TPQ, which has established a reputation for confrontation and vulgarity, andeven though he previously wrote that he would not allow personal abusestill features articles and comments in which those who do not agree with his views are labelled as liars, low-lives, a viper, or earlier this month, a bunch of c@#$%. Anthonys recent posts have included suggestions that The Irish News is involved in an attempt to shut down his website and that I, as editor of the paper,

somehow dictated the contents of a letter to him from the National Union of Journalists. A single call, which was never made, would have established that both allegations are entirely false. The way forward for Anthony should be to look at the initial descriptions he applied to Paul Campbell, compare them to the principles he once attached to his websites and decide if he intends to stand over his publication of the piece of August 7. A positive reply to my request for the removal of the article carried under a fabricated by-line would be a welcome step. Belfast Project, Frolic and Detour
Doug Cassel on the New Partial Arbitral Award

3 Responses to Noel Doran On The Pensive Quill and Anthony McIntyre

Ted Folkman Sept em ber 3 0 , 2 0 1 3
REPLY

a t 6 :5 7 a m #

Noel, thanks for this. It will be interesting to see how the discussion develops. I do not think Anthony McIntyre has admitted that Paul Campbell is a pseudonym. I do think, however, that it is fair to infer that it is a pseudonym. I think you probably overstate things when you suggest that a bloggers responsibility is not to publish things that cause offense. Obviously a blogger should not publish things that are not true. But the value, appropriateness, and tastefulness of the bloggers articles is really a matter for his or her editorial judgment. Some do better at this than others. But I dont think that a reader or the subject of an article should be able to claim offense and thus have a veto over a blogs content. All that being said, its clear that Anthony McIntyre has published comments on his blog that I would not publish here, including the apparently pseudonymous attack on Allison Morris that you focus on here.

Ted Folkman Sept em ber 3 0 , 2 0 1 3

a t 7 :2 1 a m #

REPLY

Also, I wanted to ask you about the new NUJ complaint against McIntyre that he reprinted today. The complaint states: one of those named in the article has confirmed to two separate people within the Irish News that he only spoke to Mr. McIntyre about this matter and has never heard of Paul Campbell. The suggestion is that Campbell is McIntyre. You make the same argument in your piece, and I take it that you yourself spoke with Hugh Jordan. Are you one of the two people within the Irish News referenced in the NUJ complaint, and if so, did you pass the information on to the NUJ? I am trying to determine the extent, if any, to which your efforts, reflected in your article, are coordinated with the NUJs efforts.

Carrie Sept em ber 3 0 , 2 0 1 3

a t 1 0 :4 8 a m #

REPLY

As the Editor of the Blanket, our policy, as quoted above, is clear, as was the issue of Adam OToole, aka Niall Meehan of Griffith Colleges Journalism Department in Dublin. Niall Meehan had submitted work to the Blanket under false pretenses; at the time it was believed theAdam OToole emailing us was a real person named Adam OToole, and his work was published. More the fool us, for accepting emails at face value back then! As it transpired (the details are in the link Noel provided), Niall Meehan was using a number of web-based emailers, all with fake names, and it turned out we had published all his aliases submissions under their own fake name. Lesson learned! If we are going to stand over anyones work, which we do every time we publish, then we have to know whose work it is we are standing over. We didnt encourage pseudonyms and did not publish anonymous articles. What we learned from Niall Meehan is that we had to demand contact details and verify identity before publishing. This was never a bar to publication, as Noel Doran helpfully quoted, if there was a legitimate need for the use of a pseudonym, we could come to an arrangement with a writer as long as we knew who they were, and what the reason was, and that the writer used a consistent name, so as not to mislead readers as Niall Meehan had done with his imaginary gang. After the Meehan experience, if anyone refused to allow us to verify who they were, they were not published. The Pensive Quill knows Paul Campbell. Noel Doran does not. That is not

our problem. I think its been made abundantly clear that The Pensive Quill stands over Paul Campbells article, and everything it has published in regards to the Irish News and its reporter, Allison Morris. I am amazed, frankly, that this is what concerns Noel Doran. Youd think he would have more pressing things to worry about. As you can see from the link to the correspondence between him and Anthony, he was repeatedly invited to put his views across on the Quill. It was also noted that he could not provide specifics as to what he was objecting to, or support for his objections that had any substance to them. I see he is continuing that here, which is odd enough in itself. Why refuse right-of-reply on the Quill where the problem is occurring and take it up on Letters Blogatory? Its his choice, of course, but it does seem silly. At every turn Noel Doran fails to challenge the central issues the actions of his reporter. The criticism stands. If youll bear with me for a little fisking: We can obviously both rely on solicitors, if that is his wish, but my preference has always been to reach a voluntary agreement on the removal of offensive material from TPQ. Amazing the swift arrival of the solicitors letter after the inane correspondence from Noel Doran, who only wants a voluntary agreement to remove material and if you dont agree to remove it, will get the lawyers. Having been down this road before with Noel over a previous article, we knew his emails were only a pretext. Shit or get off the pot, Mr Doran. This whole thing has been a tedious waste of time. Without providing any substantial basis for removing the article, which he was repeatedly asked for, it was never going to be removed. I dont like what youve said is not enough. And even here, all he can muster is that he doesnt know who Paul Campbell is. Tough. The article stands. This is standard practice for responsible bloggers, and is exactly what Anthony did on the last occasion when I pointed out that he had published a defamatory article about The Irish News 16 months ago. It is not exactly what Anthony did. Anthony has indicated that he intends to take a different approach this time, and says he regards himself as a victim of censorship

Anthony is taking the exact same approach he outlined to Noel Doran the first time this one-two feint was tried: Noel, We have been abroad from the day you first contacted us, and we are still abroad. Your email from Friday was not opened until Sunday. We have made efforts to contact our host server to find out the legal situation, given that our website is hosted in the U.S. and any publication on our website is protected by the First Amendment. It is our understanding that, if litigation were to be pursued, an action would have to be brought in the United States, or under its laws. However as you may be aware it is a U.S. holiday (Memorial Day) which has added to the delay in confirming the legal position with our server. In the meantime, events have overtaken us. As you know, we have serious concerns about the matters raised in Marks article which pertain to the events that led to the issuing of the Boston College subpoenas. These reservations still stand. Given his financial situation, Mark is in no position to engage in a protacted legal battle. He has removed the piece from his website due to the threat of legal action from your representatives, and he has requested that we also remove his article. As such, we have obliged Mark by removing his article from the blog, and we trust that should resolve your concerns. However, we do so in reliance upon your undertaking not to wax triumphal by publishing the removal of the article from our site in the pages of the Irish News, or causing that fact to be published anywhere else. If that happens, we will be compelled to defend robustly our original publication, which would only serve to defeat the object of your threat of legal proceedings. We remain deeply disappointed in those actions of the Irish News and Allison Morris which led to our current legal battle in the United States. Anthony Anthony subsequently went out of his way to insist that his new contributor was an important figure. Where was this done? I dont think Anthony has suggested anything about Paul Campbell, other than the fact that Paul Campbell is neither Anthony nor myself. And with writers like Paul standing at the ready we will be there to the end referred to the strength of Pauls writing, the substance of which has yet to be challenged by anyone at the Irish News. A simple check with Hugh Jordan would have also confirmed that he was satisfied Anthony was not the author of the piece, and that he was satisfied

with the article as well. The Irish News has yet to condemn or distance itself from the threats made against Hugh Jordan that Allison Morriss partner, Fernando Murphy, joined in on. Why not? Why is the issue Paul Campbell? The only answer I can come up with speaks for itself. If Noel Doran wants material removed, being able to demonstrate what is false and why or how it is so would be the first step. A nonsense shadowbox article that never once addresses issues of substance will achieve nothing.

Leave a Reply
Na m e (r equ ir ed)

Em a il (w ill n ot be pu blish ed) (r equ ir ed)

W ebsit e

SUBMIT COMMENT

Subscribe By Email
To subscribe by email, please enter your email address. You'll receive a confirmation email shortly. Email

SU BSC RI BE

Letters Blogatory Super Search

Search

Courts

All Argentina (2) Australia (2) New South Wales (1) Court of Appeal (1) Provisions All BIT (8) Argentina-UK (1) US-Ecuador (7) Brussels I (3) Tags All 1782 (77) Admiralty (1) adoption (1) Aerospatiale (2)
SE A RC H

Archives
Select Month

Letters Blogatory by Theodore J. Folkman and contributors 2011-2013 Licensed under a CC-BY-SA license. Terms of Use Privacy Opt-out Status