Guido Fawkes

Mike Ion Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 11:13:51 AM GMT Print-friendly version Facebook

It appears that Guido Fawkes (aka Paul Staines) is threatening legal action against a fellow blogger, an action that he has threatened before when aspects of his time as a member of the FCS at Humberside FE College were called into question.

Why does LabouHome still persist in having a link to the Guido gossip blog?

If you still link to the blog of Mr Staines can I ask that you think again?





tags: , , , (all tags)

Display: Sort:
Guido Fawkes | 31 comments (31 topical)

Re: Guido Fawkes (#1)

by David Boothroyd on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 02:07:29 PM GMT

Paul Delaire Staines is a thoroughgoing disgrace to humanity and should not be pandered to.


Re: Guido Fawkes (#2)

by NorthernMonkey on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 04:32:58 PM GMT

We should remove the link to his blog. I'd rather read moderates like Iain Dale than lunatics like Paul Staines.

I wish everybody in Britain could read the comments left on his website to understand what your average Tory is like.

Did you see him on Newsnight? Nothing like what I expected him to be. Hardly the fearless, brave individual he makes himself out to be - more like a rabbit caught in the headlights!


Re: Guido Fawkes (#3)

by rwendland on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 05:15:11 PM GMT

In the interests of transparency, it ought to be explained that Alex Hilton and Jag Singh, who run/own Labourhome, have business relationships with Guido Fawkes through the cross-party political blog advertising firm Messagespace. Messagespace run ads both here and on Guido's and Iain Dale's blogs (which I luckily do not see thanks to Firefox&AdBlock+).

Messagespace website now says it is a trading name of EOS Online Media Ltd which has a complex ownership/management structure involving an offshore company, a trust and an Irish company.  The majority owner, Global & General Nominees Limited, also runs Guido's website. EOS also own Message Space Creative Ltd as a subsidiary. This complex also does work for Tory Radio, and thru Mike Rouse/MessageSpace Creative Ltd used to be involved with 18DoughtyStreet.com, and created John Redwood's website. Mike Rouse is/was Head of Technology for the the very Tory Young Britons' Foundation. There is more, but you get the gist. Wikipedia has a simplified stab at explaining this.

I think Alex Hilton may be extracting himself from this complex, but still owns shares.

Basically the political blogging business scene seems very left-right incestuous. This is something that has made me somewhat uneasy about blogging here, though I've detected not the slightest political interference on Labourhome. Though it looks like a fair bit of the advert profits would go to the company that runs Guido's blog.

For the final twist, the lawyer acting in the action against the blogger is the co-founder and Chief Executive of The Young Britons' Foundation, Donal Blaney.

I just hope the action is just dropped, and we can go back to ordinary political blogging! 


Re: Guido Fawkes (#7)

by NorthernMonkey on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 06:58:07 PM GMT

Indeed, it makes me uncomfortable about contributing to a site whose adverts will end up profiting an anti-Labour site.


[ Parent ]

Re: Guido Fawkes (#13)

by mattwardman on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 09:39:05 PM GMT

I get the impression that you're putting conspiracy theories into a couple of areas where a conspiracy doesn't exist.

Most of the relationships in the "complex" don't compromise anyone. In particular I'd suggest that Jas S, Mike R and Alex H (and Chris M - the Devil - who you don't mention) are quite able to separate professional IT (MS + MS Creative) work from political arguments, I'd make the same comment re: Guido where business is concerned. They wouldn't bother to waste the time and take the risk of confusing the two.

It's worth noting that Messagespace are doing business with a totally cross-spectrum set of blogs (including me) and the relationships are very purely business - as Labourhome has found. Anyway it's unlikely that any more than about 4 or 5 (and it's pretty obvious which ones those are) of those relationships involve enough money to exert any influence even if they wanted to.

But how many political bloggers who have spent 1000s of hours building up their position (I'm over 500 hours for a position which is hardly prominent) are going to compromise it for the sake of pin money. If Messagespace tried to do that to almost any political blog (including mine),they'd be made to back down - or be booted off in half an hour.

But if someone wants to compete with Messagespace on any front, then it's a free market.

The facts about who hosts who's websites are professional arrangements. Are you going to go for Tim Ireland because he's been hosting Boris Johnson's blog for about 4 or 5 years? After all, BJ has perhaps had more of a kicking on LH than Guido. In that light, can Tim possibly have clean political hands?

I'd suggest yes, because he's an IT professional just like the others.

The aspects of the post that I'd suggest are worth some focus are the political ones - which in my judgement means the current Guido-Tim argument (that is potentially a real issue), and arguing against the case of the YBF (if that's what you think).

Guido> I never understand why the left think it matters who you have on your blog roll, it is hardly an endorsement.  Having your opponents on your blog roll says "I don't have a closed mind".

I couldn't put it better. Having said that, Guido isn't (unlike Socialist Unity and Labour Home) on my blogroll at present.

My take.

Matt Wardman

btw I don't think that Guido is a Tory; he's a paid-up member of some Irish political party (PFP?).

btw 2 I can imagine that having lots of Labour bloggers running round in circles writing about conspiracy theories would suit some on the right quite well.

btw 3 If anyone would like to Guest Post next about how they would like to see the MP pay and allowances to be set up when the dust clears, the invitation is there. PM me.

btw 4 On the ad revenue you need to exclude the % of "House Ads" that don't give revenue.


[ Parent ]

Re: Guido Fawkes (#14)

by bishophill on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 10:08:33 PM GMT

Ah the joys of the free market eh? People of diametrically opposite views united in perfect harmony by the pursuit of filthy lucre!

Gotta love it. 


[ Parent ]

Re: Guido Fawkes (#15)

by mattwardman on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 10:14:28 PM GMT

I've said my piece, so I'm off the thread now.

Matt


[ Parent ]

Re: Guido Fawkes (#16)

by rwendland on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 10:22:51 PM GMT

I don't actually think there is a conspiracy here, though maybe my rather bald style and statement of facts as I understand them came across like that. Apologies if so. I don't think many Labourhome readers know about these relationships, so I was just trying to pack all the facts in! I can quite see how in the early days setting up a joint ad company would seem very sensible.

The point isn't about IT professionals providing services to both left & right. It's that the owners of Labourhome are in business with Guido (assuming the offshore Global & General Nominees Limited is owned by Guido). I don't have a problem with that, but it should be known: transparency.

My term "complex" (rather than perhaps the better "group of companies") stems from how difficult it is to follow the ownership structure of Messagespace with the Kitts and Nevis company and a Trust (Greek?) obscurely based c/o EOS's own address as major shareholders of EOS, and the Irish asset management company acting as Company Secretary! That's down to Guido I'd guess. Then there is the subsidiary as well. Hardly a simple ownership structure for a small company.


[ Parent ]

Re: Guido Fawkes (#20)

by mattwardman on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 08:31:43 AM GMT

Thanks for the clear reply - I agree that transparency is good.

Matt W 


[ Parent ]

Re: Guido Fawkes (#21)

by alexhilton on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 12:14:17 PM GMT

Rwendland,

On transparency. I'd go further than saying I'm in business with Guido - I would say he is a friend. He's a nutty right-wing libertarian, but he's as liberal socially as he is economically. And he's a devoted husband and father, which is a quality about him I admire. He's no more a racist or homophobe than I am, though he is far less PC.

My involvement with messagespace is semi-detatched these days, though I do have an interest in the company's financial success. There are about 30 bloggers who are receiving payments from the company and I don't believe one of them has written any article differently because of it. Certainly it hasn't stopped any people writing about me!

EOS online media ltd is a UK registered company. Paul's majority ownership is through some system I don't understand, but which you seem to have described. My minority stake is UK based and not through any obscure tax haven.

I currently own 30% and there is an agreement to buy me down to 10% over time.

What else do you want to know?


[ Parent ]

Re: Guido Fawkes (#22)

by rwendland on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 02:20:55 PM GMT

Alex, I agree that your stake in EOS is obvious and entirely transparent on the company return. Reflecting, I should have included that above - my intention wasn't to imply it wasn't. I was just noting some of the other more opaque aspects of the majority company ownership. Apologies if I carelessly annoyed you. I didn't mention tax havens and certainly wasn't implying there were dodgy tax reasons for the majority offshore ownership.

But when you are a candidate or MP your business relationships will be put under more scrutiny than simply getting an annual return for £1 from companies house, as I did to check my facts before posting. The company return would not read easily to an investigative journalist, other than your clear shareholding in your name. And as you are not a director, like Guido and Jag, you almost certainly have no legal responsibility for the other info in the return.

My questions perhaps relevant to this forum, are:

Is Message Space Creative Ltd indeed wholly owned by EOS, and are you (or Jag) managerially responsible for it, and its seemingly entirely right-wing client base?

Can you influence Guido to drop the legal pressure on Tim Ireland for his blogging?


[ Parent ]

Re: Guido Fawkes (#24)

by alexhilton on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 06:12:47 PM GMT

I understand the creative bit is wholly owned. I do new media consultancy work in my own right and never through Messagespace Creative.

This article is the first time I have heard of Guido suing Tim. What for? I don't know and can't really be bothered to look into it. If Tim's done something wrong, then there are consequences. If not, he has nothing to worry about.

I don't believe I have any influence over Paul, do you believe I do? Donal Blaney on the other hand is a detestable character, from what I have read on his blog - I certainly have no influence there.


[ Parent ]

Re: Guido Fawkes (#25)

by alexhilton on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 06:18:17 PM GMT

Oh, and Messagespace Creative is run by Mike Rouse, who is Tory with whom I enjoy a drink from time to time. We have brainstormed some non-partisan projects that we could do together, but nothing yet has happened. I would not baulk at doing so under the Messagespace Creative brand.


[ Parent ]

Re: Guido Fawkes (#17)

by NorthernMonkey on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 10:43:40 PM GMT

Paul Staines is a member of an Irish party but that's because he lives in Ireland. In Britain, he is a supporter of the Tories and was active for the Tories in his student days.


[ Parent ]

Re: Guido Fawkes (#28)

by Free Socialist on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 10:20:00 PM GMT

He's a member of the Progressive Democrats, which marries hardcore Thatcherism with (supposedly) a more liberal line on social issues. He has described himself as anarcho-capitalist at times, which goes to show how extreme he is.


[ Parent ]

Re: Guido Fawkes (#30)

by TonyHannon on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 10:41:30 AM GMT

And - as a party they're almost finished after being  nearly wiped out at the last election.


[ Parent ]

Re: Guido Fawkes (#4)

by JM on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 06:01:49 PM GMT

Oh for god's sake! What are we going to do? Pretend that the country's biggest political blog doesn't exist.

Leave the link up. 


Re: Guido Fawkes (#9)

by Mike Ion on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 07:47:37 PM GMT

JM

Guido Fawkes the 'biggest' political blog? This is just silly. His blog is the political equivalent of pobbitch or perezhilton - it is not a serious political blog at all.

Take the link down.


[ Parent ]

Re: Guido Fawkes (#11)

by JM on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 08:21:49 PM GMT

If it's not serious, why are you getting so wound up about it?

Alex - I hope you see sense in this. Guido's site get some of the highest traffic figures for any UK political blog. Not agreeing with him is not a reason to ignore his existance. What next? Forbidding LabourHome members from making posts which link to Daily Mail Stories? 


[ Parent ]

Re: Guido Fawkes (#5)

by guido fawkes on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 06:13:02 PM GMT

If you close your eyes you won't see me, but you will be worse off.  I read you to be better informed, how will you be better off by not reading me?

Incidentally, your masters in Labour HQ and in Downing Street and elsewhere in Whitehall read me in their thousands.

I never understand why the left think it matters who you have on your blog roll, it is hardly an endorsement.  Having your opponents on your blog roll says "I don't have a closed mind".


Re: Guido Fawkes (#6)

by NorthernMonkey on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 06:46:49 PM GMT

I'm sure the bigwigs at Labour HQ do read your blog as well as many others.

But we on this side of the political spectrum cannot trust you simply because you are a Thatcherite and you do not attack both sides fairly as deserved.

If you actually spent just as much time digging up dirt on MP's on your own side, rather than focus on somewhat childish attacks on Labour then I might have more sympathy for you.

When some of your highlights revolve around the Prime Minister picking his nose, it loses you all credibility because we know that if Cameron or Osborne did something similar, you wouldn't cover it.

Also, the dire calibre of the kind of people who post comments on your blog is just yet another example of why 'Order Order' is not worth visiting. Get rid of the trivial insults and abuse from the comments section and you might look a bit more professional.

Of course, as has been pointed out in the comment above, the link won't get removed due to the business dealings between Alex Hilton and Paul Staines. So much for democracy. Seems in the blogosphere, as in Westminster, it's not what you know, it's who you know.


[ Parent ]

Re: Guido Fawkes (#10)

by rwendland on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 08:11:26 PM GMT

I think Guido might, to a large extent, be after ad revenue, so he is populist rather than professional in image. Having lots of "dire calibre" comments and "trivial insults and abuse" might be perfect from Guido's POV.

I'm rather out of touch with the web ad market, but if he can make 0.5p per each unique visitor per month, he's making about £1900/month. If he could get 0.25p per ad-impression, maybe upto £4k/month from his 500k hits/month. Not a great income yet, but enough to full-time blog your political views, with the potential to grow over the next few years.

I think a few volume bloggers are hoping to get a reasonable slice of the dead-tree-press's income as it moves increasingly onto the internet.

It's something the left ought to be thinking about as well. It could be a perfect for a bloggers' co-operative, but it would need a bit of a populist outlook.


[ Parent ]

Re: Guido Fawkes (#12)

by NorthernMonkey on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 08:33:17 PM GMT

You're right, but by appealing to the lowest common denominator, you can only go so far.

I'm sure he will make a fair amount by being the Daily Star of the blogosphere, but I suspect he craves more than that, thus his appearance on Newsnight and constant digs at 'Sir Michael White' etc.

What he wants is to be taken seriously and to be respected. And he certainly has not achieved that.


[ Parent ]

Re: Guido Fawkes (#8)

by Mike Ion on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 07:41:13 PM GMT

Are you seriously suggesting that in reading the postings on your site we will better informed? About what exactly? As far as I can tell your blog is not a serious political blog at all - it is more of a political gossip blog or more accurately a 'tabloid' blog (and in fairness it is more Daily Star than The Sun or Mirror) and I for one am not convinced that I will be intellectually the poorer for not reading you.

Who is or is not on an individual's blog roll is purely a matter of taste.


[ Parent ]

Re: Guido Fawkes (#18)

by guido fawkes on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 11:55:23 PM GMT

So why do you read it or care?  It is a popular blog and single handedly gets what, ten times LabourHome's traffic?


[ Parent ]

Re: Guido Fawkes (#19)

by laurencemarshall on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 12:41:58 AM GMT

Guido, I actually quite like your blog! However, what I am concerned about is how long you're going to be around. I know that the camera is supposed to put on a few pounds, but you're a tubby boy. I mean, it's only a matter of time before the chest starts hurting and you're constantly getting out of breath. Heart problems can happen to someone of your age. You seem to be fast approaching Prescott, mate you'd better get on that treadmill.


[ Parent ]

Re: Guido Fawkes (#23)

by guido fawkes on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 05:57:56 PM GMT

Fattism!  Body fascist!

 I think the technical term is "daddy fat".  A combination of being too damn tired to exercise and hitting forty.


[ Parent ]

Re: Guido Fawkes (#26)

by swatantra on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 06:24:35 PM GMT

I've never read Fawkes's blog and its done me no harm. And I've no intention to. I'd remove the link; if people want to search out his blog, then its their own affair.


[ Parent ]

Re: Guido Fawkes (#27)

by laurencemarshall on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 09:41:35 PM GMT

15 minutes a day is all you need Guido, look after your body and it'll look after you!


[ Parent ]

Re: Guido Fawkes (#29)

by Timka on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 01:07:54 AM GMT

This is one of the most heavily commented posts on the site. Odd how many people care about a link to a popular blog and yet ignore many of the other topics on the site which might actually be of more interest. 

Does it matter? Of course not. Perhaps people should be concentrating more on making sure our elected leaders make this country better and less on a blog link?


Re: Guido Fawkes (#31)

by rwendland on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 11:30:36 AM GMT

Well, this thread has been about more than a simple link. A blogger threatening legal action against another, and the business links of those that run Labourhome. Both of considerable interest to the people who write here.


[ Parent ]

Guido Fawkes | 31 comments (31 topical)