The Guardian Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.Anti-spam check. Do not fill this in! ===1972 to 2000=== ====The Troubles==== During the early period of [[the Troubles]], ''The Guardian'' supported British state intervention to quell disturbances between [[Irish Catholics]] and [[Ulster loyalism|Ulster loyalists]] in [[Northern Ireland]].<ref>''The Guardian'', leader, 4 August 1969</ref> After the [[Battle of the Bogside]] between Catholic residents of [[Derry]] and the [[Royal Ulster Constabulary]] (RUC), ''The Guardian'' called for the [[British Armed Forces]] to be deployed to the region, arguing that their deployment would "present a more disinterested face of law and order" than the RUC."<ref>''The Guardian'', leader, 15 August 1969</ref> On 30 January 1972, troops from the [[1st Battalion, Parachute Regiment]] opened fire on a [[Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association]] march, killing fourteen people in an event that would come to be known as [[Bloody Sunday (1972)|Bloody Sunday]]. In response to the incident, ''The Guardian'' argued that "Neither side can escape condemnation... The organizers of the demonstration, Miss [[Bernadette Devlin McAliskey|Bernadette Devlin]] among them, deliberately challenged the ban on marches. They knew that stone throwing and sniping could not be prevented, and that the [[Provisional Irish Republican Army|IRA]] might [[human shield|use the crowd as a shield]]."<ref name="BloodySunday">{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk/1972/feb/01/bloodysunday.northernireland1|title=The division deepens|work=The Guardian|date=1 February 1972|author=Leader|location=London|access-date=13 December 2016|archive-date=2 February 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170202121559/https://www.theguardian.com/uk/1972/feb/01/bloodysunday.northernireland1|url-status=live}}</ref> ''The Guardian'' further stated that "It is certainly true that the army cordons had endured a wanton barrage of stones, steel bars, and other missiles. That still does not justify opening fire so freely."<ref name="BloodySunday"/> After the events of Bloody Sunday, [[John Widgery, Baron Widgery]] was appointed the head of a tribunal to investigate the killings. The resulting tribunal, known as the [[John Widgery, Baron Widgery#Widgery Tribunal|Widgery Tribunal]], largely exonerated the actions of the soldiers involved in the incident.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/april/19/newsid_2491000/2491125.stm |title=19 April 1972: 'Bloody Sunday' report excuses Army |publisher=BBC |year=2008 |access-date=28 July 2009 |work=On this day 1950–2005 |archive-date=6 January 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080106153121/http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/april/19/newsid_2491000/2491125.stm |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last=Bowcott |first=Owen |url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/jun/16/bloody-sunday-inquiry-derry-verdict |title=Bloody Sunday inquiry: 'We always knew the dead were innocent' |work=The Guardian |date=16 June 2010 |access-date=11 August 2013 |archive-date=25 July 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140725211745/http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/jun/16/bloody-sunday-inquiry-derry-verdict |url-status=live }}</ref> ''The Guardian'' published an article on 20 April 1972 which supported the tribunal and its findings, arguing that "Widgery's report is not one-sided".<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk/1972/apr/20/bloodysunday.northernireland|title=To make history repeat itself|work=The Guardian|date=20 April 1972|author=Leader|location=London|access-date=13 December 2016|archive-date=2 February 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170202121813/https://www.theguardian.com/uk/1972/apr/20/bloodysunday.northernireland|url-status=live}}</ref> In response to the introduction of [[internment]] without trial in Northern Ireland, ''The Guardian'' argued that "Internment without trial is hateful, repressive and undemocratic. In the existing Irish situation, most regrettably, it is also inevitable... To remove the ringleaders, in the hope that the atmosphere might calm down, is a step to which there is no obvious alternative."<ref>''The Guardian'', leader, 10 August 1971</ref> ====Sarah Tisdall==== In 1983, the paper was at the centre of a controversy surrounding documents regarding the stationing of [[cruise missile]]s in Britain that were leaked to ''The Guardian'' by civil servant [[Sarah Tisdall]]. The paper eventually complied with a court order to hand over the documents to the authorities, which resulted in a six-month prison sentence for Tisdall,<ref>{{cite news |last=Routledge |first=Paul |date=16 January 1994 |title=Profile: Hunter of the truth: Lord justice Scott: With the Government rattled, Paul Routledge looks at the man John Major now has to face | Voices |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/profile-hunter-of-the-truth-lord-justice-scott-with-the-government-rattled-paul-routledge-looks-at-the-man-john-major-now-has-to-face-1407249.html |url-access=subscription |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210308083546/https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/profile-hunter-of-the-truth-lord-justice-scott-with-the-government-rattled-paul-routledge-looks-at-the-man-john-major-now-has-to-face-1407249.html |archive-date=8 March 2021 |access-date=6 March 2016 |work=The Independent}}</ref> though she served only four. "I still blame myself", said [[Peter Preston]], who was the editor of ''The Guardian'' at the time, but he went on to argue that the paper had no choice because it "believed in the rule of law".<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2005/sep/05/pressandpublishing.politicsandthemedia|title=A source of great regret|work=The Guardian|date=5 September 2005|location=London|last=Preston|first=Peter|access-date=13 December 2016|archive-date=2 February 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170202082642/https://www.theguardian.com/media/2005/sep/05/pressandpublishing.politicsandthemedia|url-status=live}}</ref> In a 2019 article discussing [[Julian Assange]] and the protection of sources by journalists, [[John Pilger]] criticised the editor of ''The Guardian'' for betraying Tisdall by choosing not to go to prison "on a fundamental principle of protecting a source".<ref>{{cite news |last1=Pilger |first1=John |title=John Pilger: The Assange Arrest Is A Warning From History |url=https://newmatilda.com/2019/04/14/john-pilger-the-assange-arrest-is-a-warning-from-history/ |access-date=3 May 2019 |publisher=New Matilda |date=14 April 2019 |archive-date=17 April 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190417005445/https://newmatilda.com/2019/04/14/john-pilger-the-assange-arrest-is-a-warning-from-history/ |url-status=live }}</ref> ====Alleged penetration by Russian intelligence==== In 1994, [[KGB]] defector [[Oleg Gordievsky]] identified ''Guardian'' literary editor [[Richard Gott]] as "an agent of influence". While Gott denied that he received cash, he admitted he had had lunch at the Soviet Embassy and had taken benefits from the KGB on overseas visits. Gott resigned from his post.<ref>{{cite news|last=Williams|first=Rhys|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/guardian-journalist-recruited-by-the-kgb-1386978.html |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20220618/https://www.independent.co.uk/news/guardian-journalist-recruited-by-the-kgb-1386978.html |archive-date=18 June 2022 |url-access=subscription |url-status=live|title='Guardian' journalist recruited by the KGB|work=The Independent|date=9 December 1994|access-date=5 April 2016}}</ref> Gordievsky commented on the newspaper: "The KGB loved ''The Guardian''. It was deemed highly susceptible to penetration."<ref name="findarticles.com">{{cite web|url=http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_n7_v11/ai_16679970/pg_2/ |title=CBSi |publisher=[[FindArticles]] |access-date=6 March 2016 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120624033500/http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_n7_v11/ai_16679970/pg_2/ |archive-date=24 June 2012}}</ref> ====Jonathan Aitken==== In 1995, both the [[Granada Television]] programme ''[[World in Action]]'' and ''The Guardian'' were sued for [[libel]] by the then cabinet minister [[Jonathan Aitken#Libel, arrest and prison|Jonathan Aitken]], for their allegation that [[Harrods]] owner [[Mohamed Al Fayed]] had paid for Aitken and his wife to stay at the [[Hôtel Ritz Paris|Hôtel Ritz]] in Paris, which would have amounted to accepting a bribe on Aitken's part. Aitken publicly stated that he would fight with "the simple sword of truth and the trusty shield of British fair play".<ref>{{cite news |title=The simple sword of truth |url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/1995/apr/11/uk1 |work=The Guardian |location=London |date=11 April 1995 |access-date=25 May 2010 |archive-date=19 September 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140919092400/http://www.theguardian.com/politics/1995/apr/11/uk1 |url-status=live }}</ref> The court case proceeded, and in 1997 ''The Guardian'' produced evidence that Aitken's claim of his wife paying for the hotel stay was untrue.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/1997/jun/21/uk.davidpallister|title=He lied and lied and lied|work=The Guardian|location=London|date=21 June 1997|last1=Harding|first1=Luke|author2=David Pallister|author2-link=David Pallister|access-date=13 December 2016|archive-date=15 July 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230715035835/https://www.theguardian.com/politics/1997/jun/21/uk.davidpallister|url-status=live}}</ref> In 1999, Aitken was jailed for [[perjury]] and [[perverting the course of justice]].<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/258070.stm |title=Aitken pleads guilty to perjury |publisher=BBC News |date=19 January 1999 |access-date=8 September 2004 |archive-date=2 July 2004 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20040702214336/http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/258070.stm |url-status=live }}</ref> ====''Connection''==== In May 1998, a series of ''Guardian'' investigations exposed the wholesale fabrication of a much-garlanded ITV documentary ''The Connection'', produced by [[Carlton Television#Factual inaccuracy in 1996 documentary|Carlton Television.]] The documentary purported to film an undiscovered route by which heroin was smuggled into the United Kingdom from Colombia. An internal inquiry at Carlton found that ''The Guardian''{{'}}s allegations were in large part correct and the then industry regulator, the ITC, punished Carlton with a record £2 million fine<ref>[http://www.ofcom.org.uk/static/archive/itc/itc_publications/annual_report/1998/programme_regulation.asp.html ITC Annual Report 1998 – Programme regulation] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150924071132/http://www.ofcom.org.uk/static/archive/itc/itc_publications/annual_report/1998/programme_regulation.asp.html |date=24 September 2015 }} Retrieved 26 September 2007</ref> for multiple breaches of the UK's broadcasting codes. The scandal led to an impassioned debate about the accuracy of documentary production.<ref>[http://www.latrobe.edu.au/screeningthepast/firstrelease/fr1199/bwfr8b.htm The primrose path: faking UK television documentary, "Docuglitz" and Docusoap] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120206204451/http://www.latrobe.edu.au/screeningthepast/firstrelease/fr1199/bwfr8b.htm |date=6 February 2012 }} Retrieved 26 September 2007</ref><ref>{{cite web |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://archive.today/20120719232514/http://www.bjr.org.uk/data/2003/no3_owen.htm |archive-date=19 Jul 2012 |website=British Journalism Review |first=John |last=Owen |title=Now you see it, now you don't |access-date=26 September 2007 |date=Nov 3, 2003 |url=http://www.bjr.org.uk/data/2003/no3_owen.htm}}</ref> Later in June 1998, ''The Guardian'' revealed further fabrications in another Carlton documentary from the same director.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1998-06-10-9806100250-story.html |title=TV Filmmaker Accused of 2nd Fake |last=Moseley |first=Ray |work=Chicago Tribune |date=10 June 1998 |access-date=28 May 2019 |archive-date=28 May 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190528084120/https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1998-06-10-9806100250-story.html |url-status=live }}</ref> ====Kosovo War==== The paper supported [[NATO]]'s military intervention in the [[Kosovo War]] in 1998–1999. ''The Guardian'' stated that "the only honourable course for Europe and America is to use military force".<ref>''The Guardian'', leader, 23 March 1999</ref> [[Mary Kaldor]]'s piece was headlined "Bombs away! But to save civilians, we must get in some soldiers too."<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/mar/25/balkans8 |title=Bombs away! But to save civilians we must get in some soldiers too |work=The Guardian |location=London |date=25 March 1999 |author-link=Mary Kaldor |last=Kaldor |first=Mary |access-date=13 December 2016 |archive-date=2 February 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170202111617/https://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/mar/25/balkans8 |url-status=live }}</ref> Summary: Please note that all contributions to Christianpedia may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here. You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see Christianpedia:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission! Cancel Editing help (opens in new window) Discuss this page