Doctor 'Joan Smith'

I have a shameful admission. When a friend first directly asked me “How would you feel about a female Doctor?” my gut reaction was opposition. The Doctor has always been a fatherly – or grandfatherly – figure to the entire Universe, not to mention wide-eyed young me who devoured novels and the shows equally. He ranks amongst other worthy fantasy Elder Statesmen as Gandalf, Captain Picard and Sherlock Holmes, all wise old men.

But then I decided to approach it as I do most issues in the Whoniverse – by assessing the canon qualifying. With thanks to Neil Gaiman, it is now canon that Time Lords can regenerate across the genders. So, it can happen!

Mary Tamm as Romana I

Should it, then? I got to thinking about the Female of the Species – Time Ladies, as they can be distinctly known. The most distinctive to my mind is Romana, the Fourth Doctor’s assistant during the Key to Time quest – Series 16, 1978-79. She was introduced as more than just the ‘damsel in distress’ that has so plagued Doctor Who – Romana was a Time Lord like the Doctor, but unlike the Doctor had qualified much higher in her training! The unlikely pair eventually bonded when the Doctor’s greater experience and improvised successes melded with Romana’s book-smarts and relative stability...

Lalla Ward as Romana II

Sadly, Mary Tamm would decide that the scriptwriters still couldn’t extract themselves from the premise that the Doctor’s assistant was basically a plot device to be captured or threatened and du jour.
handed – a fact which is arguably correct. Lalla Ward would take over as the second incarnation of Romana, only to be equally menaced by the villain

After their exit, Romana would be redeemed in the novels and audios that comprise that forgiving crucible of characterization, the Extended Universe. Romana would become Lord President of Gallifrey, and have entire stories revolving around her adventures on the Doctor’s homeworld which crucially didn’t involve the fact that she was a woman!

Gallifrey, it seems, was very progressive. Thalia and Flavia were both politically powerful, holding seats on the High Council; Thalia was a Lord Chancellor during the Second Omega Crisis, and Flavia would later ascend to the position of Lord President herself after another of the Doctor’s reluctant adventures back home. The Sixth Doctor would be menaced by the determined Lady Inquisitor, even if the script did call for her to flounder a bit with what was going on – and also wear a novelty birdcage on her head.

Left to Right: Lord Chancellor Thalia, High Chancellor (and later Lord President) Thalia, and Inquisitor Darkel

Kate O'Mara as The Rani

In time as well, Colin Baker’s incarnation would succumb to the more deadly gender – the Rani, a renegade like himself and played with overly-exagerrated hateur by Kate O’Mara, one of TV’s most favoured villains.
Just like our hero, she stole a TARDIS and used her superior intellect to carve a life for herself out in the universe – only she was unencumbered by petty morality. Thankfully this would frequently be her undoing!

All of these successful Time Ladies prove irrevocably that a female Doctor would be no bad thing – the real risk, I feel, is from bad writing, just like it plagued Romana so long ago.
Moffat and his script writers have made a few lurches away from the confused, screaming assistant – how would they cope with the confident, intelligent, alien Doctor contained within a woman’s body?
Of an equal risk is if Moffat pulls one of his famous surprises and switches the Doctor’s gender merely to spice up the show, or as a sop to the growing chorus of complaint from the ‘right-on’ crowd.
The show suffers from weak writing frequently enough now, let alone hamstringing it with an ill-thought shark-jump.

Done right though – with someone like the stark Tilda Swinton who recently acted as an equally alien figure as David Bowie, or the sinister Fiona Shaughnessy who excelled in bleak Channel 4 drama Utopia – there is no reason the Doctor couldn’t join the ranks of so many other Time Ladies who have excelled within this traditional, patriarchal, even misogynistic institution. Gallifreyan society? No, I mean the BBC! What an irony!

* * * * * * *

NB: I have purposefully avoided references to Lady Iris Wildthyme, the infamous and popular star of her own audio series from the Big Finish team. I’ve never heard them and thus feel I can’t do her justice.

Suffice to say I’ve heard good things about a post-middle-age, vodka-loving good time girl who just might be a parallel universe lush version of the Doctor – fit that into your arguments how you like!

Katy Manning as the irrepressible Lady Irish Wildthyme

End of an Era

Hello blog. It's been a while, in which a great deal has happened. Namely my final exam - in English Media Law.

It was an exciting topic, made all the more - shall we say, challenging - by the fact that the laws governing contempt and defamation are in such flux. I'd like to take this opportunity to be profusely grateful that my Lecturer in Law was the estimable Nigel Green, a battle-hardened journalist and truly inspirational teacher. He made a difficult, sometimes dull and potentially dangerous subject both interesting and approachable.

I came out of the exam broadly confident. I am certain that I understand the various laws that control how I report from the Courts, from press conferences, on sex attack victims and juveniles. No employer will find me unsure of the four factors of defamation, or the four key defences.
In fact they might find me avidly reading stories about landmark cases in legal history. The only way to keep up with this game is to stay ahead of it!

It was enjoyable on the whole, but I'm glad to get that behind me. It wraps up the entirety of my Journalism BA degree work - I submitted my dissertation at the end of April. That was a highly enjoyable piece of work entitled Fleet Street to Task Force and was an analysis of media reporting during the Falklands War of 1982. Again, I was able to do something I deeply enjoyed and then submit it for assessment. It's proof positive of what makes a career, rather than a job. The passion for the task.

Although I'm currently only temping, I understand the difficulty of making the transition from graduate to employed journalist. Right now my priority is restoring my overdraft to a reasonable level and contemplating my next move. I'll graduate formally on July 15th - and after that, even though I only have casual work in an unrelated field going on, I'll have financial security to seriously consider what I want to put my passion to.

It's been an amazing, challenging, frustrating, inspiring, and above all enjoyable few years. I can't credit the faculty highly enough, and they must have done their job truly properly, because of all the roles I considered post-graduation, one keeps appealing to me more...

Teaching journalism!

Bradford's own Batman - The latest 'real-life superhero'

All over West Yorkshire, locals are chuckling over news that a man dressed as Batman (and as the cheesy Sixties Adam West Batman too) has hauled a minor criminal into a Bradford police station.

Amazingly, this has precedence. The starched shirts of Wikipedia seem to be smothering their own giggles as they compile information about 'Real-Life Superheros' - everyday citizens who don colourful costumes to combat crime. Whilst they might not have Superman's invulnerability or Batman's billions, what they have usually have is pride, bravery, and a canny knack for promotion - and sometimes, if not most, a difficult relationship with conventional law enforcement!

Indeed, the police attitude is understandably against 'Vigilantism' and whilst nothing has yet occurred, incidents like these will no doubt force a landmark confrontation between the self-declared 'Enemies of Crime' and the legally-bound protectors who are permitted to dispense justice.

I telephoned West Yorkshire Police for a comment on this kind of "zero-tolerance in tights"  - their overwhelmed press office begged for time in responding until tomorrow morning! Commissioner Gordon must be busy, so bookmark this blog for an update...

Suspicions about the identity of this civic-minded crusader are ranging far and wide, and many suspected - or perhaps hoped - it was outspoken and promotionally-minded Bradford West MP George Galloway. He moved to quash the allegations:

Contrary to rumours sweeping gotham, I am not the Bradford Batman, However I take my hat off to him and wish him luck in the future.

— George Galloway (@georgegalloway) March 4, 2013

But isn't that precisely what Bruce Wayne would say? The odds on his real identity are already being calculated by Ladbrokes with an interesting selection of "What, really?" choices! I'd be interested in the odds of someone betting celebrity gardener Alan Titchmarsh is also a night-time crime nemesis  - but what a bulletproof secret identity!

Professor Brian Cathcart - Founder, Hacked Off campaign

Professor Cathcart at Journalism Week

Coming hot on the heels of yesterday's appearance by staunch press supporter, former News International Executive Editor Neil Wallis, was today's rebuttal from Professor Brian Cathcart - leading academic light of the Hacked Off alliance of hacking victims. They represent the strongest supporters of the Leveson Inquiry recommendations and are in direct conflict with the Fleet Street empires who have been exposed in the midst of the greatest wrongdoing in modern journalism.

Wallis' comments yesterday were highly provocative, and into the small hours I was tweeting with former Daily Star reporter turned moral crusader Richard Peppiatt as he responded to some of the slings and arrows exchanged at yesterday's session!

@thehoodedhack @neilwallis1 Aww, man who's made a career out of smearing & lying, continues smearing & lying, shocker..
— Rich Peppiatt (@richpeppiatt) February 27, 2013

Regardless of hurt feelings, the mood on the #LTJW feed was one that had been swayed by the "Wolfman's" charm to anti-Leveson sentiments. It was hard not to be convinced that our basic rights as Journalists were at the mercy of vengeful and distant celebrity personages - and Professor Cathcart had an uphill fight on his hands!

It's worth noting that Brian did not bother with a presentation and spoke directly to his audience, drawing the facts and figures straight from memory. His language was creative and exciting, much like Neil Wallis' - "Celebrities were subject to stalking and - let's face it - surveillance" he said of the scandal, wryly observing that the story of a massive corporation with a famous leader breaking the law would certainly make an entertaining book - and movie. Indeed, it already comes preloaded with celebrity faces!

Getting into the grit of details, Brian observed how the Guardian - whose reporter Nick Davies is widely credited as the man who broke the hacking scandal - ran 237 stories on the drama as it unfolded. Conversely, papers from the Mail empire ran just 37, usually criticizing the Guardian for mounting what appeared to be a "politically-motivated vendetta!"

Indeed, Brian strongly implies the presence of a "conspiracy - to cover up phone hacking" - a joint effort by titles both News International and not to bury any evidence of wrong-doing on Fleet Street.With relish he quotes an interview with Richard Murdoch from the Sixties, where the mogul said "Newspapers can hide things - and be a great power for evil." You can infact see the comment for yourself in this amazing archive footage courtesy of the BBC, at 1:50. Never before have such prophetic words been uttered - I am certain that Rupert would dearly like to "have no recollection" of this interview as he did so much else when placed before the Culture Committee as well as Lord Justice Leveson!

Meanwhile, Professor Cathcart is undaunted in his pursuit of the truth. "What is happening? The only newspapers reporting the scandal to begin with are the British national papers with the smallest circulation - the Guardian, the Independent, the Financial Times." There is a disconnect between the actions of the underdog papers and the powerful alliances of Murdoch's empire, and Dacre's, and the Trinity Mirror group.

The answer, he claims, is simple. "Journalists don't want to shine a light into their own backyards - and that is shaming, as a Journalist myself." In reality, he says, we should be a force for change, 'poking' the powerful and exposing wrondoing - but what does that make us, the press, if we won't do the same for ourselves?

He turned his attack on regulation - past, present and future, mentioning the Press Council from 1953, and the PCC from 1991 - both organisations grudgingly formed under threat of statutory reform. The results, he says, speak for themselves. 

History is repeating itself, we don't want another PCC@briancathcart #ltjw
— Journalism Week (@JournalismWeek) February 28, 2013

Stronger, statutory-backed press regulation, audited three-yearly, is "Nothing to be afraid of. It could become a kitemark, a badge of honour, a standard to be aimed for and to be held to." He contrasted this with his ending comment, taken from a taped conversation at the News of the World in 2002. "This is what we do, Charley - we go out and we destroy people's lives." We, as journalism students, have nothing to fear - but those kinds of tabloid hacks do.

- -

At this point he thanked us for our time, and turned the floor over to questions. The entire session was filmed as always, and at 33:35 you can see me ask the first question, passing on a direct quote from Neil Wallis that was made during his session the preceding day!

Many of the audience came away from this speech informed, but not especially swayed after the more charismatic speech of Mr Wallis. Indeed, Neil was able to push the buttons of fear and apprehension about the possible restraints placed on us if the Hacked Off campaigners succeed in having their recommendations passed - although Professor Cathcart acknowledged that David Cameron's administration is compromising significantly with the press to water down the Leveson recommendations as much as possible. 

After the Q&A finished, too quickly as always, I was able to talk to Brian one-on-one to ask another question about collusion between the media, the police and the politicians.

Journalism Week 2013 - Neil Wallis, former Executive Editor of the News of the World

Possibly one of the most highly anticipated speakers at Journalism Week was Neil Wallis, lauded in our programme as a former editor of The People, Executive Editor of the News of the World, and member of the Press Complaints Commission.

He was one of many journalists arrested following the phone-hacking scandal in 2011 on charges of conspiracy to intercept mobile communications. Just recently the Crown Prosecution Service dropped their case against him, citing a lack of evidence to secure a conviction.

If there is a man more qualified or able to talk to us about the journalism industry and the Leveson proposals, then we haven't met them yet! Certainly, the tone was set before he even began with his presentation entitled "LEVESON: Devil in the Detail - Why Inquiry Report Threatens Press Freedom In More Ways Than One". Quite clear what his feelings on the reforms of the media are!

Neil was introduced by his former employee, and current Leeds Trinity Senior Lecturer in Media Law - appropriately enough! - Nigel Green. It was a perfect moment for Neil's phone to ring, and one wag in the audience (I have my suspicions about who!) shouted "It's Leveson!" to laughter all round.

Turning then to the serious, Neil was candid about his arrest, his bail and his subsequent exoneration - "It's scary. You feel like wetting yourself! It brings everything to a grinding halt - your life, your family, your career." The mood of the room was actually sympathetic, and it will be interesting to see if that holds up tomorrow when we're joined by Professor Brian Cathcart of the Hacked Off campaign, bitter ideological opponents to Mr Wallis and co.

Back to today, and Neil - cleared of all charges - has now set his sights on those arguing for the toughest of press reforms as proposed by the Leveson Inquiry. He painted a very convincing picture of the dangers of appointing a statutory regulator - specifically one backed by (and therefore dominated by) Parliament.

A Parliament, of course, that is wracked by scandal, corruption and ineptitude - see left!
There has been no end to the procession of crimes and misdemeanours of our elected leaders - exposed, naturally, by the Press they're now struggling to gag.

Hitting the topical angle, Neil referred to the Rennard scandal engulfing Nick Clegg's Lib-Dems, and how it was broken by a Journalist, those self-appointed detectives that the Deputy Prime Minister has made inadvisable enemies of!

Picture courtesy of @DMJHull

He spoke rousingly and charmed an audience of - I'll be honest - naieve journalism students who have been raised on a diet of cynicism towards the Government, even though their (our?) faith is still in the Guardian and the ethical correctness of the Leveson Inquiry. Nonetheless, it's clear to see how he was able to wield such influence over a Murdoch newsroom - and we're only seeing the beauty of charm and not the 'Wolfman' beast!

When the Q&A came around after a very quick half-hour, Neil made it clear how he'd tackle press reform. Trinity Journalism Graduate, and next Paxman Ben Cropper asked him if the Press Complaints Commission - of which Neil had sat on the board as a tabloid Editor - was a "toothless watchdog".
Neil responded forcefully that the PCC simply lacked stronger investigative powers - which seems surprising as the main complaint against the PCC seemed to be its lack of punitive strength instead. As an editor, however, Neil stated how he spoke to the PCC practically every day, checking the suitability of his stories - and is that a comment on other editors who might not have held to that admirable practice? He made it clear that "People were not arrested becase they broke the Editors Code of Conduct - they broke the law. The PCC couldn't stand in the way of that."


At one point he turned the entire Q&A on its head and asked us at one point we'd fall back on that tried and tested method of chequebook journalism. I couldn't tell if the silence that greeted him was moral in fibre, or just squirming! A few hardy souls ventured to admit they'd pay out for stories, and uppermost in my mind was securing the Telegraph scoop on the Expenses scandal. It was an interesting moral conundrum, and he continued the theme when asked if there was indeed a culture of criminality amongst the tabloids - "No, but I know a lot of journalists who sail bloody close to the wind!"

It's fair to say Journalism has always operated in the 'grey' areas, both morally and legally - indeed, it's probably where it's most needed. I had decided long before this session to get into this as far as possible, and tweeted a former Journalism Week guest - infamous tabloid apostate Richard Peppiatt. 


I asked Richard what I should specifically put to Neil, considering their naturally opposing viewpoints on a common topic. By the wonders of modern technology, the link to the right will show you all of Neil's talk and at 43:35 I am the person who asks the question - "Regarding press freedom, which you have discussed extensively and proudly, how do you reconcile it with the fact that all 175 titles owned by Murdoch simultaneously supported the Iraq War?"

The response I get is somewhat confusing - not certain that I would describe Rupert Murdoch's work as "left-of-centre papers". Nor would I describe all of his titles as "not being huge opinion formers." And his decision to mention the 'Editor of the Times' as opposing proprietorial influence seems laughably inappropriate!

Raising the most eyebrows, of course, is Neil's vehement response to Mr Peppiatt which came across as a violet drubbing. No less energetic is his attack moments later on Professor Cathcart, but Richard himself has already been responding to the comments via Twitter and the Journalism Week hashtag #ltjw until just recently, several hours after the talk has concluded!

Will the Hacked Off campaign respond equally forcefully to this tabloid supremo turned press freedom fighter? No doubt there will be even more exciting developments as Journalism Week comes to an end for another year, continuing the theme whereby I ask impertinent questions of important people!

Until tomorrow...!