In evidence to a House of Lords’ inquiry into the government’s spin machine, Nicholas Jones says televised lobby briefings would introduce a new sense of discipline and accountability. If Downing Street had a publicly-identified spokesperson who appeared on camera, it would set a new standard for attribution within the rest of the government.

The House of Lords Communications Committee is conducting an inquiry into whether the government communications system is “open, impartial, efficient and relevant to the public”. In written evidence to the committee Jones said:

There could hardly be a more opportune moment to consider an overhaul of the government communications system and to chart a new sense of direction for civil servants working in the information service. The forthcoming general election and the installation of a new administration will provide an ideal opportunity for a fresh start. What is needed is a change of culture and a new presumption that the flow of information from the state to the media should be de-politicised and that all news providers outlets should have equal access.

Hand to hand combat between the government and political correspondents would continue if the Conservatives were elected because an administration led by David Cameron would be just as determined to try to control the news agenda.

This was the conclusion of journalists and press officers at a seminar held by the Westminster Media Forum (1.7.2008). The two sides felt that the politicisation of civil service information officers, and the likelihood that any future government would find itself on the defensive, meant that further trench warfare was inevitable.

Such is the depth of the government’s unpopularity that there is little immediate likelihood of Gordon Brown being able to take control of the news agenda once again. He is being abandoned even by the newspapers of Rupert Murdoch and his only chance of fighting back effectively is to challenge a hostile news media head on. However much he might be tempted to seek refuge in the routines of the past, the spin of New Labour, which he previously helped to deploy with such flair, has to remain a distant memory.

What the Prime Minister needs is an official spokesman -- or spokeswoman -- who is capable of promoting government policy, preferably by holding televised news briefings. If Brown could only delegate the task of providing immediate responses to an open and upfront spokesperson, he could then devote more time to preparing himself for far fewer but more effective news conferences and interviews.

Gordon Brown’s formative years as a politician were spent in opposition fighting the Conservatives. Once Labour were in power and he became Chancellor, Brown was in effect in “opposition” again, promoting himself at the expense of Tony Blair. For the first time the Prime Minister has found himself continually on the defensive. In a speech at Coventry University (22.5.2008), Nicholas Jones argued that the only way Brown can deal with an avalanche of negative publicity is to face up to the news media head on and adopt a far more open and transparent communications strategy.

While the warnings about the demise of viable journalism could hardly have been any clearer, when the vote was taken it was overwhelmingly in support of the freedom and opportunities offered by the internet. Unesco’s annual World Press Freedom Day debate (2.5.2008) produced a spirited exchange of views but ended with a 43-13 vote to reject a motion that “new media is killing journalism.”

It was modestly put but heartfelt nonetheless: bloggers believe that crap journalists are finally feeling the heat.

When a trio of celebrated bloggers were brought together by the Adam Smith Institute (16.4.2008) they were united in their belief that the collective strength of the new media was helping to start to improve the accuracy and quality of the main stream providers of news and information.

Celebrity reporting has had a corrosive influence on British journalistic standards. Whether the stories are sycophantic or invented the effect has been the same: a showbiz style of story-telling has been replicated in sports reporting, politics and business. In a lecture at the University of East London (3.4.2008) Nicholas Jones pulled back the veil to expose the hidden influences that have besmirched celebrity reporting and damaged the reputation of British journalism.

Like other powerful but controversial institutions the European Parliament is stepping up its investment in what amounts to paid-for journalism. Contracts are about to be awarded for funding programmes to be broadcast by local and international television channels. But, with editorial budgets for investigative and analytical journalism in steep decline, are the European Parliament -- and also the European Commission -- faced with no alternative but to buy news coverage in the media market place in the hope of gaining some favourable exposure? If the initial reports are correct, and if the contracts likely to be awarded for programmes on CNN and ITV are to be controlled by script and even post-production approval, the European Parliament could be in danger of repeating the worst examples of embedded journalism during the Iraq War and might well end up financing nothing more than blatant propaganda. Nicholas Jones examines an initiative which is already producing some agonised soul searching among Europe’s journalists.