Does the media fear constitutional reform?

Anthony Barnett (London OK): The ignorance, philistinism and meanness of London’s professional journalists (or ‘hacks’ as they sometimes describe themselves with unusual accuracy) rarely surprises but can sometimes outdo itself. Gordon Brown’s declaration of constitutional intent, opening the way for a “new settlement” is matter of great interest to a population that despises the lies and spin of modern politics and is manifestly disturbed by issues of who is and is not British. Our mediacrats are not so interested. They blame the boredom of “the average punter”. But ‘boredom’ is often code for repression. With few exceptions the hacks love the lies, the personalisation and the informal. It gives them privileged access to our uncodifed political order: sofa politics needs and feeds sensational journalism. They have been twins with a mutual interest in the old regime. Most hacks fear a grown-up constitution that might deprive them of their sandpit, oblige them to stop being childish and even respect the public. To manage this they often pretend it is not really happening. In today’s Sunday papers, the Observer’s Andrew Rawnsley welcomes Brown’s call for a renewed constitution because he regards himself as “an anorak” and thinks we need “consultation” over draft legislation and “a better ministerial code”. The Sunday Times sets out Brown’s programme in 10 points and under “The Conduct of Politics” it puts “honesty in politics” followed by “reform of the constitution”. These are just two examples of a self-induced mental myopia which can't see long-term structural and institutional change except in sofa-style terms of behaviour.