Last Sunday, 16th May, The Mail on Sunday published an article based on a secret recording of a private conversation between Lord Triesman, the then Chairman of the Football Association and the leader of England’s bid for the 2018 World Cup, and a woman named Melissa Jacobs who had previously worked for him and who may or may not have been his former mistress. The conversation took place in a London restaurant. In the course of this conversation Lord Triesman mentioned some gossip to the effect that Spain and Russia were planning to bribe referees at the forthcoming World Cup in South Africa. He also spoke in less than flattering terms about John Terry, the former England captain.
The conversation apparently took place about two weeks before the story appeared and, in the interim, Miss Jacobs had, it is now alleged, tried to sell the story to one or more other newspapers and had also retained the services of Max Clifford, the publicist. It has been reported that The Mail on Sunday paid her £75,000. The paper maintains that it had not set up the “sting” and only learned of the conversation after the event.
As a consequence of the newspaper story, Lord Triesman resigned his two football posts and English hopes of staging the 2018 World Cup have been damaged, possibly fatally.
I have considerable sympathy for Lord Triesman. His remarks were made in what he believed was a private conversation with a friend. They were not intended for a wider audience. He was naturally embarrassed by their subsequent publication and he had no real alternative but to do the honourable thing and resign. His position would have been untenable if he had remained as leader of the World Cup bid.
The behaviour of Melissa Jacobs appears despicable. It is unclear why she behaved in the way she did. She may have been a woman scorned, simply motivated by money or both. She has been vilified in the Press and on the Web. Her victory in damaging Lord Triesman appears to have been Pyrrhic.
It is unsurprising, but nevertheless gratifying, that The Mail on Sunday has also been widely vilified. It has tried to justify its publication of the story on the basis that “The public is clearly entitled to know about such allegations”. Now there’s a surprise. It is highly debatable whether the public is entitled to the information in the disgraceful circumstances in which it was obtained. I have read that an abortive attempt was made to prevent the newspaper from publishing the story. This indicates that the law was unable to assist. Surely there should now be a coherent law of privacy upon which reliance can be placed in situations such as these. In the meantime, the Triesmans of the world are reliant on the judgement of people such as the editor of The Mail on Sunday. God help them. I think the vast majority of Englishmen will not think that the article was in the public interest. Indeed, quite the reverse if the country’s hopes of hosting the World Cup have been seriously jeopardised. It would serve the newspaper right if the football fans among its readers switched allegiance to another publication.
I read today that Gary Lineker had resigned as a columnist for The Mail on Sunday because of the publication of the story. It is not clear to me whether that was as a matter of protest or because he felt that he had a conflict of interests on account of his role as an ambassador for the 2018 bid. Whatever the reason, he has done the right thing.
Leave a Reply