How fear works

Adrian Monck provides a few snippets from David Leigh's speech last night, in which Leigh listed some of the investigative campaigns he had undertaken which had actually led to change. His concluded:

There’s only one reason why these stories have an effect. I like to think, of course, it’s down to our own extreme personal brilliance. But it’s not. It’s because a story on the front page of the Guardian carries clout.

...

And that’s perhaps one of the biggest dangers of the media revolution. When the media fragment – as they will – and splinter into a thousand websites, a thousand digital channels – all weak financially – then we’ll see a severe reduction in the power of each individual media outlet. The reporter’s voice will struggle to be heard over the cacophony of a thousand other voices.

Interesting, very interesting. There is a response to this - that a thousand voices can self-organise into something very powerful (as Dan Rather will tell you) - but I think there's also a very valid point in here. We've had several decades of influential media moguls and editors who could shift opinion with a sweep of their pen. While we should not mourn Beaverbrook and his nefarious ilk (or the influence, real or perceived, of the Sun on domestic UK policy), we should also be wary of how the way media operates as a check on government is shifting in this country. Worth keeping an eye on, at the very least.