Last week, at the London College of Communications, Sun editor, Rebekah Wade delivered the annual Hugh Cuddlip lecture to students of journalism.

In the old days, one of the first things they taught young hacks on the Chuffing Sodbury Argus was to make sure they always spelled the punters’ names right. Not, it seems, any more at the London College of Communications, the country’s premier hack school, who announced their up-coming lecturer as “Rebecca” Wade. I wonder if she was cross. You don’t go round spelling your name “Rebekah” unless you really care.

That, however, is not the point. More interesting perhaps are the criteria by which speakers are chosen to deliver this important lecture (past deliverers: Alastair Campbell, Paul Dacre, Andrew Marr and Michael Grade.) What, you might ask, could the editor of one of the most dishonest, self-serving and prurient of British tabloids have to tell any aspiring journalist that might enhance their future career, other than the clear knowledge that, if all else fails, you can always sell your soul?

She beat the drum for the few cynically inspired “campaigns” which she’s launched, including, as News of the World editor in 2001, the “naming and shaming” of convicted paedophiles when the paper took matters into its own hands by printing pictures of 50 offenders.

But when an entirely innocent 49-year-old man was attacked after being mistakenly identified as one of the paedophiles because, like the named man, he was wearing a neck brace, a proposal to identify a further 110,000 was dropped. The police had also claimed that the paper’s campaign was wrecking investigations and potentially placing children at risk. It was described by Tony Butler, Chief Constable of Gloucestershire Police as ‘irresponsible journalism’. He said he had attempted to get the newspaper not to run the campaign. ‘I strongly pointed out what the possible pitfalls of publication were to the News of the World staff,’ he said. ‘I am saddened to see that they have ignored my advice and published without any evidence.’

The media consensus at the time was that Rebekah Wade’s campaign was a naive stunt to curry public opinion. She’d only recently been appointed to the Screws and was keenly aware of the need to prove herself. It’s hard to believe now, after her innings at the Sun since 2003, that she’d promised readers of the NoW fewer girly pictures, less prurience and fewer celebs and vice girls.

In the lecture she repeated her recent claim that breach of privacy actions, like that brought by Max Mosley against the News of the World were restricting investigative journalism, while failing, naturally, to point out that if journalists are pursuing real news stories of genuine public interest, they are protected against prosecution.

She delivered more sanctimonious stuff about ‘getting close to her readers’, which seems to mean arriving at lowest common denominator journalism, while assessing what inducements will get those ‘readers’ to go on buying the Sun.

About journalistic excellence there was very little, and even less in her own newspaper to offer as example. It would be helpful to know why one of our leading Schools of Journalism felt that an editor of the Sun would have anything of value to teach their students.

Those who don’t read (or ‘look at’) the Sun won’t have seen the fine piece of journalism that filled its front page the day after Wade’s lecture. It focused on the meaty matter of the quantity and hue of facial make-up being worn by an insignificant female student at Leeds University. The paper felt that Prince Harry’s – apparently former – girlfriend was looking a shade too orange. These are Sun priorities. And they are delivered with spite, envy and a lack of respect for an individual’s privacy or emotional state.

These are not values and priorities that should be guiding us or our children. And they shouldn’t be guiding young journalists either.

Popularity: 2% [?]