Freedom to disclose

There is a fear that too much press freedom may now be taken away in this country to prevent disasters like Rupert Murdoch's staff illegally hacking into phones, bringing subsequent demands for an independent inquiry and new regulations.
But how much press freedom is there now? The competitiveness of London journalism,both in-house and among the Fleet Street pack, ensures that many stories get into print and on air as well as online which otherwise would not. (One exception is the BBC news, whose editors seem to think that carrying the same leading news headline for 12 hours and more can be called "news".)
Other stories never see the light of day unless some tame MP can be persuaded to raise the subject in the privileged atmosphere of the House of Commons, freed from the libel laws.
Otherwise, the laws remain supreme along with possible contempt of court actions and breaking of national security codes. Superinjunctions have been taken out, stopping newspapers not only from printing the stories, but investigating them. At one time, a police demand that a story should be stopped could be met with the reply from a night news editor, "Sorry, the presses are already running." I don't know whether anyone has tried this with a superinjunction, but the consequences would be fearsome.
The book about our security services, "Spycatcher" was successfully banned from coverage in British newspapers in 1986. We had to rely on copies brought over by friends from the States if we wanted to read it. In America, the libel laws are less strict, but the newspapers fewer and less competitive,making our national newspaper coverage a more lively scene. It is impossible, looking at the general financial results, to see why anyone would want to found or buy a newspaper to make money. They are far more likely to make a hefty loss. The reason they are sought after therefore, is power. Lord Northcliffe knew all about this, long before Rupert Murdoch managed to acquire power and some profit - though it would have brought more cash if invested elsewhere.
Revelations which can avoid successfully the limitations of the libel laws need good investigative journalists and too often investigations are avoided because they would cost too much. It might mean the best reporters being lost to a newsroom for months and, as with foreign coverage, the decision as to whether to go ahead with an investigation is often made on the basis of whether it is worth spending the money.
One where it was decided it was not worth it was at the Guardian in the early 'eighties, when a book was offered for coverage by the publishers, Andre Deutsch. It had been written by a New York lawyer, Joseph Borkin, a prosecutor at the postwar Nuremberg trials who had been shocked by what he considered to be too-lenient sentences handed out to the leaders of the chemical cartel I.G. Farben and was determined to put the record straight.
For not only had the three companies in the cartel - Bayer, Hoescht and BASF, still the world's leading chemical companies -funded the Nazi party and produced for it the synthetic oil and rubber they needed for the war. They had operated out of their own concentration camp near Auschwitz in Poland, using slave labour and prisoners of war who were worked, beaten, threatened and killed in conditions of unimaginable suffering. Those who could work no longer were either killed or sent back to Auschwitz to be gassed. The poison gas, Zyklon B, used to exterminate camp inmates, was also a product of the I.G. Farben empire.
The book was read and the story written by an experienced journalist, then handed to the lawyer. His opinion was firm. "You cannot carry this. The libel damages would be huge, more than the paper could afford. Imagine this being discussed at one of their board meetings."
The book was dropped, to the dismay of one or two of the older hands on the paper, still strongly in the tradition of its founder, C.P. Scott and his dictum "Facts are sacred, comment is free." I have always kept near me the copy of the book.
I.G. Farben was disbanded after the war but the three companies which formed it are still operating internationally. Bayer have U.K. headquarters at Newbury, Berkshire, BASF at Bradford in Yorkshire, and Hoescht merged with the French companhy Rhone-Poulenc S.A. in 1999.
Bayer, the inventor of aspirin as well as heroin at the end of the 19th century (all three have historic and distinguished scientific records, with Nobel prizewinners) claims it produces "Science for a Better Life" and offers competitions for its workers to produce ideas for a low carbon, greener environment. It supports local charities. Bayer have been asked for a comment on the CBG, but with no response so far.
After directors and executives had served the sentences handed out at Nuremberg for slavery, looting and mass murder, they returned. Fritz ter Meer, the senior scientist, became chairman of the supervisory board of Bayer and after his death, the company had wreaths placed annually on his grave.
There is still little public knowledge about this here. But in Germany a protest group was formed by people living near the Bayer plant in the Rhineland. The CBG (Coalition against Bayer dangers) seek compensation for the I.G. Farben Monowitz camp survivors - which was paid out by Bayer - and organising meetings for them to describe their experiences, they are also strong in pursuit of the company's scientific products. Philipp Mimkes, a founder of CBG, which now has a distinguished board of scientists and academics advisers, says "The Allies
needed Bayer after the war for the products it needed in the Cold War and the public and the politicians whitewashed them."
But they are now under fire internationally from various quarters. Baye pesticides have been linked to the decline of bees and birds, there have been protests and compensation paid about GM maize and rice, and stories about risks from the Mirena contraceptives and a heart drug.
CBG were taken to court by Bayer in the 1990's, but the case was unsuccessful after taking over five years. They have made contact with a supporting group in Pittsburgh and went over there last summer to join a crowded meeting. "There have been dozens of accidents in worker safety, pesticides poisoning and pharmaceuticals," says Mimkes. "But it is difficult to get support abroad." In Germany, they have had support from the Green party. They have 1000 members, of varying ages and occupations, mainly in the Rhineland area. Why do they not campaign against Hoescht and BASF also? Mimke says it is a matter of time and resources and Bayer, as their neighbour, is the main concern.
The account of how much I.G. Farben was involved, not only in the separate action of setting up their own concentration camp at Monowitz and the thousands killed there, but in actually helping the Nazis to power, giving money and open support, (having ridded I.G. Farben of its Jewish members) is told in chilling detail in "Hell's Cartel" a book by the journalist and columnist for Al Jazeera, Diarmuid Jeffreys, published by Bloomsbury in 2008 and in the US in the same year.
It is minutely and painstakingly researched - a work that took three years - and started by Jeffreys after he was working on a book on aspirin and started to follow Bayer's later history.
As well as the upsetting account of life in the Momowitz camp, the way in which the cartel was able to assist and keep the controlling political group in power and support it towards war is the most compelling part of the book. But now we are back to Mr. Murdoch again.

ends