Bizarre decision

Words fail. So after contracting with ICE to help track down illegal immigrants in the US, Thomson Reuters is now pledging - guns ablazing - to honour and support Britain's Armed Forces - why just Britain's? - and treat with "fairness and respect" those who serve or have served in them.

Assuming that pension increases for Reuter ex-service retirees are not in mind, it might be asked just what this "Covenant" does mean. Can we expect instructions to Editorial to lay off stories that might cast those serving "our country" (!!) in a less than glorious light? Top brass from the military "Community" on the Board to supervise implementation of the pledges? Or just a Thomson Reuters wreath at the Cenotaph on Remembrance Sunday?

And with all this, and probably much more, in place, the Company will apparently humbly ask the "Community": "How are we doing?"

One wonders if those who drafted this document and the executives who announced it have any concept of what Reuters is (or was)? Of its history of fighting (if not always totally successfully) to maintain its independence from any government, or arm of government, in any country?

Or, for that matter, of the danger in which they are placing Reuter correspondents who in many less than democratic countries for decades have had to contend with host government claims - and sometimes more than just claims - that they are agents of the British state? As someone said in another context: "Mr Putin must be laughing up his sleeve."

One can wonder what lies behind this bizarre decision. Has some indignant retired General now in business taken umbrage at something he saw in a Reuter story and threatened to cancel some lucrative contracts? During the Falklands War then editor Manfred Pagel had a call from an angry Admiral at the Defence Ministry demanding "more patriotism" in the Reuter coverage. Only on that occasion the demand met a resolute Germanic rebuff.

Whatever, it can only be hoped that the current editor-in-chief Alessandra Galloni, who presumably was not consulted about the implications of this "Covenant", will now follow her own injunction to journalists and "break glass" to ensure that Reuter journalists views are heard and to get senior management to understand just what they have done. But I doubt that that will be much fun. ■