Guardian and Scott Trust leaders faced furious staff this morning as they answered questions about the plan agreed last night to sell The Observer to Tortoise Media.
Numerous staff made impassioned speeches and there were times when Scott Trust chair Ole Jacob Sunde and Guardian editor-in-chief Katharine Viner were openly jeered. Guardian Media Group chair Anna Bateson was also present, as was GMG chair Charles Gurassa who is understood to have read out a prepared statement.
There was standing room only in the morning conference room in the Guardian offices at King’s Place, London with more staff joining via Zoom.
Questions asked of management at the meeting included: Why has the sale been concluded so quickly and why were staff not consulted?
[Read more: Guardian chair says Tortoise deal will end ‘inevitable decline’ of Observer in open letter shared with Press Gazette]
It emerged during the meeting that the Scott Trust is investing £5m in the newly merged Tortoise/Observer business. This brings the total amount of investment which Tortoise says it has to spend on The Observer to £25m.
Anger at the meeting appears to have centred around a sense of betrayal felt by Observer journalists, many of whom strongly identify with The Guardian’s mission of providing liberal journalism for free to the world. Many fear that a paywalled Observer will have a much smaller audience which will be very different, and more elite, than the one they write for now.
Leading Guardian and Observer journalists attending the meeting included science editor Robin McKie, columnist Andrew Rawnsley, investigative reporter Carole Cadwalladr and comment writer Sonia Sodha.
At one point one of the journalists at the meeting said the deal between The Scott Trust and Tortoise Media looked like “an establishment stitch-up”.
They accused the leadership team of “riding roughshod over the Scott Trust values of integrity and honesty” because The Observer’s sale was seen as a closed process involving just one bidder.
One speaker said: “You want The Observer behind a paywall so that it is not a rival to The Guardian.”
The speaker said the process was “damaging for the reputation of The Guardian, you should all be thoroughly ashamed of yourselves” – to which there was applause and cheering.
At one point editor Viner said she had been worried about the fate of a one-day, UK-only, print-only title for some time. This comment was met with shouts and jeers. One person shouted “we’re not print only” and another said: “Our journalism goes out around the world as Guardian journalism.”
A relatively famous and multi-award-winning Guardian journalist asked Scott Trust chair Ole Jacob Sunde if he would call him by his name or if he knew the names of any of the journalists in the room. Sunde admitted that he did not know the journalist’s name.
The journalist responded: “I’ve been here for 34 years… Sonia, Carole… these are quite well-known people – you should know who we are.”
The Scott Trust chair said: “I’ve been working in media for 30 years, why do you think I have done that? Why do you think I come to London often to chair The Scott Trust? You think that is because I don’t care? Of course I care.
“I’ve spent a large part of my life trying to promote liberal journalism throughout Europe. I’ve done that in Scandinavia, I’ve saved journalists’ jobs in Scandanavia, I’ve tried to do it here. That is why I am here. That is why I am putting a large part of my life into this. The fact I do not know your name should not overshadow the fact that I really care about this.”
The journalist said: “To care about the Guardian and Observer you have to know us, you have to read us, you have to care about us, you have to know our values and to be overseen by someone who doesn’t know any of us…”
At this point Viner intervened and said: “Is it because he is foreign?” This comment was met with loud jeers and comments such as “that’s shameful” and “that’s really out of order”.
Around 100 Guardian and Observer journalists, and several hundred more joining online, attended a meeting of the joint NUJ chapel on Friday afternoon and agreed to press on with a second 48-hour strike scheduled for next week. There was some discussion about whether a vote should be held censuring editor-in-chief Viner and it was agreed to discuss this again next week.
The joint chapel issued a statement saying: “We were outraged to wake up to news this morning that members of the Scott Trust had chosen to approve the deal while our action was taking place. The decision to move ahead with the deal, in principle, underlined their refusal to take on board the well-founded objections and strength of opposition from journalists and readers.
“This chapel is still opposed to the transfer and believes that by ramming this deeply unpopular and opaque deal through they have undermined their values and sparked a crisis in governance, a responsibility that lies at the door of the boards of the Scott Trust and Guardian Media Group.
“The Guardian and Observer has a long and proud history of journalists’ participation in the organisation; this has never felt more at risk. We urge the company to pause, reconsider all options and the impact this will have on the standing of the Observer and the long-term future of liberal journalism.
“Two days of strikes take place next week, and the Guardian and Observer NUJ chapel will be meeting to consider further actions.”
Guardian response to ‘inaccurate information’
The Guardian News and Media press office has issued a fact sheet stating: “During the last few months, inaccurate information has circulated about the Observer and the proposed deal.”
It sets out answers to “key questions” including the following: “Has the deal been rushed and secretive?
“No. We were first approached by Tortoise Media at the start of the year. Initial investigations of the proposal were done over the following months. When it became clear the offer was serious we investigated further and in September we told staff we were considering the proposal.
“Since then we have spoken to our journalists, sought professional insight from external experts, and are in a formal consultation process with our unions.
“GMG considered all options available and concluded Tortoise Media is best positioned to take on the Observer and continue its legacy.”
Another question and answer reads: “Have the Scott Trust and GMG looked at alternatives?
“Yes. A thorough scoping exercise was done at the outset of this process to understand who else might be a potential investor. Aside from Tortoise, we have not received any credible alternative bids to date – we have had two separate approaches through lawyers with no substantive details. They were anonymous and then leaked to the press.
“Separately, Dale Vince has said he would be interested in the Observer only if there was a problem concluding the deal.”
In an earlier email to staff the Scott Trust chair said: “We’re confident we have agreed the best possible way forward for staff, readers and the future of both titles. It is a model that will see investment in journalism, enshrines the Scott Trust’s values in the Observer’s future, and protects the Observer and Guardian’s ability to continue to produce trusted, liberal journalism.”
Tortoise Media founder James Harding said in a statement today: “We are honoured and excited at the prospect of working together to renew The Observer, a name that represents the best of liberal, pioneering journalism. We admire its temperament, both tolerant and humane. We love its appetite for the arts and, of course, food.
“We promise its readers we will do all we can to live up to its history as a defender of human dignity and to give it a new lease of life as a powerful, progressive voice in the world.”
Email pged@pressgazette.co.uk to point out mistakes, provide story tips or send in a letter for publication on our "Letters Page" blog
