the book by reproducing precisely the kind of falsehood and distortion which it attempts to expose.

In the book, I argue that part of the reason why journalists so frequently fail to tell the truth is simply that they are not given the time to find it. And before I have time to say "Told you so", I find myself confronted on the BBC's Today programme by two senior Fleet figures who insist that I am wrong, even though one of them, John Mullin from the Independent on Sunday, admitted he had read only half of the book; and the other, Stewart Kuttner from the News of the World, appeared to have read not a word.

Nervous - they're nervous. Simon Jenkins and Magnus Linklater (whom I revere) both have written more or less negative pieces which would surely strike most of those who have read the book as missing the point entirely.

One editor, who may as well remain nameless, encouraged a young reporter to phone me with a dotty smear about my private life. After a while, the reporter

accepted that the story was false and said goodbye. Two hours later, he was back with the news that his editor nevertheless wanted him to pursue it! It took hours and my stern declaration to the editor that I'd recorded the reporter's admission that the story was false before I finally stopped it.

Some have been (in my possibly self-serving view) courageous: Peter Oborne, Peter Wilby and Roy Greenslade have all stepped forward and said there's something important here. I thought Mary Riddell was generous to acknowledge any virtue in the book when she was writing in the Observer, whose old regime comes out badly.

But still the question remains: why should an industry whose primary object is to tell the truth be so nervous about having the truth told about itself?

'Flat Earth News: an award winning reporter exposes falsehood, distortion and propaganda in the global media', Chatto and Windus