The Guardian - sort of...

Today, a very good friend came over. We chatted about some of our shared experiences at our previous school and our frustration that injustices had yet to be resolved. One experience came up that I have not developed in the blog thus far – an ‘article’ on the Guardian Jobs website.

At the end of last year, I included notes from correspondence with the DfE (see DfE 10.12.22):

A governor who is a freelance journalist has twice shown conflict of interest relating to [the head]. [They] commented on the [highly critical] article in the [local paper] in defence of [the head] without stating [their] role on the Board. Since published an extremely positive piece on [the head] on the Guardian Job website (then removed [presumably because they] did not declare own interest by holding a Board role at [the school]. It [was for a period] put back up with addendums at the top and bottom of the article.

Indeed, shortly after the publication in February 22 of the article in the local press (see The Article & Statements both 25.05.22 and Lack of action 29.08.22), instigated by myself, other ex-colleagues and concerned parents, an article was published online in the Guardian Jobs https://recruiters.theguardian.com/ section. As mentioned above, it was a celebration of the head’s achievements as a woman in education and ‘leading by example’… many of us with first-hand experience of working with the head felt that not only was the article entirely misleading, but we were puzzled that it was presented on the school website was as if it was a feature piece by a Guardian journalist. When we saw who wrote the article, it became clear what had happened. I would argue that this piece of hot air PR was a cynical response to the local press article: an effort in damage limitation, pulled together quickly to ensure it was at the top of any web searches - rather than the local press article detailing from a number of perspectives the toxic culture that had developed at the school under the current head’s leadership.  

As soon as I became aware of this puff piece, I sent filled in a comment on the Guardian Jobs website to point out this cynical manoeuvre. Below is the correspondence that ensued.

______________

17.03.22

Dear Alex,

Thank you for contacting the Guardian. The profile you referred to is commercial marketing content on the Guardian’s recruitment site, supplied by an external agency, and is completely separate from Guardian journalism. The content was updated to state that the author is a former governor at the school when we were made aware of this. We are not in a position to comment on the internal school matters that your email referenced.

Yours sincerely,

(…)

Head of Sales, Guardian Jobs

______________

17.03.22

Hi (…),

Thanks for getting back to me. Who should I get in touch with at The Guardian to make them aware that the school's website is claiming the article is an interview with one of your journalists?

Thanks,

Alex

______________

21.03.22

Dear Alex,

Thank you for your reply. We are aware but it appears the school have now changed the description on their website. 

Yours sincerely, 

(…)

Head of Sales, Guardian Jobs

______________

21.03.22

Thanks (…), have just checked. They took their time about it but they have. 

______________

Obviously, I had not been the only one to complain. I was soon contacted by another ex-colleague who told me that they had also been in touch with the Guardian. Shortly after, I was contacted by the parent of one of my students from the school; they advised me that a number of parents had also complained to the paper. It would appear that one parent in particular had beaten us to it and made their displeasure at this lack of integrity very clear.

The Guardian acted quickly, adding text at the end of the article to accurate credit it as being paid content written by an actual governor of the school and noting that this correction was made as soon as it was made aware of the connection. Subsequently it has been taken down (The Guardian is one of our rare papers with integrity), so while the news page of the school website still highlights the article, the link is now empty. I’m not sure why the school has kept the news snippet on there but can’t imagine these changes will have gone unnoticed by the school community. A similar article has popped up again since - this time repurposed for a headteachers’ online magazine. It is a slightly different iteration, but much of the fabrications and spin remain.