The dangerous identity politics of Cambridge’s Simon Woolley

Andrew Gilligan's column argues that Lord Simon Woolley's defence of his Trafalgar Square remarks is false. In passing, The Spectator suggests that Jason Arday embellishes his CV, a charge the column never supports. It also calls Byline Times a deranged truther outlet with nothing to back the label. The column's argument against Woolley is its own and is not a finding.

Opinion piece: read for false claims of fact and for fairness to the people it names, not for its opinions.

1. Smears a named person

   Serious

   “an Arday-style CV embellishment”

   Why this matters

   The words "Arday-style CV embellishment" use Jason Arday's name as shorthand for padding a CV.

   The impression it gives

   A reader comes away believing that Jason Arday is known for embellishing his CV, so that "Arday-style" is a recognised kind of dishonesty.

   The context

   The column offers nothing about Arday's CV or qualifications. The only claims it makes about him concern his public appearances and a reported book advance. The charge against a named person rests on nothing in the piece.

   Written straight

   It was never clear whether the false statement came from Woolley or from the college; both have refused to answer questions on the subject.

2. Smears a named person

   Minor

   “one of Britain’s most deranged Arday truther outlets”

   Why this matters

   The words "most deranged Arday truther outlets" brand a named news organisation, Byline Times, as a conspiracy outlet.

   The impression it gives

   A reader comes away believing that Byline Times peddles conspiracy theories and cannot be trusted.

   The context

   The column gives no example of anything Byline Times published that was false. It even credits the site with qualifying Woolley's claim, which cuts against the label.

   How we know

   • Elsewhere in the article“Even Byline Times felt obliged to put square brackets qualifying Woolley’s claim”