Exhibit JC42 - The Leveson Inquiry

For Distribution to CPsHacks and Dons - Teaching at the London University Journalism School 1919-1939: Its origin,development and influence.success in Fleet Street. He clearly thought we all read The Times and noneof us obviously had a nose for news. ’4 Dunhill had started work in hisfamily’s tobacco business, but had decided on a change: ’3ournalisrn wasattractive, for I liked writing. The course seemed the very thing: itcommitted me to nothing, perhaps for two years - and my father was willingto pay. King’s College was happy to take me - and I think probably anybody- so I presented myself that October and became enrolled. ’5Dunhill felt that his story was not untypical for those pre-war days andobserved: ’we all seemed to come from established and fairly prosperousbackgrounds. The prevalent unemployment touched us little.’Commenting on the academic side Dunhill mentioned that one Professorof English always refused to set a subject for their essays. Clarke chimed inwith: ’Never mind what those English professors tell you. Forget all that.We don’t want composition and that nonsense. We want a story.’ As thiswas in the days before any central control existed it is not surprising thatDunhill’s feelings were likened to that of being a football ’kicked aboutbetween Grub Street and the Academic Halls. ’8Another student was highly critical of the academic lecturers who did notturn up for lectures and she said the course was badly organized: shewondered if the professors engaged in that side of the work took thejournalism course seriously: ’1 can hardly think so, from what I have seen. ,7This young lady also objected to writing essays which were never returned,but she also maintained that the course was excellent, although there wasnot sufficient opportunity for practical work.These ’stock character’ reactions possibly typify the tenuous grasp eachside, academic and journalist, held, conceptually, of the other. So that Dr.Harrison could add a postscript, in his second letter to Clarke in November,1935: ’How can I do some journalism myself? I have some things to say ofgeneral interest - at least I think so.’Dr. Harrison himself believed that a natural gift was what was needed tomake the good reporter, backed up by learning the art of writing andemploying another of nature’s gifts: empathy. Reporters who did not dotheir homework before interviewing someone - whether it was looking uppeople in Who’s Who or the corresponding book of the interviewee’sprofession - would not win their confidence. That extra knowledge (eitherfrom books, or personal contacts) could make all the difference; that wasthe natural gift of empathy, mentioned earlier, but backed up by what Dr.Harrison regarded as the ’right kind of education’ - in this case, knowingwhere, and what, to look up, or who to ask.Dr. Harrison was a firm believer in the Art of Conversation, and studentsattending his tutorial sessions in English Composition must have had everyopportunity of developing the art, when discussing their fortnightly writtenwork for that subject. The titles in the English Composition examinationpapers also reflect the flavour of those sessions, reinforcing Dr. Harrison’sstrategy, that the ideal journalist was an all-rounder, supplied with generalknowledge of home, and international, politics, sport, art of all kinds andeven religion.In this way, Dr. Harrison obviously felt his talents were under-employedand needed the supplementary income such writing for the press might]4!MOD100051312