Pip Dunn, Rail Magazine and the demise of DNLL and FM Rail

Could anybody answer me a simple question?

Why was Deltic 9000 Locomotives Ltd a small volunteer company with one
locomotive running on the mainline, more important to Pip Dunn,
Railways Illustrated and Rail magazine than FM Rail the countries
biggest independent locomotive and rolling stock provider, holder of
only one of three national track access licenses, owner of 90
locomotives and employer of over 50 people?

Let me explain, cast your mind back to the demise of DNLL, Dunn worked
himself up into a frenzy. No less than two editorials were devoted to
DNLL, numerous large articles and Dunn even wrote to the letters page
of his own magazine to agree with himself. All this for one small
company with one loco?

Now consider FM Rail, not a word prior to the liquidation, indeed Dunn
wrote a glowing article about his day out on the green saloon and Rail
magazine was quoting an interview with the FM Chairman about the
revival of long dead 47s at MOD Kinton and post administration both
magazines have been very muted indeed one would be hard put to see any
coverage at all.

Remember a furious editorial by Dunn about the treatment by DNLL of
privately owned 50002? Yet oddly there has not been a word by either
magazine about FM's treatment of privately owned 08631, 47550, 47701,
31422, 31423 and a collection of coaches, all of which have suffered
in FM's storage leaving their owners in some cases with some large
bills to put right.

So why the difference in coverage? Obviously Dunn has not got a friend
who wanted to buy FM Rail...

On Sat, 03 Feb 2007 16:44:51 GMT, George Fuller
<george@fuller.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:

>Could anybody answer me a simple question?
>
>Why was Deltic 9000 Locomotives Ltd a small volunteer company with one
>locomotive running on the mainline, more important to

<big snip>

Without commenting on the specifics here, it is becoming painfully
obvious that ethical standards in railway journalism have slipped a
long way below what they were.

Gone are the days of impartial, objective reporting that characterised
railwau journalism up to about 20 years ago. In its place comes
increasingly partisan reporting, with more than a hint of bias.

Splitting BR into so many companies means that there are now a lot of
organisations who are keen to get even a small a slice of publicity.
Certain companies make a point of being very generous with their
hospitality to journalists, and they are amply rewarded with
favourable copy.

In my opinion, the only magazines that appear to have retained their
objectivity and high standards of journalism (and not to have fallen
prey to commercial companies looking for "positive reporting") are
Railway Magazine and Modern Railways. However, the future may not be
so bright as some old stalwarts will soon retire.

Presumably, they will be replaced by lesser people from a younger
generation of reporters that seems not to place a high priority on
ethics, objectivity and/or a good standard of written English.

Charlie,
I know you're right about Polson, and I don't normally bite, but in
this case, I felt that his accusations were so serious in their
implications that I couldn't let them go without a right to reply as
one of the younger generation he seems to dislike so much!
On the subject of influence, that's a really difficult one, isn't it?
Different publishers have different views on that - one might argue
that travelling on the last 47-hauled train to Manchester was a
legitimate press trip, but equally one might also argue that the
publishers should have paid their journalist's own way, and both
arguments might be right!
Generally speaking, my experience of the TOCs has been that they
respect the independence of the railway press. It's certainly never
been hinted to me that there might be an incentive for writing
something favourable about a company: all they've expected is a
reasonable right-to-reply when anything's written about them: any
trips offered are usually in the interests of showing something
newsworthy. That's not to say that companies don't try to influence
journalists: of course they do - but it's much more in the lines of
showing them something positive rather than extensive hospitality and
jollies.
I must say though, that I'm astonished that as one of the North West's
most assiduous railway writers you haven't been offered more trips
though - the website's been a permanent fixture in my favourites
folder for years,and in many press officers and other journalists too!
Andy

On 5 Feb, 11:53, Charlie Hulme <i...@davenportstation.org.uk> wrote:
> tonymi...@beeb.net wrote:

> > Well, sometimes the MD asks us for personal correspondence although
> > personally I wouldn't use that as material for a column.
>
> I didn't mean you Tony - I don't often see you as The Sage of Humphrey
> Park! In fact I wish you would write about 'Up North' more often.

I have meetings booked - just trying to get a grip on reorganisation
at work (you'll understand all that Charlie!)
I am still miffed with the SRA/DfT for cutting my service from hourly
to two-hourly in the Northern franchise to "save a DMU" - not that the
DfT ever sets timetables... or decides how many trains a TOC can
operate, according to ministers!

> Did anybody point out that Handforth is not in Birmingham? ;-)
> Charlie

I did - and I suggested the Ed. reads the info. files I send with
pictures in future!
(I sent an email asking if it was some kind of subtle joke that was
lost on us all... never got a reply!)

Tony

"Andy Roden" <andrew@andrewroden.wanadoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1170683567.571758.176110@l53g2000cwa. o...

>
> Sorry 'bout the blank post there - good points, Tim, and well made.
> Such a shame really, isn't it?

It is, because Only No Post is knowledgeable on some subjects. His mistake
is the assumption that this automatically extends to everything else.

--
Tim

"I do not approve of the words that came out of my mouth" - Jade Goody

<snip Steve's interesting analysis>

Hi Steve,

What a very good question you ask - I joined the business because I
love writing and I'm interested in railways: not a bad combination of
interests. Earning megabucks isn't going to happen in journalism, so
I'll settle for being comfortable and happy instead. Does that shed
any light?

Andy

<tonymiles@beeb.net> wrote in message
news:1170671757.369244.110510@a75g2000cwd. o
<snip>
>
> As it happens I'm writing this in my coffe break at my day job - I
> need the coffee because I spent the whole of yesterday writing stories
> for Rail Business Intelligence including some very complex stuff on
> the "Blue Pullman" situation and the two companies involved etc. I had
> to listen to recordings of interviews, transcribe quotes to make sure
> I had the exact statements from senior managers and didn't put any
> words into their mouths.

Just to try and get this back to a Blue Pullman thread -- (and as a
regular HRT customer) -- is there anything you can say on this messy
subject?

On Feb 6, 4:02 pm, srbroadb...@btopenwold.com (Steve Broadbent) wrote:
> It is the lure of the railways for some unknown reaosn, the same lure that
> gives us so many rail user and similar groups.... you never hear, in the
> same context, of Friends of the M6 or of BA.... the same lure that makes
> chaps fill a MML-livered VXC HST, which I by accident have just been on,
> as against fisihing or even going to work!!

Deos anyone else remember when the late (and very lamented) Brian
Redhead was one of the presenters of the Today programme? In
particular, his frequent references to the "Friends of the M6 - and in
the state it's in, it needs all the friends it can get!" :-)

I also recall he was a regular user of the train from Macclesfield and
if there were any problems, the entire audience of the programme would
know. In particular, I recall an episode concerning the availability
of Savers on one particular up morning train; Savers were valid if you
joined at Man Picc or Stockport, but not Macclesfield. Once Mr R had
got his teeth into BR (live on the programme), that situation changed
rapidly!

In article <BRC6Jb1a4LyFFwPs@romana.davros.org>,
Clive D. W. Feather <clive@on-the-train.> wrote:
> >But then readers of specialist defence mags buy defebnce products,
> >whereas readers of railway mags do not buy trains.

> The advertisers in Modern Railways would appear to disagree with you -
> why else were Hitachi advertising the "A train", for example?

Many years ago, I asked the editor of Railway Gazette why companies
producing large locomotives, and such thing would advertise in his
magazine, when they almost certainly knew which railways were wanting the
equipment.

He said the companies did it so that the magazine could carry on and print
reviews of new equipment.

--
David Wild using RISC OS on broadband

On 7 Feb, 09:50, srbroadb...@btopenwold.com (Steve Broadbent) wrote:
> Sorry, but PR-dabbling MDs are simply doing something easy to avoid doing
> soemthing hard they ought to be addressing, and the PR person should be
> strong enough and senior enough to stop it, before it does harm. Sadly,
> few railway companies have such PR people......


Surely it depends absolutely on the nature and capabilities of the MD?
I would imagine Tony can probably think of a few over the years who
have palpably led from the front and were/are more than capable of
fielding the meedja without a spin-doctor at their elbow 24/7.
Similarly I dare say there were/are others who seriously shouldn't be
allowed out on their own. When a spokesperson for a TOC says something
a bit silly IMO its as likely if not more likely to come from a PR
person with limited nuts and bolts knowledge of how the railways
operate.

--
gordon