Quite bizarrely the report has exactly the opposite conclusion that Colin Goodman says it does.
The accusation that this site is a council mouthpiece is clearly preposterous. It has been holding the council to account for many years now as the Ealing Gazette has failed to do before its disappearance. It has done so in a balanced and objective way which appear to me at least largely unbiased.
However, it is perhaps worth taking note of the appearance of advertisements for the Perceval House consultation on the site. It was an anomaly that the council chose not to communicate with residents through what is probably the borough's most widely read news media and they probably did so because they preferred the Ealing Gazette's more gentle coverage. Now that the printed newspaper has in practical terms disappeared they appear to be rethinking this strategy.
I would hope that the council have realised there is a communication gap with residents and this site must form a part of putting that right. Those of a more sceptical bent may think that making a show of properly consulting protects the borough from a judicial review of the scheme on this basis.
Either way if the council chooses to divert more of its advertising budget to this site then readers need to watch the coverage very closely but it is nonsense at this stage to suggest the process of editorial independence being compromised has begun.
Gordon Southwell ● 1663d