BBC.co.uk

Talk about Newsnight

Big Fat Politics Blog

Bullingdon and Blair

  • Michael Crick
  • 1 Mar 07, 05:22 PM

Why can the media no longer show that photo of David Cameron in the Bullingdon club?

Tonight Newsnight reveals the painting we've specially commissioned, an artistic alternative to the photo that legally we're no longer permitted to broadcast.

cameronpaint435.jpg

Two and a half weeks ago the Mail on Sunday published the first photo of the Conservative leader David Cameron as a member of the Bullingdon Club, the elitist Oxford University dining club whose public school members have become notorious over the years for vandalising restaurants and trashing students' rooms.

The photo, taken around 1986, showed David Cameron and several other Bullingdon members, including the young Boris Johnson, cockily posing for the camera in their £1,000 uniforms of blue ties, tails and biscuit-coloured waistcoats. The photo was published in several national newspapers two weeks ago, and commentators suggested that the scene of Mr. Cameron and his toffish chums was far more embarrassing to the Tory leader than the recent story about him taking cannabis at Eton.

But last week Gillman and Soame, the Oxford photographers who took the original Bullingdon picture, and who own the copyright, announced they were no longer giving permission for the media to use the photo (or indeed any other of their library of tens of thousands of student and school photos). The firm insists this decision was taken for commercial reasons and that they were not pressurised to withdraw the picture.

The alternative painting commissioned by Newsnight of the same scene as in the Bullingdon photo was produced by the Oxford artist Rona.

tbcrop_203.jpgAnd it's not just David Cameron whose been embarrassed in the past by photos in drunken Oxford University dining clubs dredged up from their undergraduate past. This photo of Tony Blair at a St. John's dinner in the 1970s has been published many times before, but tonight, Newsnight reveals for the first time the lower part of the same picture which until now has always been cropped off. We'll show the extraordinary gesture the future Prime Minister was making below the waist - a picture you'll never forget.

YOU CAN NOW SEE THE FULL PICTURE HERE

Comments  Post your comment

"Why can the media no longer show that photo of David Cameron in the Bullingdon club?"

I believe in equality for everyone, except reporters and photographers.
Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948)

  • 2.
  • At 11:03 PM on 01 Mar 2007,
  • ian smith wrote:

I was just watching Newsnight and at the point where Tony Blair's gesture was revealed, the folks from Newsnight Scotland cut us off so that they could drone on about the Holyrood parliament. I would have loved to have seen the full article and the rest.

This happens every night, Monday to Thursday. Please liberate Newsnight from BBC Scotland.

  • 3.
  • At 11:23 PM on 01 Mar 2007,
  • Lofty wrote:

The gesture revealed correctly sums up his recent foreign policy.

  • 4.
  • At 06:57 AM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Geoff wrote:

My wife says; maybe he was gesticulating that everything was ok!

  • 5.
  • At 08:15 AM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • stephen wrote:

Can you put all the full pix on the website please

  • 6.
  • At 09:29 AM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Nigel Clark wrote:

Should licence payers money be used for such party political activities? There can be no legitimate reason for commissioning a painting of this photograph.

  • 7.
  • At 09:47 AM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Karl Capp wrote:

UK society was very different twenty one years ago and so this Bullingdon Club photo featuring David Cameron is of no consequence just as with the Tony Blair photo. Just to put things in to perspective, the BBC's own David Dimbleby was a Bullingdon Club member. The world changes and so do people's values and attitudes.

  • 8.
  • At 10:01 AM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Ann Keith wrote:

Is Newsnight supposed to be a serious news and comment programme or isn't it? Neither Blair or Cameron are no longer students at university and nothing either of them did when they were is of the remotest concern now so what's all this about photographs and paintings? What on earth do you think you're doing? Isn't there enough serious news in the world for you?

  • 9.
  • At 11:09 AM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Jon wrote:

in the tony blair photo... is that Peter Mandelson fourth from right on the bottom row? Clearly a carefully stage managed photo opportunity as part of some obscure machiavellian plot!

  • 10.
  • At 11:15 AM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • jock mctavish wrote:

Who cares? We all do questionably things as we grow up and go to college and university, including bad behaviour and drug taking. Why then do we condem it so ferociously when it is revealed that politicians have done it as well? Attacking someone for being part of a club or taking a bit of cannabis at university is just petty and is designed to distract the proles from the real issues.

  • 11.
  • At 11:39 AM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Tony wrote:

The gesture seen in the photograph of Mr. Blair could be taken to be the actions of a very introspective young man - or may even have demonstrated remarkable prescience on the part of one who could foresee how history would judge him.

Sadly today, This same gesture from him seems to be aimed at the country's electorate.

  • 12.
  • At 11:42 AM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Simon Andrew wrote:

I know high level politicians are supposed to be exceptionally talented individuals but assuming they also have the power to see the future is a bit much. How are they to know they will occupy positions of power many years after these pictures are taken?

Honestly, they have no relevance whatsoever to the current politicians concerned. Time to post some actual "News" for once methinks.

In recent years the obsession with irrelevant news about so called "celebrities" coupled with being the spokesman for Al Qaeda on many occasions - the news is currently the big embarrassment to us, not the politicians.

  • 13.
  • At 11:45 AM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Martyn Freundlich wrote:

Is this what passes for mature debate and useful political coverage?
It's no wonder that the electorate can no longer be bothered to vote.

Why refer to adults as 'Eton-eductaed'; I don't care what school anyone went to - very few kids had a choice in this, anyway.

As for perceived misbehaviour during their teen years - I'd rather they get it out of their system then than 30 years later invade countries on the other side of the globe resulting in the deaths of thousands.

  • 14.
  • At 11:47 AM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Kathy wrote:

When I was at college I attended a party wearing black&white vertically striped lycra trousers and a pair of white stilletto boots.

It must have looked hideous and I have no desire for a photo of me so dressed to be published. The image would damage my reputation as a marketing director but it hardly makes me a bad person. Similarly, I doubt this photo makes Cameron any more or less able to govern.

  • 15.
  • At 11:49 AM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Jane Pearson wrote:

I agree with Jock Mctavish - who does care? It is how they do their job now that matters. At least they've had a life before politics, which means they now have experience and hopefully a better knowledge of the world and so can do their current job better. They would be very two dimensional characters if they had done nothing, been nowhere and had no skeletons in their cupboards!

  • 16.
  • At 11:50 AM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Tom Garnett wrote:

I had great fun getting dressed up and going to fancy (and drunken) dinners while at university. It's another world again, and an interesting place to visit.

Also, of course, you'd hope that our elected leader was a cut above.

Anyway, I still won't vote for his party, but this only improves my opinion of the man.

  • 17.
  • At 11:52 AM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Andrew wrote:

One definition of Democracy is "a state of society characterised by equality of rights and priveleges". Looking at the pictures of our two current main party leaders it doesn't seem that we're quite there there yet.

  • 18.
  • At 11:52 AM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Mark Bailey wrote:

The Bullingdon painting makes the whole thing look far more sinister than I am sure the photo did. Not great publicity for 'Call me Dave'm and an undermining of his credentials as a man of the people, particuarly as it gives the impression he put pressure on the owner of the picture to withdraw it.

Are they now going to dig out pics of Gordon Brown throwing up at Uni, or with ice cream on his face at primary school? We should be told.

  • 19.
  • At 11:55 AM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Marcus Wood wrote:

Why do you allow Michael Crick to engage in such childish and pointless 'investigations' on licence fee money?

This kind of non-story isn't worthy of a red-top tabloid let alone Newsnight.

Who cares what Blair or Cameron did when they were young?

I don't, anymore than I would care what Paxman or Crick did as posh students.

  • 20.
  • At 11:57 AM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Tim M wrote:

I don't think people are particularly interested, judging by the responses here. It would, I'm sure, be revealing to find out what TV and/or red top editors were up to at 20, as they undeniably have as much influence as a party leader, and in the case of the Beeb, are effectively public employees.

Newsnight Editors - please grow up!
What events in your past merit such coverage? Plenty I would imagine but frankly my dears we don't give a damn. I'd rather have a PM with a wild past than one with no imagination or enthusiasm whatsoever.
The tight little group that lives inside the Westminster Circle may find this gossip to be terribly exciting but the 99% of us who live in the real world just want a leader and a party that will move Britain forward and resolve the many issues of the day that desperately deserve the media's full attention.

  • 22.
  • At 11:58 AM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Howard wrote:

I think the photos show a real difference, actually, Blair looks rebellious, and silly in a Monty Python sort of a way. Cameron on the other hand is revelling in his elitism, money, power and arrogance.
The point isn't about whether people are from a particular background, it's what their behaviour says about their character.
As a student I went on demos against apartheid and cruise missiles, for example, while David Cameron was smashing up restaurants on the basis he could afford to pay for the damage. People's underlying attitudes to life are formed when they are students.

  • 23.
  • At 11:58 AM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Darren Mumford wrote:

Wow! What a shocker! A load of Oxbridge berks dress up like idiots and get to run the country. That's not news.

  • 24.
  • At 12:01 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • alan mitchell wrote:

What is the fuss about these pictures of what people did years ago in their youth? Surely we all did things in our younger years that we wish we hadn't with the benefit of hindsight and dare I say maturity? This country will end up with no decent politicians in office if we, no the media, continue to hound them over these inconsequential matters. The real disgrace is the behaviour of today's media, not what happenned years ago.

Both men have worked hard to achieve academically, our country can only benefit from their knowledge. Diana was a Pincess for the people, but we all knew that she was different! Neither Blair nor Cameron would be at the top if their IQs were 100 and they had drunk beer at a football match and bloodied someones nose.

Let give credit where credit is due they have lived a little thank God!

  • 26.
  • At 12:09 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Rosemary Bennett wrote:

I don't care. What I do care about is that the country should be governed properly.

  • 27.
  • At 12:15 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Ian Baldwin wrote:

Is Tony's gesture to indicate what he thinks of us ?

  • 28.
  • At 12:16 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • jasper wrote:

Anyone with a negative perception on these pictures of Blair and Cameron has either never been a student or generally a young person living life!

  • 29.
  • At 12:17 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • ven csv wrote:

Both the Labour and the Cons have always denied the public from knowing
what sort of people are running the
country. It's well known that both of them have never beeen able to produce results.

  • 30.
  • At 12:18 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Antonia wrote:

It makes me like David Cameron more. Youth is there to be partied away!

  • 31.
  • At 12:19 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Ian wrote:

Gillman and Soame have made a shrewd long term business decision not to permit this, or other photos to be used. Many students might think twice about having photo's taken if they knew they could appear in the papers in the future should they or someone else in the group achieve fame or notoriety. G & S must have numerous embarassing pictures of Oxford Students who are now well known and can now rest easy. Many formal group photos have matching very informal pictures taken a few minutes later.

  • 32.
  • At 12:19 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Martin Smith wrote:

I am so impressed by this brave act of defiance by the BBC against this conspiracy by posh people to hide truth from the people (once again!). Without acts of bravery like this free speech in this country would be dead. Also it was very brave to spend public money to get this painting done. How much did the painting cost?

  • 33.
  • At 12:22 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Derek S wrote:

Couldn't agree more with Ian Smith. Newsnight Scotland constantly ruins my enjoyment of Newsnight. It cuts from stories of importance to the whole of the UK to stories that are not even interesting to most Scottish people. The Scottish parliament and the people in at are rubbish. OK, we've got the message and agree. Now lets not spend the next few years repeating it every night. Get rid of Newsnight Scotland ASAP.

  • 34.
  • At 12:27 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Linda Abrahams wrote:

For heaven's sake, who cares? I would definitely NOT like to meet anyone who never did anything stupid between the ages of 15 and 25!
When will we British stop being so prune-faced about politicians' past indiscretions in their personal lives? Also, if that is all the news there is then I shall stop trying to keep myself up to date with it!

Linda Abrahams

  • 35.
  • At 12:31 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • John wrote:

What has happened to the other participants in the photo?

Guess most of have done things we regret but are lucky enought not to have it made public. It's all part of growing-up.

  • 36.
  • At 12:33 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Andy Jones wrote:

This piece is a classic example of BBC left wing bias. You desperately want to run the Cameron picture and luckily you have the Blair picture that allows you to do so. Blair is about to leave so it matters not one jot if you publish something embarassing to him. So the piece runs.

Were the Blair picture to be of Gordon then doubtless the story would not have merited the prominence on the BBC website. I cannot wait for the day when Murdochs son replaces the Director General. Biased Broadcasting Corporation.

  • 37.
  • At 12:35 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Angela Morris wrote:

David & Tony, posh dinners, rude gestures,oh how we laughed!
Why is this news? This IS British politics.

  • 38.
  • At 12:37 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Bill Rees wrote:

Whats the difference in being a RICH POSH YOB and a CUDDLEY HOODED YOB ? Cameron seems to appreciate and support both.

  • 39.
  • At 12:39 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Bill Rees wrote:

Whats the difference in being a RICH POSH YOB and a CUDDLEY HOODED YOB ? Ask David Cameron.

  • 40.
  • At 12:42 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Tanya wrote:

What worries me most is the fact that Labour is trying to use this to stoke up the perceived class war in order to win votes from the unthinking proles. It is utterly hypocritical and a cheap shot. No-one should be judged on what they did at university or when younger as people change. It should be a greater reflection on what Labour is like as a party, not what David Cameron is like as a leader.

  • 41.
  • At 12:45 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Geo wrote:

The photos are irrelevent. What is relevent though,in my opinion, is the Bullingdon club during the Cameron Years were renowned for anti-social behaviour, trashing restaurants regularly, but that type of behaviour is ok as long as some cash changes hands? Morally bankrupt.

Blair showing his maturity and respect for others? Now preaching about social responsibility.

Hypocrites both. BTW Neither of them were "kids" at the time of the photos.

  • 42.
  • At 12:47 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • bob dod wrote:

The majority of the British public is not at all interested in this idiotic and puerile brouhaha given such pride of place in todays news media. When is the real debate going to start? Surely there are enough real issues to engage with, without wasting time and money on this absolute rubbish? As least Tony Blair found the time to grow up, unlike the giggling media schoolboys responsible for this "debate".

  • 43.
  • At 12:56 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • R Rigley wrote:

I see that Labour are now taking a leaf from the American political stage and discrediting the person instead of concentrating on their party policies, but maybe Labour have no policies any more.

  • 44.
  • At 01:01 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • C Cook wrote:

Sigh. Yet another case of the media getting itself worked up about something that the majority of people in the UK don't give a damn about. Same with the Cameron-cannabis story, same with every "sex" scandel involving a politician. Do they really think that the ordinary people think being a human being is deplorable?

  • 45.
  • At 01:01 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Jack wrote:

Isn't it interesting that the BBC thinks it is in the public interest to show these pictures, yet it balks at publishing cartoons criticising bombers for fear of offending Muslims.

  • 46.
  • At 01:03 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Sarah wrote:

Another example of the politically biased BBC. Why don't you go and dig up some ridiculous photos of Gordon Brown and David Milliband in their teenage years just to make this story slightly more fair?

I don't see any labour politicians being given such a hard time about what they got up to at school or university.

This whole story just stinks of double standards and labour spin. It is OK for Tony Blair to go to one of the most expensive public schools in Scotland and Oxford Universtity because he is labour but not OK for David Cameron to have been educated at Eton and Oxford?

What sort of university photos would the BBC like to see of David Cameron? Unconsious in the student bar covered in puke? Then he would think he was an alright bloke fit to lead a political party.

  • 47.
  • At 01:04 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Emily wrote:

A non-story that appears to show that BBC bias is alive and kicking. Considering that Cherie Blair tried to charge more to the taxpayer for her hairdressing bill, I couldn't care less about how much these suits cost. And how much does Blair spend on his suits? Again, how they spend their own money is irrelevant.

Good journalists would tackle real stories like why Labour not only gives significant Labour donors peerages, but also incredibly lucrative government contracts in the form of sell-out PFI deals.

No wonder the BBC has lost so much credibility.

  • 48.
  • At 01:04 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • C Cook wrote:

Sigh. Yet another case of the media getting itself worked up about something that the majority of people in the UK don't give a damn about. Same with the Cameron-cannabis story, same with every "sex" scandel involving a politician. Do they really think that the ordinary people think being a human being is deplorable?

I like the idea of the artist's impression of the photo. It reminds me of the Thatcher era when the voice of Gerry Adams had to be spoken by an actor.

The point about all this is not, of course, the photos themeselves, but the desire of the politicians to keep embarrassing things out of the news media. Efforts to manage or manipulate news will always be newsworthy in their own right, as they reveal something about people's character.

  • 50.
  • At 01:07 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Mike Robertson wrote:

Personally I think club members show some moral responsibility - possibly slightly scewed but at least everything was paid for and I, for one would have loved to go to that seat of learning.
At least we have somebody who is educated formally and otherwise rather than some jumped up ships steward who has difficulty expressing himself in the Queens English and resorts to violence at any provocation. There is nothing wrong with manners and decorum - and that cam from my grandmother.

  • 51.
  • At 01:15 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Matthew wrote:

What a bunch of drips, the lot of em.

They sound really wild don't they?.....

Going out drinking in blazers. Causing trouble in high brow eateries then paying for the damage with daddies cash. Really zany and wild.

  • 52.
  • At 01:20 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • David Skertchly wrote:

What a relief that the leaders of our country recieved the best education that the nation can offer, ie Oxbridge. Our leaders have to deal with the huge problems in real time, we cannot afford to deploy the B team to run the country!

We have all been involved in youthfull high jinks, and remember the resigned patience of our parents and others. Oh and I seem to recall a saying "let those without sin cast the first stone".

  • 53.
  • At 01:24 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Conrad Gills wrote:

To think that the Labour party would be so philanthropic as to highlight Mr Cameron's 'dark past'for the benfit of the simple folk; it is another example of their desperation to fight off an inevitable defeat at the next election BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOTHING TO OFFER, CANNOT DELIVER AND MAKE US PAY FOR THE PRIVILEGE.
Tony Blair's gesture on the other hand is described as rude or cheeky, when all it epitomises is what everyobe thinks of him and his government. To think of the hands that has shaken too...

  • 54.
  • At 01:24 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Richard Budgen wrote:

As a long-time resident of Oxford and part of Oxford University I well remember the Bullingdon Club in its heyday as it coincided with the problems of joyriding etc. on the Blackbird Leys estate in Oxford.
The Bullingdon Club regulalry, not only trashed the resatuarnt they were using, but then ran amok in neighbouring establishemnts also.
They were never arrested or disciplined by the university, and yet the young people on Blackbird Leys were.
Both were doing wrong and yet "justice" was only dispensed to one side.
I think David Cameron should come clean about his past, apologise, and move on. If he doesn't he'll lose all credibilty.
Tony Blair has already done so by his policy in Iraq and being Mr Bush's poodle.

  • 55.
  • At 01:36 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Phil wrote:

This `club`was not just a way of showing youthful high spirits or the `normality` of being drunk as a student but was an extraordinarily arrogant way of exhibiting a complete lack of any respect for the people who owned the places they deliberately trashed. The basis of such behaviour is that money buys privilege - and protection from the consequences of disgraceful behaviour. For the rest of us, such activities would lead to court. Future leaders - I sincerely hope not.

  • 56.
  • At 01:49 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Nick wrote:

For all those who wish to see the real photograph, the link is below.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/02/14/noxford14.xml

  • 57.
  • At 01:51 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • newtron wrote:

footage has been found which shows a live bbc broadcast on september 11th 2001, it shows the bbc reporting that wtc 7 has collapsed even though the building can be seen still standing in the background! the building did not fall for another 26 minutes so how did the bbc know it was goin to fall even tho no one else in the world did!!!!

go here to see-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTeOzFRLfdc

Copyright law seems a tricky fellow, especially in this "digital age."

For all those so dissapointed at not being able to view the original photo, despite the joy of the painting, don't worry - the Telegraph still have it on their site! I leave you to do your own searching.

Anyone for returning to the stone age?

  • 60.
  • At 01:54 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Ian edlin wrote:

Surely most young men or women have done some outrageous things as part of growing up and finding boundaries.
Without it al of us would be very colourless. The excesses of youth should not be held against tose who have grown up as long as they are open about it and additionally do not condemn the coming generations passing through the same process.

Copyright law seems a tricky fellow, especially in this "digital age."

For all those so dissapointed at not being able to view the original photo, despite the joy of the painting, don't worry - the Telegraph still have it on their site! I leave you to do your own searching.

Anyone for returning to the stone age?

  • 62.
  • At 02:01 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Hugh wrote:

If you can no longer show this pic, why's it all over the rest of the web (and I'm talking on proper news sites, not blogs)??

Be bold, Beeb!

And, dear readers, use this URL if you want to see the pic on the Evening Standard website:

http://snipurl.com/1auc7

(scroll down for a much bigger image)

  • 63.
  • At 02:07 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • BAC wrote:

Not suprising, most high level world leaders are (or have been) members of dodgy "secret boys clubs". Just goes to show that all political parties are essentually controlled by the same people (and it isn't the public)

There's lots of info about such societies on Wikipedia (skull and bones, the bohemian grove, etc etc)

When are the masses going to realise that these people are essentually evil and take control of thier own destiny??

  • 64.
  • At 02:07 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • ANON wrote:

Go to Telegraph.co.uk and search the photo - they still have it online.

  • 65.
  • At 02:09 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Tony B wrote:

It looks as though thuggery, vandalism, and so forth is acceptable, as long as one is of a certain social class, and pays for the damage afterwards.

I think this says a lot about the people who run this country.

  • 66.
  • At 02:09 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • James Davies wrote:

How much did it cost the licence-fee payer to commission this painting? What public service does the BBC think it serves?

You could at least have asked the artist to graft hideous monster heads onto Cameron's companions. And devil horns on to "Dave" himself

  • 68.
  • At 02:12 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Alexis wrote:

Irrelevent.

It was banned because the British are pone to a bit of inverse snobbery.

Everyone has embarrasing moments in life, especially from their youth.

I'm more interested in how Cameron conducts himself today, not what happened 20 years ago.

Furthermore, who would want a future PM who has led a boring life?

You could at least have asked the artist to graft hideous monster heads onto Cameron's companions. And devil horns on to "Dave" himself

  • 70.
  • At 02:13 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Paul T wrote:

'Tory is upper class twit shocker'

  • 71.
  • At 02:18 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Alexis wrote:

Irrelevent. It was banned because the British are prone to inverse snobbery.

Everyone has embarrasing moments in life, especially from their youth.

I'm more interested in how Cameron conducts himself today, not what happened 20 years ago.

Anyway, who would want a future PM who has led a boring life?

@ newtron:

Stop posting off topic material especially 9/11 conspiracy nonsense. Its a well known fact that information was very scare on that day and there was a lot of incorrect news reportings. Other hijacked planes for example. The incorrect mention that WTC7 had collapsed was just as a result of news reporting based on bad sources.

I have reported your post to be deleted.

  • 73.
  • At 02:25 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Mark wrote:

Isn't the point to this not what someone did or wore when they were students but that here we have a potential prime minister of this country trying to get elected by visiting council estates and portraying himself as someone very much in touch with 'ordinary' people when clearly he is anything but.

  • 74.
  • At 02:26 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Alan wrote:

What's the kafuffle?
The photo is still available on Google fairly easily, I believe the Telegraph website still has it in its' archives.
At the end of the day I'm sure we all have slightly embarrassing photos, even if that lot do look a bit daft in their finery.

  • 75.
  • At 02:28 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • John Hackett wrote:

I appears Tony Blair was trying to tell us something about himself in that photo! Of course, we all now that now anyway...

  • 76.
  • At 02:28 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Emily wrote:

Blair uncropped.
http://5thnovember.blogspot.com/

What a loser and what a bunch of ridiculous toffs.

  • 77.
  • At 02:36 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Rita wrote:

My family and I could not care less. My son (26 years) and daughter (28 years) think Cameron cannot be that bad if he actually has had the odd spliff here and there. As for the drinking, well thousands of british people, and not precisely from the highter schelons of british society, regularly thrash spanish bars, hotels and public property on a nightly basis; this is the British National Sport "getting drunk and abusive and destructive" and it is not a CLASS thing peculiar to ETON et all.
As for LIAR Blair, well I think he has been doing the same gesture to the citizens of this country for nearly 10 years. It comes as no surprise.
But what is the BBC doing wasting time and money with this kind of news?. Please lets be more serious!

  • 78.
  • At 02:47 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Polytechnic wrote:


As with declining to talk about drug dabbling, attempting to ban the publication of a photograph, will only attract more interest......silly really?

  • 79.
  • At 02:49 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • g s randall wrote:

How has Newsnight got the nerve to spend licence payers money on trivia like this?

  • 80.
  • At 03:01 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Rod Essery wrote:

I am not surprised by the "ban" on the photo as it shows "Dave" in a truer light than most of the hype that usully surrounds him.

  • 81.
  • At 03:11 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • ron Luton-brown wrote:

BORING! don't care! can the man do the job and is his policies any good i don't give a monkeys what he did as a child!

  • 82.
  • At 03:15 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • J Howes wrote:

And it's not just David Cameron whose been...

Who has, perhaps.

Poor for a journalist.

  • 83.
  • At 03:15 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • David wrote:

Who the hell cares? What we want is a leader who isn't preoccupied with image and images but one with the guts and conviction to make a difference to this country.

  • 84.
  • At 03:20 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Jack wrote:

the bullingdon club represents everything that is wrong about the class system in this country. they're a bunch of posh lads basically involved in anti-social behavoiur but can get away with it because they have title and/or money. if a lad from a manchester estate did the same, even if he paid afterwards, he'd be in trouble.

the bullingdon club were then, and still are now, a bunch of snobs who dont represent this country anymore and shouldnt be allowed to lead it.

  • 85.
  • At 03:21 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Dan wrote:

It has not exactly been "banned", it has been withdrawn by the owners. I am fed up with misleading headlines and sloppy reporting. Moreover, the commissioned painting is likely to be as much a breach of copyright as the original!

  • 86.
  • At 03:28 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Edward OShea wrote:

We all do twatish things while we are young, for Gods sake have a laugh about it then turn a page and carry on with life, cheer up everyone it does us all good to have a laugh!

  • 87.
  • At 04:10 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Mr. L wrote:

I am so amazed after reading this. Seems as the usa stoops and sinks to new lows, the British eventually follow, even though it may take several years.

Why don't you hunt down the pictures from their first few years of life, with poop in their pants and use that to discredit them.

Certain you won't want to elect anyone that's ever done that - P U

Copyright law seems a tricky fellow, especially in this "digital age."

For all those so dissapointed at not being able to view the original photo, despite the joy of the painting, don't worry - the Telegraph still have it on their site! I leave you to do your own searching.

Anyone for returning to the stone age?

  • 89.
  • At 04:14 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Tom Baxter wrote:

I'm beginning to get the feeling that Cameron has a LOT of skeletons in his cupboard. There seem to be things he really wants to hide.

  • 90.
  • At 04:16 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Mr. L wrote:

I am so amazed after reading this. Seems as the usa stoops and sinks to new lows, the British eventually follow, even though it may take several years.

Why don't you hunt down the pictures from their first few years of life, with poop in their pants and use that to discredit them.

Certain you won't want to elect anyone that's ever done that - P U

  • 91.
  • At 04:18 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Segat1 wrote:

Haven't we all got more important things to be worried about?

It's trivia and complete twaddle. Univeristy is a time to do silly things and thank god these people had a life at university - and aren't complete boring swots.

  • 92.
  • At 04:24 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Greg Branagan wrote:

I find it ridiculous how everyone gets up in arms about a student photo of David Cameron...Everyone does things while a student that have absolutely no reflection on how they are as a person later in life. University is the time to get it all out of your system so you don't do it when you are older. This coming from a student!!!
I find it ridiculous how people will try and find anyway to put any politician down as being a "snob" just because of the educational background!! Surprisingly enough, not all good schools brainwash people into becoming a snob!!! So what he went to Eton and Oxford?? I'm glad of it, actually, because it shows that he has a damn side more intelligence than the people who find this "wrong", and therefore a much better candidate to possibly run the country in the future!

  • 93.
  • At 04:25 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • anthony wrote:

As a former Oxford student neither of these photographs suprises me greatly. The fact that we are governed by overprivilaged public schoolboys who have little or no connection with the lives of most people in Britain is hardly 'new news'. In student politics at Oxford it was far from unusual to see our budding politicians transfer loyalty between parties at the drop of a straw boater in order to further their 'careers' and this unpricipled approach is endemic in modern politics.

  • 94.
  • At 04:36 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Simon Kearsley wrote:

I think it says far more about Labour than David Cameron. They are obviously worried about him or else why attack his aristocratic credentials?

I couldn't care less about the background of our leaders so long as they are intelligent, forthright, fair and above all DON'T LIE TO ME!

  • 95.
  • At 04:55 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Clive Parker-Bowles wrote:

This is a piece from the telegraph all about it:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/02/14/noxford14.xml

You say the painting is sinister?

  • 96.
  • At 04:56 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Mr A. wrote:

Banned? by who?... Oh you mean withdrawn by its owners. Is it also so safe to assume that all the Bullingdon Club members behaved in such away?
It seems that someone is trying to make a big story out of the photograph and merely exposing their own prejudice. Should the headline really be "Why are standards of reportage and impartiality at the BBC slipping so badly.

  • 97.
  • At 05:05 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Arthur Lawrence wrote:

The last three Conservative Prime Ministers (Heath, Thatcher, Major) all came from ordinary backgrounds, and had advanced through their own efforts. When Douglas Hurd wanted to be party leader, he played down his Eton education, and emphasised that his father was only a tenant farmer. How strange that the party of law and order should now choose a leader from a wealthy and titled family, who has a history of pompous and aristocratic vandalism, and who also tries to play the common man when he is anything but.

  • 98.
  • At 05:06 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Paul Browne wrote:

There are many sites you can see the picture. It is horrid. I'm afraid to say that Cameron is the most 'sneery' and aloof. It's quite clearly self-propaganda as they are all trying to look meaningful or menacing. There aren't too many group photographs where no one is smiling.

Yes we all did rather stupid things at University but most students are stuck with the fact that to go out on a bender uses up a week of food/bills money. This pompous lot were not just 'typical students'; flinging cash around as if that pardoned their mendacious behaviour.

Cameron is not a man of the people. This was/is another world of privilege and escapist frivolity.

  • 99.
  • At 06:36 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Lance Knight wrote:


Young men do many "daft" things in their youth.
Thank goodness we have a couple of leaders who had a normal young attitude to life.

Lance Knight

  • 100.
  • At 06:54 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Lance Knight wrote:


What a politicaly correct set of nit-wits we have become. We all do daft things in our youth. Both Cameron and Blair had a life before politics. Thank goodness at least they have lived in the real world.

Lance knight

  • 101.
  • At 07:29 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • tom atkins wrote:

I can't believe that the Blair picture has been "censored" for so long.
Crick really is brave publishing it a few months before Blair goes.

Another award for courage for Crick.

Funny how he managed to get the Cameron picture commissioned BEFORE his first general election campaign.
Why didn't he publish the Blair photo 14 years ago?

The BBC at its unbiased best.

  • 102.
  • At 07:30 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Emily wrote:

Blair went to the Scottish equivalent of Eton - Fettes. He was also part of a totally elitest and only male uni club. You only have to see the picture the BBC is too embaressed to show in full.

Newsnight is using license payers' money for propaganda purposes which is the real story here. It is well-known that some Newsnight staffers have cosy relationships with New Labourites - even dating them. It is an absolute disgrace.

  • 103.
  • At 08:07 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Mike Diprose wrote:

Shock horror! Tory leader is posh after all.

  • 104.
  • At 10:33 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Alasdair Carnie wrote:

To those who are wondering why this is news, the answer is, it's not.

This is just an attempt by the BBC to drum up interest in a non event because they lack the guts to report real news. It's much easier to report irrelevant garbage like this, that to dig deep into what both labour and the conservatives are really up to.

The public is of course a willing accomplice, as all these comments, including mine prove. If we were to just ignore such pointless and banal 'reporting', the BBC would be forced to do their job. So Mr Paxman and the rest of the Newsnight team, how about some real detailed and in-depth news reporting for a change. I know you think that the public are too dumb to understand and therefore have to be a fed an endless stream of drivel, but there are a few of us who would like the facts from time to time. The real facts and not just the ones you want to report.

  • 105.
  • At 12:56 AM on 03 Mar 2007,
  • philip allen wrote:

I can imagine there are few former students who didn't do at least one thing they wouldn't want the world to know about. Any exceptions must be such inveterate dullards or nerds that they would scarcely provide the leadership we need from politicians. While I hold no brief for David Cameron, if the media keep up this level of intrusion, the only politicans we'll get are dullards or nerds.

  • 106.
  • At 09:08 AM on 03 Mar 2007,
  • Philip Meers wrote:

I am very concerned that people should be condoning Cameron's student past as something young people do. The behaviour of the group to which he belonged was no different to the gangs of thugs who terrorise people now, except they paid for the damage they carried out. If we condone his "Hooray Henry" behaviour, we can hardly condemn thugs today - they are only young and will grow up as responsible adults. Well, I remain to be convinced by my last statement!

  • 107.
  • At 09:28 AM on 03 Mar 2007,
  • Double Standard Don wrote:

So many of the comments ask what's the problem?, only young men doing what comes naturally etc. Well is this natural?, is it normal practice to destroy other peoples property, and physically attack others who "irritate" you (de-bag)?, safe in the knowledge that your family connections give you impunity, and that this abhorrent behaviour will not affect your future career?. Only yesterday a top Tory man called the BNP every name under the sun, and of course the controlled media sneeringly refer to them as skinhead thugs etc, so what is the diference between being a follower of a youth trend such as the skinhead (and this label is often used on their members even though they are nothing of the sort...I mean I no longer have the same ammount of hair, so does that make me a (natural) skinhead??), and being a member of another loutish group who do real damage?. How many skinheads have attacked anyone, or smashed up other peoples property, or regard behaviour like this as the rights of passage?. One set of rules for the establishment, another for the masses. How have we allowed these types of "people" to control us for so long. Its disgusting., and whats even more concerning, is that the political system here is a charade, the three main parties members are all from this type of background, and despite performing to the public with shows of dislike for each other, all drink together in the commons bars. No wonder they despise the BNP, its nothing to do with racism, its the old class war rearing its head, and sadly the voters would rather blindly follow leaders who have no concept of what its like to be of the lower orders, than back people from their own ranks.

  • 108.
  • At 09:28 AM on 03 Mar 2007,
  • Double Standard Don wrote:

So many of the comments ask what's the problem?, only young men doing what comes naturally etc. Well is this natural?, is it normal practice to destroy other peoples property, and physically attack others who "irritate" you (de-bag)?, safe in the knowledge that your family connections give you impunity, and that this abhorrent behaviour will not affect your future career?. Only yesterday a top Tory man called the BNP every name under the sun, and of course the controlled media sneeringly refer to them as skinhead thugs etc, so what is the diference between being a follower of a youth trend such as the skinhead (and this label is often used on their members even though they are nothing of the sort...I mean I no longer have the same ammount of hair, so does that make me a (natural) skinhead??), and being a member of another loutish group who do real damage?. How many skinheads have attacked anyone, or smashed up other peoples property, or regard behaviour like this as the rights of passage?. One set of rules for the establishment, another for the masses. How have we allowed these types of "people" to control us for so long. Its disgusting., and whats even more concerning, is that the political system here is a charade, the three main parties members are all from this type of background, and despite performing to the public with shows of dislike for each other, all drink together in the commons bars. No wonder they despise the BNP, its nothing to do with racism, its the old class war rearing its head, and sadly the voters would rather blindly follow leaders who have no concept of what its like to be of the lower orders, than back people from their own ranks.

  • 109.
  • At 11:14 AM on 03 Mar 2007,
  • Lucy wrote:

Does it matter? Who hasn't had fun while growing up, and a few pictures they regretted in the process! People change and there are many years between David Cameron and this photo. He is a lot more honest that New Labour.

  • 110.
  • At 04:14 PM on 03 Mar 2007,
  • H.Jim Green wrote:

We have suffered one dangerous CLOWN we cannot afford to have another or maybe a better description would be IDIOT.

  • 111.
  • At 07:30 AM on 04 Mar 2007,
  • Shaun Osborn wrote:

Dodgy student picies ?? Hang them !!!

(Not the picies) The subject matter.
I feel like Rip van Winkle on his return.
Are these really the issues of Britain today ????

What happened to real issues like;
Proportional reresentation ?

regards

Shaun O.

(waiting for match of the day to start on 2 !!)

  • 112.
  • At 01:10 PM on 04 Mar 2007,
  • Tim wrote:

To try to make an issue out of those two pictures (one of which is a faked-up 'impression') you (by which I mean the news media in general) must be pretty desperate. Can we get on with some real news please, or haven't you got enough?

Lets have some pictures of the editors of the BBC News website, maybe, at a student party. Perhaps one of them dressed up (wow!), or made a rude gesture (wow again!).

What is it about the British media?

  • 113.
  • At 10:32 PM on 04 Mar 2007,
  • a walsh wrote:

Why did new Labour consider this photo an opportunity to gain an advantage over David Cameron?
They seem to think the electorate are stupid!
On one hand they tell us to educate are youngsters in state Schools, But when it comes to their own they opt for private education.

  • 114.
  • At 12:59 PM on 05 Mar 2007,
  • Edward Treen wrote:

Blair's picture? It shows consistancy; now it appears he's always been one...

  • 115.
  • At 01:23 PM on 08 Mar 2007,
  • Neil Jones wrote:

I this really news

  • 116.
  • At 11:20 PM on 08 Mar 2007,
  • Seana wrote:

What dashing young men!

  • 117.
  • At 12:48 PM on 10 Mar 2007,
  • Andrei Skvarsky wrote:

Both as regards the picture of David Cameron and that of Tony Blair, I think we should make allowances for the fact that this was all quite a while ago. Neither Mr Cameron nor Mr Blair will necessarily be proud today of everything they did as student dining club members. A lot of us have done things in the past we are embarrassed to think of today. So I believe it's ridiculous to use either of those pictures as a political weapon. Some of Mr Blair's more recent doings deserve more criticism.

Andrei Skvarsky

On climate change will our politicians please leave us alone and concentrate on the big poluters in China, India and USA. What we could save in UK in one year could be saved in those countries in one day.

  • 119.
  • At 03:14 PM on 03 Jul 2007,
  • Will Hazell wrote:

No one should be discriminated against on the basis of their educational background. However the fact remains that David Cameron's Conservative frontbench is incredibly socially elitist- Cameron has more Etonians around him than any leader since Harold Macmillan! (3 members of his Shadow Cabinet and 15 on the front bench are Old Etonians). Who wants 21st Century Britain run by members of the same school?

  • 120.
  • At 10:20 PM on 18 Feb 2008,
  • Lorne Irving wrote:

I do agree with the posting about BBC Scotland - we do need liberated from this biased rubbish !!

This post is closed to new comments.

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites