I love the froth the press is generating over a few recent examples of television producers “sexing up” their content by staging events, papering over some cracks or fiddling with chronologies.

After all, it’s not as though newspapers are ever remotely economical with the actualite, is it?

It’s not as if a paparazzi photograph – isolating 1/250th of a second in time from one particular angle and cropped before publication – would ever appear in a newspaper insinuating that Minor Celebrity A had been cheating on Minor Celebrity B by enjoying passionate encounters with A Mystery Blonde, when in fact all it was was Minor Celebrity A kissing hello or goodbye to one of a group of friends in a club.

It’s not like a newspaper might run a prominent story alleging that Minor Celebrity X did or said something he shouldn’t have done or said, only to be forced my Minor Celebrity X’s lawyers to print a (rather less prominent) retraction and apology a few days later under threat of litigation.

I’ve got no problem at all with anyone campaigning to improve the standards of the British media.  I do, though, have a problem when the campaign appears to be being led by another phalanx of the British media with no moral authority whatsoever in the sphere of “trust”.

Meanwhile, Michael Grade has told Today that he believes the problem in broadcasting is because of an influx into the industry of young and inexperienced people who “have not been trained properly. They do not understand you do not lie to audiences any time in any show – whether it is news or a quiz.”

Er, well, as a former Chief Executive of Channel 4, Chairman of the BBC and now Executive Chairman of ITV, doesn’t some of the blame therefore fall on you, Mr. Grade, as the employer of such people and the person responsible for their training?

Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right…