Matthew d'Ancona is new Editor of The Spectator

Matthew d'Ancona has been appointed to succeed Boris Johnson at The Spectator.

Mr d'Ancona is one of the few conservative commentators with excellent links to the Labour party and has been sympathetic to its approach to homeland security issues.  He has been supportive of David Cameron since the new Tory leader was elected and has, for example, paid tribute to Francis Maude's analysis of the Tory predicament and has supported the A-List against Simon Heffer's objections.

Mr d'Ancona is pro-American and will (hopefully) use The Spectator to support further steps in the generation-long war on terror.

Comments

[James Maskell]

Its a good thing Im cancelling my Spectator subscription this week then!

[Sean Fear]

I think you've made the right choice James.

Do you think he'll write an editorial simultaneously supporting the Iraq war and arguing that there are no differences between us and the Lib Dems over the issue?

[Ted]

just renewing my online subscription in time for next week. Hope Matthew will be as annoying as Boris & Lawson managed to every so often - I'd read the Mail daily if I wanted boredom in print.

[Frank Young]

A BRILLIANT MOVE!!!!

Matthew D'Ancona is my favourite columnist, i'm chuffed, lets see what happens with the spectator. I might even move over from the New Statesman.

[James Maskell]

I just find the Spectator really old fashioned. The only reason I read it is because of the chess column and even then I follow the tournaments that the games come from anyway...

[Frank Young]

Indeed James,

I only ever buy it when there is a really interesting piece that I am willing to pay the £3+ for. With the NS i find interesting political comment and analysis all the time.

I'm not sure if I’m in a minority here but I wish both of these magazines, especially the Spectator would have a little less in the way of theatre, arts etc and more politics and comment. Maybe I’m a philistine though!!!

[malcolm]

Frank,you must be the only Conservative ever to choose the New Statesman (which even if one agreed with its politics is so incredibly dull) over the Speccie.
I loved the Spectator under Boris which I thought always wrote intelligently even when I disagreed with their view.
I hope D'ancona keeps giving space to Conservative writers of all persuasions space.If he follows one line over Iraq or other important subjects the Spectator will lose influence and readers.

[James Hellyer]

It looks like I'm not renewing my subscription either, which is a shame as post-Boris "The Spectator" had started to improve (something I attribute to Andrew Neill).

I'm not prepared to buy d'Ancona's work though. His Telegraph columns are bad enough, given that they take a disingenous approach to evidence in order to support the author's political agenda.

[Frank Young]

I find the New Statesman really interesting, it's irrelevent to me that it doesn't reflect my views I find it challanges me to think and reflect on my Conservatism, which in turn makes me a more thoughtful tory. For the same reason I enjoy coming on here and reading the posts it makes me think - which is what I enjoy most about politics.

All strength to the spectator though!!

[Goldie]

As a Magdalen man I am happy to see our unparalled dominance of the media & politics continue. Good to have the Spectator back! Only if only we could have this 'Dave' character move sideways to be replaced by either the Shadow Chancellor or Foreign Sec (or if need be the chairman of the Econc Competitiveness Council) we'd really make some headway...

[David]

They should have kept Andrew Neill. I read the Spectator occasionally before, but would certainly have subscribed had Neill been made permenant editor. From what I've seen it has improved considerably since he took over the reigns. He is a very good and interesting journalist who has done wonders with both the Business and the Scotsman- which I read regularly despite never having been north of the Lake District. I've also seen him speak publically and he is very good. He is even well known and dare I say, liked- even Dead Ringers did him once.

Why they should pick Matthew d'Ancona, who isn't my favourite at all really, is quite anyone's guess. I feel he will take the Spectator in a Cameronite direction, maybe that's the reason. However I feel a party needs internal discussion- something a bit more intelligent than entirely image and spin. I feel this is a further move from the Wienerite Conservatism that actually works to the Old Toryism that accepts the leftist rubbish and just promises to do a 'lite' version. Generally I feel d'Ancona spouts all the wishy-washy nonesense that I heard at Oxford, I will wait and see what his tenure at the Spectator is like, but won't be holding my breath. A great shame.

If they didn't want Neill, why not Heffer?

[CJ]

Heffer at the Spectator? Well it would have saved me £2.75 a week.

[Burkean]

Goldie,

You could add the Shadow Minister for the Disabled to your list. Ah, the Magdalen Machine...

[Cllr Iain Lindley]

I always thought the Spectator was somewhat content-lite considering the price. Even Kerrang seems like a longer read...

[James Maskell]

I get more out of Kerrang than I do the Spectator. Im a big rock fan.

[Richard]

"I always thought the Spectator was somewhat content-lite considering the price. Even Kerrang seems like a longer read..."

Agreed. Maybe it's the way it's laid out but the NS seems to have more political content. I'm not a fan of its politics but I often find it to be more informative than the Spectator. Like Frank Young I also like to have my views challenged, hence why I read the Guardian comment section everyday. For the record I contribute nothing monetary to either publication.

"As a Magdalen man I am happy to see our unparalled dominance of the media & politics continue"

As a Christ Church man I'm happy to note that we've produced more Prime Minister's :P. Just a pity the two most recent ones were Eden and Douglas-Home.

[Goldie]

You could add the Shadow Minister for the Disabled to your list. Ah, the Magdalen Machine..

How could I forget! We have LibDems too I think...

But a Brasenose man at the top...It IS galling...

[Alexander Drake]

I particularly like Mary Killen's advice column.

[Richard Allen]

A very disappointing move. I can't recall ever reading an article by Matthew d'Ancona that I considered particularly interesting or thought provoking. I will probably maintain my subscription but I will not particularly look forward to reading it.

[Tory T]

Whatever one may think of his journalism, Matt d'Ancona is a very good editor. He has an instinctive feel for what readers are interested in. Why else would instinctive non-Modernisers like Andrew Neil and the Barclay twins give hm he job? My advice to disgruntled Tories is to give him a chance - there will be plenty time to criticise him if he doesn't deliver a good read.

One caveat - if he bows to PC pressure to sack Taki then he'll lose my support straight away. I often disagree with the Greek Boy but his is a unique voice - I know at least two people who buy the mag purely to read him.

[Esbonio]

I was also disappointed to hear of Mr D'Ancona's apppointment.

I stopped getting the Sunday Telegraph a few years ago and let my Speccie subscription lapse recently under Boris's editorship.

I admit I do read the free stuff on the internet but would not do so if there was a charge. After all there is plenty of free info and insightful comment elsewhere on the net.

[Richard Allen]

One caveat - if he bows to PC pressure to sack Taki then he'll lose my support straight away. I often disagree with the Greek Boy but his is a unique voice - I know at least two people who buy the mag purely to read him.

I strongly agree with this point. Taki must stay.

[Press Baron]

"Matt d'Ancona is a very good editor. He has an instinctive feel for what readers are interested in. Why else would instinctive non-Modernisers like Andrew Neil and the Barclay twins give him the job?" (Tory T)

In our modern cynical, materialist world, the sheer child-like naivety of this thought is truly heart-warming.

Of course, Mr D'Ancona has attained his new job purely on grounds on merit and outstanding natural ability, but in a parallel universe other less elevated motives might have been in play:
(1) The Spectator is the Barclays' licensed reservation for Cameroonies; Boris out - shift Matt.
(2) They want his current job for someone else.
(3) They want to be nice to Cameron.
(4) There's a regular policy of moving staff between the Sunday Telegraph and The Spectator (cf: Charles Moore, Dominic Lawson).
(5) It's cheaper to move someone sideways than buy-in new talent.

So far everyone has been considering the impact on The Spectator. Bad call. What will this move do for the Sunday Telegraph, which is a much more significant publication?

[Passed Over]

Boris Johnson was a very lazy editor of the Spectator. He wasn't interested in promoting new ideas and many of the writers had that angry and negative tone which was so wrong about the Michael Howard regime.

It is really important that the magazine reflects the positive and constructive outlook that Cameron wants.

The Telegraph/Spectator has been a nest of nepotism, cronyism and sentimental attachment to lunatics and snobs for far too long. D'Ancona, like Cameron, will have to spill blood and make enemies to sharpen up the publication.

Ship Charles Moore, Taki, Paul Johnson, Frank Johnson and Mark Steyn off to The Oldie. Charles Moore's contribution to the near demise of the Conservative Party has been particulary distinguished over many years. Why he is still given so many column inches and put in charge of Policy Exchange is a complete mystery.

[Richard]

"Boris Johnson was a very lazy editor of the Spectator. He wasn't interested in promoting new ideas and many of the writers had that angry and negative tone which was so wrong about the Michael Howard regime."

He also significantly raised its circulation.

Getting rid of the like's of Taki would not be a good business decision.

[Richard Allen]

It is really important that the magazine reflects the positive and constructive outlook that Cameron wants.

Perhaps it can be renamed as The Pravda.

[Richard]

I actually rather liked The Spectator under Boris. I am however disappointed that Mathew d'Ancona has been appointed the new editor. I do hope he keeps Mark Steyn though as he is very, very funny and more often than not right on most issues.

[Andy Peterkin]

"It is really important that the magazine reflects the positive and constructive outlook that Cameron wants."

Surely it's far more important that it reflects all strands of Conservative opinion?

[Martin Smith]

Maybe we will have the Spectator following the "and" theory....

[Editor]

We can only hope Martin!!!

[EML]

I am hoping Matthew d'Ancona will help to encourage a little more debate about possible future conservative policies. The Spectator has been very good with comment, theory and analysis, in my opinion, but the one thing that has been missing is its input on concrete practical proposals, with the mag's collection of very distinguished contributors spending a lot of time talking about how rubbish Britain has become.

There needs to be some more optimism, and some reflection on Britain's possible future, not just laments about a paradise lost.