Mr. Harry Browne:

I would prefer not to make a statement along those lines. I believe it is fair to say that the majority of journalists working in the property area would not be engaged in anything remotely resembling corrupt practices. Conflict rarely arises in the relationship between property developers, estate agents and the journalists working in those areas. There is not really any need for the showering of gifts. There is a shared interest in property journalism as traditionally understood in the property supplements. There is a shared interest in the promotion of property sales. I believe that in some respects, property journalism sometimes gets bashed a little too hard in these discussions. It is a genre in itself and in some ways can feature some of the most beautiful writing in journalism. Most readers understand what property journalism is and can see it for what it is.

My concern about property supplements is not so much the journalism that was in them, or the relationships that existed between individual journalists and the interests represented there, but the insidious effect their very existence had on larger aspects of newspapers. For example, it is one thing to have property supplements saying that one should buy a beautiful home in Ballsbridge, but it is another thing to have the business advice column treating homes and houses as just another asset class that people are invited to invest in. I believe in some ways that is more insidious.