A Wayward Game Read Online Free Page B

perhaps by those higher up at
their corporation. Sallow’s web of influence extends across the
media, and few people in that world remain entirely untouched by
it. Sallow’s father is a wealthy businessman, after all, with an
interest in several media groups – including that which owns
Argyle’s former paper. Editorial independence may be cherished and
protected in theory, but in practice editors know that they are,
ultimately, answerable to those who hold the purse strings.
    Argyle’s editor was,
I suspect, reluctant to give in to such blatant intimidation, but
in the end felt that he had little choice. He was up against the
kind of money, power and influence that could make a coward of
almost anyone. Argyle herself was a ritual sacrifice of sorts. None
of this is particularly surprising. The question, perhaps, is why
Sallow was so sensitive about an article that took great care not
to directly accuse him of any
involvement in Diane’s disappearance.
     
    I click “Post”,
and my comment pops up beneath the others. I wander off into the
kitchen and make some coffee, not really expecting anyone else to
comment so early in the day. But of course, normal hours do not
apply on the internet, and when I come back I find that another
comment has appeared. It has been posted not by one of the
regulars, but by a newcomer who calls himself, simply, Phillip. I
quickly check his stats, and find that this is his first post on
the forum.
     
    First up, apologies if
it seems like I’m butting in here – I’m new, and haven’t even
introduced myself yet. This discussion interested me, though, and I
wanted to take part.
    The question of whether
Argyle’s employers were caught up in a conspiracy is an interesting
one. People talk a great deal and at great length about “the
Establishment”, but rarely clarify precisely what they mean by the
term. What is this Establishment, and what aims does it have?
    To my mind, the
Establishment consists not of the Monarchy, not the Church, not the
police, and not even politicians. These authorities seem
old-fashioned, almost quaint, by the standards of the modern
powers. Instead, today’s Establishment is comprised of the
money-makers and powerbrokers, namely business and the media. The
views of top businessmen are considered of importance, even when
they relate to topics entirely unconnected with business; their
good opinions and endorsement are avidly sought by politicians. The
backing of a popular newspaper can be the making of a politician;
the implications present in even apparently balanced reporting can
hugely sway public opinion on a given topic. The Sallow family, of
course, is most certainly part of that Establishment. Was Argyle
punished because she was pointing out the inconsistencies and
absurdities of the Establishment’s preferred narrative?
    The question, perhaps,
is this: if Argyle’s bosses were working to put across a given
narrative, why then would they have allowed her story to be
published in the first place? When I consider this question, I find
it very hard to believe that there was a conspiracy – a conspiracy,
that is, in the sense of a particular course of action prescribed
by a higher authority. I believe only that there were competing
strands of influence, and that one of those strands was, in the
end, slightly stronger than the others.
    This is, in turn, part
of a more general problem. When people speak about “the
Establishment” they are talking about a very diverse collection of
aims, interests, and people. The Establishment cannot, in my
opinion, push one common agenda, simply because they are not
sufficiently united or homogeneous. There is no common agenda, no
universally agreed strategy.
    Take journalists, for
example. Individual journalists have as wide a range of opinions
and sympathies as any other random section of the population. Most,
I’m sure, go into journalism for all the right reasons, and aim to
provide their audience with a balanced