Claire Rowney to join Macmillan as Executive Director of Fundraising

first_img Macmillan Cancer Support has appointed Claire Rowney as Executive Director of Fundraising, Marketing & Communications. She will take on the role in February 2019.She joins the cancer charity from Save the Children UK where she has been Executive Director of Fundraising and Marketing since early 2017. Before this she spent 13 years at Cancer Research UK, leading Race for Life, Stand Up To Cancer, and Innovation and Corporate Partnerships.  Rowney takes over from Richard Taylor who is leaving Macmillan at the end of the year to pursue a career in coaching.Lynda Thomas, Chief Executive of Macmillan Cancer Support highlighted Rowney’s “huge breadth of experience from across the charity sector”.She added: “This, combined with her energy and passion for the work we do, will be invaluable in ensuring we continue supporting the growing number of people living with cancer to live life as fully as they can.”Rowney was appointed a trustee of the Institute of Fundraising in April this year. Claire Rowney to join Macmillan as Executive Director of Fundraising  142 total views,  2 views today AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis9 AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis9 Tagged with: leadership Management Recruitment / peoplecenter_img  141 total views,  1 views today About Howard Lake Howard Lake is a digital fundraising entrepreneur. Publisher of UK Fundraising, the world’s first web resource for professional fundraisers, since 1994. Trainer and consultant in digital fundraising. Founder of Fundraising Camp and co-founder of GoodJobs.org.uk. Researching massive growth in giving. Howard Lake | 30 November 2018 | Newslast_img read more

Continue reading

Donald Trump and the Return of Seditious Libel

first_imgBy Richard Tofel, ProPublicaIn 1733, New York printer John Peter Zenger began publishing the eighth newspaper in the American colonies, and the first willing to venture criticism of the government. The New-York Weekly Journal was the second paper in a city of 10,000 or so people, 1700 of them slaves.As we are reminded in Richard Kluger’s comprehensive new book, “Indelible Ink,” the first full-length account of Zenger’s travails, by 1735, Zenger (and the likely editor of his paper, James Alexander) had so offended Britain’s royal governor of New York and New Jersey, William Cosby, that Cosby brought suit against Zenger for seditious libel—the crime of criticizing the government. Under the law then in effect in Britain and its colonies, truth was not a defense to this charge. The leading legal treatise of the day explained that “since the greater appearance there is of truth in any malicious invective, so much the more provoking it is.” And: “The malicious prosecution of even truth itself cannot… be suffered to interrupt the tranquility of a well-ordered society.” This was deemed especially the case with true attacks on those in power, as they would have “a direct tendency to breed in the people a dislike of their governors and incline them to faction and sedition.”New Yorkers in 1735, though, weren’t buying it. While the jury in the Zenger trial was instructed that the truth of Zenger’s attacks on Cosby was no defense, Zenger’s lawyer argued that it should be, and asked the jury, if they found the stories true, to acquit the printer. This the jury did, striking a dramatic blow against the law of seditious libel, and launching a proud American tradition, ratified in 1791 in the First Amendment, and laid out over the centuries in a range of Supreme Court decisions.For at least the last 30 years, since Chief Justice William Rehnquist acquiesced in the constitutionalization of the law of libel, which has safeguarded the American press for more than a half century, we appeared to have a consensus in this country around our modern system of protections for the value of a free and untrammeled press to the process of self-government.Until now. This year, for the first time since at least Richard Nixon, the leader of one of our major political parties has pledged to limit press freedom by restricting criticism of his prospective rule.But Nixon’s threats were private, revealed only by his own taping system, while Donald Trump’s are very public, loud and clear. And to be fair to Nixon, he never made good on his private threats, and in the one Supreme Court case he argued personally as a lawyer, he seemed to accept modern constitutional protections for libel.In fact, Trump is more hostile to the legal and constitutional rights of the press than any major presidential candidate of the last two centuries. What he proposes is reminiscent of the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 championed (to his immortal disgrace) by President John Adams in the last serious attempt to relitigate at the federal level what had seemed resolved in the Zenger case. It is cold comfort—although it may be some warning to Republicans inclined to go along—that Adams was not only defeated for re-election after passage of those laws, but lost the White House to Thomas Jefferson and his close associates James Madison and James Monroe for a quarter of a century, while Adams’ Federalist Party never really recovered.In case you think a comparison of Trump’s goals with Zenger’s opponents or the sponsors of the Alien and Sedition Acts is unfair, a quick review of the record may be in order.Trump has said that most reporters are “absolute dishonest, absolute scum.” He’s said that “I think the media is among the most dishonest groups of people I’ve ever met. They’re terrible.”In February he pledged that “one of the things I’m gonna do if I win, and I hope that I do, and we’re certainly leading, is I’m gonna open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money. We’re gonna open up those libel laws. So that when the New York Times writes a hit piece that is a total disgrace, or when the Washington Post, which is there for other reasons, writes a hit piece, we can sue them and win money rather than have no chance of winning because they’re totally protected. You see, with me, they’re not protected, because I’m not like other people, but I’m not taking money, I’m not taking their money. We’re gonna open up those libel laws, folks, and we’re gonna have people sue you like you never got sued before.”Nor is a threat by Trump to sue for libel an idle one. In 2006 he brought such a suit against a book that asserted he had wildly overstated his wealth. He lost the case on the merits as well as for failure to prove fault. But the Washington Post reported that “Trump said in an interview that he knew he couldn’t win the suit but brought it anyway to make a point. ‘I spent a couple of bucks on legal fees, and they spent a whole lot more. I did it to make [author Tim O’Brien’s] life miserable, which I’m happy about.’” Trump has also sued the Chicago Tribune and comedian Bill Maher, and threatened to sue the New York Times (more than once), ABC, the Daily Beast, Rolling Stone, the Huffington Post, reporter David Cay Johnston, TV host Lawrence O’Donnell and comedian Rosie O’DonnellIn the February rant, Trump also seemed to threaten to force Jeff Bezos to divest himself of the Washington Post, asserting that it had been purchased to obtain political influence, and declaring that such purchases should be forbidden.Asked in June if his stance on the press would continue as president, he said, “Yeah, it is going to be like this… You think I’m gonna change? I’m not going to change.” He repeated his view that “I am going to continue to attack the press. I find the press to be extremely dishonest. I find the political press to be unbelievably dishonest.”In August he tweeted that “It is not ‘freedom of the press’ when newspapers and others are allowed to say and write whatever they want even if it is completely false!”Melania Trump’s libel lawyer (she is suing the Daily Mail in Maryland for a story on her modeling days) is even more specific, saying that New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, the 1964 Supreme Court decision that established modern press protections, should be overruled.Anyone paying attention knows there is a great deal at stake in this election. Freedom of the press in this country may be among those stakes.ProPublica is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative newsroom. Sign up for their newsletter. Sign up for our COVID-19 newsletter to stay up-to-date on the latest coronavirus news throughout New York last_img read more

Continue reading

Defoe in confident mood

first_img Defoe was on target for the second successive league game as Sunderland claimed a precious point in a 1-1 draw at Swansea, and the 55-times capped England striker has certainly given the Black Cats a cutting edge since ending his 11-month MLS adventure at Toronto. Sunderland have taken four points from their last two games after winning only one of the previous 12 in the Premier League and enter back-to-back home fixtures against fellow strugglers QPR and West Brom with renewed optimism. Jermain Defoe feels Sunderland have built the momentum to distance themselves from relegation bother. “It was always a difficult place to go and we just have to make it like that, we have to be direct, play with a lot of energy and create chances. “We did that against Burnley and if we keep doing that we should be fine.” Swansea salvaged a point when former Sunderland loanee Ki Sung-yueng grabbed his fourth goal of the season midway through the second half with a fine diving header. It was Ki’s first Swansea appearance for five weeks as he had been away leading South Korea at the Asian Cup in Australia and skipper Ashley Williams hailed the importance of the midfielder. “He’s a massive player for us and we probably missed him a little bit while he’s been away,” Williams said. “But he slotted right back in and was as good as he’s been all season. “Ki and Jack Cork put in good shifts and I thought Jack covered a lot of ground on his debut. “I was a little bit disappointed with the way we played but we showed great character to come back from a goal down, especially when you’re not playing as well as you want to. “We’ve had a bit of a wobble after Christmas but we’ve got four points from the last two games and we want to kick on now.” “The games we’ve got coming up are massive and we have to be confident now,” Defoe said ahead of QPR’s visit to the Stadium of Light on Tuesday. “QPR are a team that are really fighting as well but we just have to play like we did here because I thought we played well. “We created some chances but football’s about results and you have to put on a performance.” Defoe’s rasping first-half strike which gave Sunderland the lead at the Liberty Stadium saw the 32-year-old became the first player to score against every team currently playing in the top flight. The Londoner has now netted more than 220 goals in English football and Sunderland boss Gus Poyet appears to be responsible for one of the transfer masterstrokes of the season. For his part, Defoe says he is relishing being back in the Premier League and believes an intimidating Stadium of Light will prove crucial in Sunderland’s battle for survival. “Having our fans onside during games is a massive thing for us,” Defoe said. “Even when I was playing for other teams, coming to Sunderland was always a difficult game. Press Associationlast_img read more

Continue reading