Publisher orders destruction of entire print run of magazine over article

The entire print run of 36,000 copies of the January issue of the current affairs magazine, Magill, has been destroyed on the instructions of the magazine's publisher, Mr Mike Hogan.

The magazine had contained an article "which would have caused us several problems", according to Mr Hogan. It was later reprinted without the article and distributed to newsagents.

Sources close to the magazine said yesterday that the article concerned was in relation to property development and media coverage of such development, particularly in the national press.

Mr Michael Smith, a director of Lancefort, a company which was formed to oppose some property developments, yesterday expressed disappointment that an article he submitted to the magazine had not been printed.

Mr Smith said he has heard nothing of the production difficulties and could not say whether it was his article that was given as a reason for the pulping of the magazine.

He did say however that his article had been "trenchant" in its views, carrying a soap-box designation. It contained allegations of corruption in the property development sector and was strongly critical of media coverage.

It is understood that the magazine issue was prepared before the new editor, Ms Emily O'Reilly, took over her responsibilities, but the destruction of the print run had her full support.

Ms O'Reilly pointed out yesterday that the first issue under her editorship would not appear until February.

Mr Hogan commented: "I can confirm that I did have concerns and that an article that had been written and printed in Magill has been shredded along with all the copies of that edition." Asked how many copies had been destroyed, Mr Hogan said that "36,000 had been printed and 36,000 were destroyed".

Mr Hogan said that he had given an undertaking that he would not interfere in the editorial content of Magill when he purchased it from its founder and former editor, Mr Vincent Browne, last October, a fact, he said, that might explain why the article was allowed into print.

"We were putting a belly-wrap (a plastic covering containing promotional items) on the edition and this delayed its appearance in the newsagents for 24 hours. During this time I took the opportunity to read it and was horrified by what I read. " As luck would have it, we had this belly-wrap delaying things, so we were able to destroy the entire print run. It was my decision - as publisher only I could take that decision," Mr Hogan said.