On Thursday I wrote to a confined list of personal contacts, stating my reasons for ceasing to write for the English edition of Kathimerini. The decision was reached after Kathimerini declined to publish two columns by myself which analyzed the “Erimitis” situation in Corfu and criticized the current government for its support of this project.
Subsequently – and I have no knowledge of how this occurred – my message appeared on many websites, stating that “Irish/British author is censored by Kathimerini for criticizing Mitsotakis.” NOWHERE IN MY MESSAGE DID I USE THE WORD “CENSORED” and I would not condone the use of such a word, since the columns were not in fact "censored" – they were rejected. There is a very considerable and important difference between censorship and rejection.
My dispute with Kathimerini is based on the fact that they declined to publish – they did not attempt to censor or suppress the columns. I continue to believe that the editor(s) of Kathimerini were wrong in their decision, but I will say no more than that at this stage, since we have had correspondence since my original message was transmitted yesterday morning, except to say that I do not accuse them of “censorship” – the word has, I believe, been used by other media as a “stick” with which to unfairly beat Kathimerini.
What is of far greater importance is the situation regarding Erimitis, and I attach my “Open Letter” to Mitsotakis, which should in my opinion have been the priority in any consequent publicity.
I am now sending this message to the same recipients, in the hope that whoever was responsible for releasing my message to a wider public might be able to revoke the word “censored” which was not used, or intended, by me and, instead, draw attention to my “Open Letter" to Mitsotakis.