We Stand Corrected: Why Can’t the Media Get Gennady Timchenko Right?

Is coal beating oil as the hot new commodity? Trading activities at Gennady Timchenko’s Gunvor suggests the answer is yes.

Gunvor Group’s co-founders Gennady Timchenko and Torbjorn Tornqvist are seeing their hard work pay off—literally.  Recently Bloomberg reported on October 10, 2011 that Gunvor estimated its revenue will increase from $65 billion to $80 billion this year—a 23 percent improvement on last year’s already stunning profits. Gennady Timchenko and Torbjorn Tornqvist noted that Gunvor will continue to expand via acquisitions, around half of which will be in Russia.

Despite recessionary times in Europe and abroad, Gennady Timchenko’s Gunvor bears witness to the fact that the demand for coal is increasing over the demand for oil, and the traders predict more of the same over the next two decades, particularly in Far East Russia.  Gunvor bet wisely that the demand for coal would “outpace” demand for oil when it landed a controlling stake (51 percent) in Kolmar in partnership with Gennady Timchenko’s investment vehicles. In line with this investment strategy, Gennady Timchenko’s Gunvor has cut its share of Russia’s seaborn oil exports to under 20 percent, whereas the Geneva-based company once handled around 30 percent of Russia’s seaborn oil exports. Gunvor is also slated to develop trading in grain, sugar, and ethanol. 

The good news for Gunvor continues in other coal-related purchases.  Pinesdale LLC, a Gunvor subsidiary, reportedly paid $400 million for one-third ownership in coal mine Signal Peak.  News sources indicate the Signal Peak mine is estimated at more than $1.5 billion, including existing debt. 

Mike Dawson, a spokesman for the Boich Cos. in Ohio, which purchased the mine with Ohio FirstEnergy Corp. in 2008, said of the business deal with Gennady Timchenko and Torbjorn Tornqvist’s Gunvor, “This transaction is a win for everyone involved, most especially for the continued operations of the mine. Having Gunvor as a partner will strengthen our mine operations.” Media outlets reported that Gennady Timchenko’s Gunvor plans on increasing the underground production from 9 million tons annually to around 15 million tons and shipping the coal to Pacific and Asia markets via British Columbia.

As an internationally renowned global energy trader, Gunvor’s position on coal—and its increasing profitability in a down market—show oil may soon be on its way out.

US/2012: new rules for political communication on Twitter?

Now that Twitter is wading into the world of political advertising, the Federal Election Commission may change the way they regulate those messages.

Tech President notes that the FEC is still trying to get their arms around the new platforms and mediums.

Part of the reasoning for a return to the rules, according to the draft document, is the advent of new technology. Twitter’s political ads, for instance, display a text box when users hover their cursors over a particular area; in that box is a more formal disclosure of who paid for the ad in question. The FEC hasn’t given a definite yes or no as to whether these new technologies are kosher, which leaves people trying to innovate in the multi-million-dollar field of political advertising in something of a gray area. New rules would change that.

“Given the development and proliferation of the Internet as a mode of political communication, and the expectation that continued technological advances will further enhance the quantity of information available to voters online and through other technological means,” reads the draft document, included in a memo to the commissioners from their general counsel, Anthony Herman, “the Commission welcomes comments on whether and how it should amend its disclaimer requirements for public communications on the Internet to provide flexibility consistent with their purpose.”

It’s not clear if the rules will change in time for the 2012 election.

Read more: Utah Pulse – New Rules for Online Political Ads Could be Coming

A Russian billionaire starts a war at Kremlin’s top spin doctor

Russian billionaire Mikhail Prokhorov on Thursday resigned from the post of leader of a pro-reform party and launched an unprecedented attack on Kremlin’s top spin doctor, accusing him of stifling debate.

Prokhorov, who was until now the leader of the small Pravoye Delo (Right Cause) party, pledged to establish his own movement, saying he was not afraid of repeating the fate of tycoon Mikhail Khodorkovsky who supporters say was arrested in 2003 for daring to challenge the Kremlin.

Prokhorov carefully avoided any criticism of President Dmitry Medvedev and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, instead taking aim at their close associate.

“There is a puppeteer who has long ago privatized the political system, puts pressure on media and misinforms the country’s leadership,” the charismatic owner of the NBA’s New Jersey Nets basketball team told a party meeting.

“His name is Vladislav Yuryevich Surkov, first deputy chief of staff,” Prokhorov said to cries of “Bravo” from the audience.

“I will do everything I can to get him fired,” said the businessman, ranked Russia’s third richest man by Forbes magazine with a fortune of US$18 billion.

Surkov is considered one of the most influential Kremlin officials, who is credited with coining the term “sovereign democracy” to describe Russia’s political system.

He has worked with both Medvedev and his predecessor in the Kremlin Putin and is in charge of the ongoing political campaign for December parliamentary polls.

Such lacerating critique of the Kremlin was so startling in a country where top businesspeople and parties have for years toed the Kremlin line that some suggested the attack was stage-managed by the Kremlin to allow Prokhorov to win political points ahead of the polls.

Prokhorov said he would not take the party into the parliamentary elections because he was resigning.

“I am calling on those who are not indifferent about our country to join forces, not to quit politics, get Surkov fired, create a new political movement and win genuine elections,” he said.

“Welcome to real, honest politics.”

Observers said however that he would have to either quit politics for good or accept Kremlin rules of the game.

“If he starts genuine political fight against the regime then the threat of following Khodorkovsky’s footsteps will loom large,” former prime minister turned opposition politician Mikhail Kasyanov said on Echo of Moscow radio.

Several top culture figures including pop diva Alla Pugachyova and film director Pavel Lungin turned up at the meeting to support the businessman.

Prokhorov’s opponents organized an alternative party convention at a different location where they voted to dismiss Prokhorov from the top post.

Running heavily edited footage from both meetings, Russian state-controlled television portrayed Prokhorov’s resignation as an internal party squabble and excised all criticism concerning the Kremlin officials.

On Wednesday, Prokhorov hastily called a press conference during which he accused Surkov’s subordinate Radiy Khabirov of orchestrating a “hostile takeover” of Pravoye Delo on the first day of the party’s convention the same day.

A Kremlin official dismissed Prokhorov’s Wednesday statements as “hysterics.”

In June, Prokhorov made a splash on Russia’s lethargic political scene by winning the party’s leadership at a congress.

The move marked the first foray into politics by a top businessman since the 2003 arrest of Khodorkovsky who had financed opposition parties prior to his imprisonment.

Analysts have said Prokhorov could not have assumed the party leadership without the tacit support of the Kremlin.

benefit from a semblance of political competition ahead of the parliamentary polls and a presidential vote three months later.

They said the Kremlin had expected Prokhorov to conform to existing rules of the game but might have underestimated his ambitions.

Brand new morality for British newspapers?

Drunk in the heady wine of success, blindfolded to absolute power corrupting absolutely, Rupert Murdoch’s media empire is at last getting its comeuppance. Not that its methods passed off as white lilies in the past, but the present avalanche of revelations is sending shock waves down the media landscape.

All stick-bands around the self-inflicted wound are falling off exposing the deeper layers of a festering ethical crisis in the British media and politics, to begin with.

As the British media got obsessed with power and money and the editors revelled in the growing, somewhat, captive circulation figures and an increasing clout over politicians, it was halcyon days for both British media and politics.

Politicians, with skeletons in the closet — and there are many as the salary and perks scandals concerning British MPs had once underlined — felt beholden to the press. Murdoch and his CEOs and editors knew too much about the politicians to expect to be ruffled by the latter. The media simply cashed in on this fault-line, as it were. The government regulator and the self-regulation the media were left with could work no more. That is why, a review has been ordered into the ethical side of media including the relations among politicians, media and the police in addition to an inquest into the criminal offence.

Certain inside stories are revealing: Former British PM Gordon Brown saying that he had no knowledge of ‘criminal’ inclination in the News Corp has earned him some scathing epithets. The critics reminded him of the Sunday Times’ disclosing medical reports of Brown couple’s child, an invasion of privacy which sent Mrs Brown into tears and caused huge embarrassment to David himself. Even so, the then British Prime Minister would invite News Corp. CEO Rebekah Brooks to a sumptuous dinner party with uncorked champagne cascading as they treated their tormentor.

Tony Blair’s super spin doctor A. Campbell cozying up to the press to sell the unsaleable for all one knew.

In passing, admittedly though, the beauty of the British press is its absolute candour, even when operating in the reverse gear.

Personally, British Prime Minister Cameron’s embarrassment is huge. He had hired Andrew Coulson as his media consultant on his resignation as editor of the News of the World in 2007, perhaps with certain dark forebodings at the back of his mind. At any rate, when Cameron sensed that a spilling of the beans was imminent he eased off Andrew who resigned from government. Arrested, interrogated and set on bail, he remains on the radar.

Rupert Murdoch, his son James Murdoch and Rebekah Brooks, the News Corp’s CEO, have been called to face questioning by a House of Commons committee. The first two have refused to respond to the summon while the CEO is going to appear before the Committee. Meanwhile, Murdoch has withdrawn his bid to take full control of satellite broadcaster BskyB. Again, it’s a sand pack against an engulfing storm.

In the process, however, what the British prime minister sees: ‘we are all in it — the media, police and politicians including me’ — may go down as a correct diagnosis of the ailment. But the other way of putting it would be that the media was indulged in undermining the moral power of truth and the ideal of public service by successive elected governments in varying degrees.

The media was obsessed with their methods and procedures of news gathering thinking perhaps that the readers have got used to a diet of sensational scoops and exclusives. Partly it may have been addictive on the part of readers but to a large part it was due to apathy.

In a democracy with affluence, people could care less; as long as it didn’t affect their lifestyle, it wouldn’t perhaps sink in their minds. One wonders, however, if the British economy were not in the doldrums such a hue and cry would have been raised.

But it is perhaps safe to infer that when British people thought that the victim could be anybody among them that they felt outraged and exploited.

The Western countries are used to criticising the weaknesses of Bangladesh’s democracy. Of course, we have many and we are aware and conscious of them. But the longstanding Western democracies have their own kind.

Without feigning any holier than thou image, can we draw parallels between Bangladesh media scene and the current phase of the British media. Not quite, yet like the British or any democratic media, the press in Bangladesh is politically divided. While British media and politics are well-coordinated, to put it politely, in our case, they are not so. In fact, there is a hiatus between the politicians and the media in Bangladesh.

There is, however, a common threat perception in democracies: Either democracy is being compromised by commercialisation of the media or by money and muscle power as in Bangladesh.

The question is whether the robust review of the media-politician role in Britain would prove to be curative, only time will tell.

Telephone hacking is a babe in front of the many-fangled technology shift the media world is going through. This in time has the potential to send tectonic shock waves to people who would like to keep faith with the media as their sacred trust.

With the financial, media and political domains taking on complex and sophisticated ramifications, there is little knowing how vulnerable the media might become to the wily side of power brokers given to abusive use of all tools of power.

Andy Coulson : the resignation of Cameron’s spin doctor

The resignation of Andy Coulson is probably the biggest blow ­suffered by David Cameron since becoming Prime Minister. It need not have happened at all.

In appointing Mr Coulson to the powerful position of Tory Director of Communications three and a half years ago, Mr Cameron took an unnecessary risk that many forecast would end in disaster. The outcome ­inevitably places a question mark against his judgment.

Even if no controversy had surrounded Mr Coulson, it would have been an unwise appointment simply because he was editor of the News of the World for four years. It is a newspaper unlike any others which, while sometimes breaking important stories, employs controversial techniques. In ­journalistic terms, Mr Coulson was as far the other side of the tracks as it was possible to be.

But he was not just any editor of the News of the World. He had been forced to resign from the newspaper because of evidence of phone-hacking that had taken place during his editorship, and which had led to the prosecution and imprisonment of one of his journalists, royal editor Clive Goodman, and of a private investigator called Glenn Mulcaire, who had collaborated with the paper.

There was – and remains – no proof that Mr Coulson was aware of these illegal practices. He has told the Commons Culture Select Committee that he had no recollection of any phone-tapping during his time as editor of the newspaper. He said that he gave reporters freedom to operate and did not attempt to micromanage every story. Yet the response of many people who know how journalism works was that it was difficult to see how he could not have been aware. It was always possible that evidence would emerge which pointed a finger at the former editor, and a racing certainty that the Tories’ enemies in the media would plug away in the hope of implicating him, and embarrassing Mr Cameron.

Why did the Conservative leader nonetheless go ahead and appoint him a mere six months after his resignation? Mr Coulson is a talented man, and as an editor of a Sunday ‘red-top’ tabloid who had very definitely not been born with a silver spoon in his mouth, he offered an understanding of ordinary people’s concerns that was not obviously shared by the privileged Old Etonians and slick marketing men who dominated Mr Cameron’s team.

Mr Cameron was also influenced by Tony Blair’s reliance on Alastair Campbell as his spin doctor from 1994 until 2003. Mr Campbell had a similar background as a rough-and-tumble former ‘red-top’ journalist who shot from the hip.

In fact, Mr Coulson is a much less abrasive and generally more straightforward character, and has shown little appetite for bullying journalists and threatening media organisations in the manner of the divisive Mr Campbell. Nevertheless, his appointment owed much to the New Labour spin doctor having gone before.

A third factor in his appointment – and arguably the most important – was Mr Coulson’s background as a senior executive who had worked for Rupert Murdoch, first as associate editor of The Sun, and then as editor of the News of the World. One of Mr Cameron’s main concerns during 2007 was to secure the support of Mr Murdoch’s newspapers, which had backed New Labour through thick and thin for more than a decade.

Although not particularly close to Mr Murdoch himself, Mr Coulson understood how his organisation worked and had many important contacts within it. The Tory leader’s assiduous courting of various figures in Mr Murdoch’s circle eventually bore fruit. Of course there were many reasons, not least Gordon Brown’s increasing unpopularity, which explained Mr Murdoch’s dumping of Labour at the end of September 2009. But Mr Coulson had played a useful role and Mr Cameron must have thought he had made the right decision by giving him the job.

What he did not foresee was that, after Mr Murdoch had dropped Labour, elements opposed to him on the Left in politics and the media would feel free to launch assaults on the media mogul with a ferocity they had not shown for many years. Mr Coulson had already been an object of their attacks because he was an important Cameron lieutenant.

 

In the end, Mr Coulson evidently felt weighed down by the media onslaught and has become increasingly disengaged. Two recent developments tipped the balance: the revelation by the News of the World that it was suspending a senior executive, Ian Edmondson, following a ‘serious allegation’ relating to phone-hacking while Andy Coulson was editor of the paper; and an announcement by the Crown Prosecution Service that it will mount a ‘comprehensive’ review of phone-hacking evidence held by the police.

The resignation will inevitably be seen to have been deliberately timed in the immediate aftermath of Alan Johnson standing down as Shadow Chancellor, and on the day that Tony Blair appeared for the second time before the Chilcot Inquiry, in an attempt to lessen media coverage.

I doubt the stratagem will have any effect on the damage that may be suffered by Mr Cameron. His judgment is already called into question. If the Crown Prosecution Service should issue proceedings against Mr Coulson, and if that led to a conviction, the Tory leader would face much more serious criticism.

We have no way of knowing whether this will happen. If no charges are brought, the controversy will slowly fade away, though the whole phone-hacking scandal will continue to be invoked by some who oppose Mr Murdoch’s ambitions for BSkyB.

For Andy Coulson this is a sad end to a brief but on the whole successful foray into political life. His understanding of the concerns of ordinary Tory voters was a factor in Mr Cameron becoming prime minister. He also acted as a counterweight to some of the wilder ideas of Steve Hilton, the Tory leader’s political guru. By the way, Mr Hilton is said to be delighted that his rival has resigned, though Mr Cameron and George Osborne reportedly tried to persuade him not to go.

For David Cameron his resignation is a setback rather than a disaster – so long as his former spin doctor does not end up being convicted in a court of law. The lasting damage that will result from his misjudgment is therefore still unknowable. All we can say with certainty is that this was one appointment which David Cameron need not, and should not, have made.

Spin doctor: what is the “spin”?

In quantum mechanics, the spin is the property of a particle rotating around its own axis. In PR, this effect has been used to describe the ability to modify the public perception of an event, a company, a policy or a person. An ability relying, of course on a certain amount of disingenuous messages…

Spin is not to be mixed up with plain lie though: in quantum mechanics, lying would mean taking the particle away, and replacing it with a brand new one. Instead, the spin aims at modifying the perception of this very same particle, this very same event. Obviously, if you need to have a very bad candidate elected (say, hmmm, for instance, George W. Bush), or a very bad product to sell (say, hmmm, for instance, Microsoft Vista) you can’t just say you’d need a better one. The candidate (or product) is here, your job is to have him elected (sold).

It requires flair, strong-nerves, knowledge of the human nature, and a good share of techniques. Those ones I’d like to share and, hopefully, discuss with all of you.

10 good reasons to use social videos for PR

 I’ve often argued that video is a tool of social media. So as many social media responsibilities are being taken on by PR departments, we are seeing public relations teams becoming more actively involved in the creation and deployment of social video content. Viral videos, branded entertainment, web series videos and video game trailers top the list along with original, entertaining product launch videos. This new breed of video content, rather than simply supplementing the efforts of PR teams, is often spearheading them. 

My creative agency has been working with some of the more innovative PR agencies and internal PR teams over the past couple of years, and here’s a list of the top 10 ways video is being used by PR professionals to help brands, businesses, organizations and individuals tell their stories.

1. Media relations / pitches and press releases. Videos make pitches and press releases infinitely more interesting and engaging. Referencing a hot new viral video, the latest video in a web series, a video announcement from a key corporate player or simply a fun, informative video about a product can make a huge difference in how a pitch is received. Video gives journalists, bloggers and publications more content to share with their visitors. 

2. Building trust and credibility with targeted groups. Nothing builds trust like video. Instead of reading a text quote from a company spokesperson, viewers are able to actually see that spokesperson speaking. There may be some coaching involved, but that’s what directors are for. 

3. Raising brand awareness / promotions / working with celebrities. Videos that offer something of value like cash, prizes or 15 minutes of fame can spread like crazy and highlight a product’s involvement in a contest or promotion, raising awareness of the product, and by extension, the brand.

Creating and launching funny, edgy or cool video content involving TV, sports and YouTube celebrities guarantees a targeted audience. Launching a coordinated social media sharing strategy and integrating this effort with the marketing department allows PR teams to capitalize on that momentum, building and raising brand awareness.

4. Product launches. Viral videos and branded entertainment are high-profile ways to announce new products or refresh old ones. Video gives PR teams a visual, entertaining and engaging tool around which to center campaigns. We were recently involved in creating a video for a pizza chain in which large amounts of cash were stuffed in the crust of their new pizza. The content was used not only as a stand-alone video, but as part of a funny promo on a late-night comedy talk show.

5. Crisis management / shifting public opinion / corporate and ceo reputation management. In 2009, when two Domino’s Pizza employees made a video of themselves sticking cheese in their noses and messing around with customers’ sandwiches, the companywas quick to respond with a video apology from Domino’s USA President, president Patrick Doyle.

In 2010, BP  CEO Tony Hayward made a video apology following the oil spill in the Gulf. Most of the top comments on the video reference the “South Park” episode that lampooned Hayward, but that’s OK. The message still got out.

In both cases, the videos reached large audiences and supplied talking points for the media, social and mainstream, to propel the video messages further. Both videos were effective in turning around negative perceptions toward the brands.

6. Content development. Company newsletters, blogs, speeches and annual reports are being sprinkled with videos. PR teams don’t need to produce a viral video hit for every newsletter, but they can encourage key employees to create video content at events and parties. Include the videos in monthly correspondences with clients and the media. Just be sure to edit them first, especially the ones from the Christmas party.

7. Social media marketing. If social media is UPS, video is the package. If social media is the rocket launcher, video is the rocket. Video can be branded as heavily or as lightly as the creative and messaging dictate, and the larger story can be shared and developed via social media. Having a PR message go viral across Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and other video sites and social outlets creates a new story that can then be pitched to, or organically picked up by, mainstream media outlets — enabling the message to reach TV, radio and print audiences as well.

8. Social and environmental responsibility. For brands, businesses and organizations, being socially and environmentally responsible can be a key way of differentiating themselves from their competitors. Video can bring the faces of individuals and positive actions of these companies to the forefront and help move brands closer to new and existing fans and customers.

Video can also be used to present a call-to-action, or as a rallying cry for public involvement in a good cause. Launching videos where fans are encouraged to submit a response in video form allows a call-to-action to be spread even faster and with farther reach.

9. Events. While a single live event reaches only the people attending, social video allows PR teams to share the event with everyone. This increases the exposure of both the event and the brand, product, organization or personality. Events don’t always have to be real, either. Flash mobs are types of events that are staged and shared on Youtube and via social media.

10. Political campaigns. Politics is about convincing people to trust a candidate, motivating them to convince others to trust the candidate and getting everyone to vote for the candidate. Politicians are often recorded publicly for videos that can take on lives of their own — but funny, emotional or serious original video content can be produced and launched in order to manage the direction and spread of both positive and negative conversation. Political attack videos and damage control videos can both contain humor, meaning or even shock value — and will be shared. 

Online video is fast becoming the face of social media. Like their marketing and advertising brethren, PR agencies and PR departments should be exploring the possibilities and pushing the boundaries.<

 

Some more drama around Cameron’s spin doctors

The cabinet secretary, Sir Gus O’Donnell, has written to David Cameron to ask him to rein in government spin doctors, saying that some have behaved “unacceptably”, it has emerged.

The unusual step came after government sources unleashed an attack on a senior public servant, Jenny Watson, claiming her career was “built on incompetence” and that she was “milking” the taxpayer. The comments last September were interpreted as a sign to other public officials that the coalition was preparing a clearout from the Labour era. But the outspoken and personal nature of the briefing provoked a storm in Whitehall with senior figures – including the chair of the Committee for Standards in Public Life, Sir Christopher Kelly – condemning the language used by the community secretary, Eric Pickles‘ department. The briefing was given by one of Pickles’ special advisers.

Now it has been revealed that O’Donnell wrote to the prime minister following the row. In response to a freedom of information request by PR Week, the Cabinet Office confirmed that O’Donnell wrote to the PM regarding “the role, status or conduct of government special advisers”.

PR Week reported that the letter said: “You will have been aware of briefings to the media regarding Jenny Watson. This behaviour is unacceptable. I trust you will agree with me and take necessary action to make sure that people understand this will not be tolerated.” Labour has written to O’Donnell calling for those responsible to be identified and sacked.

Asked about the letter, the prime minister’s official spokesman said: “Clear rules are in place and we expect people to abide by them. The prime minister is responsible for the appointment of special advisers.” O’Donnell refused to comment.

Last year, the Times reported a source in the communities department confirming that Watson’s position as a board member of the Audit Commission was not being renewed, saying: “She was begging Mr Pickles to stay on but we are not having someone who built their career on incompetence continuing to milk the taxpayer. She is not fit for the role.

“The Audit Commission has lost its way and the last thing we need is someone like her on board. She has no previous experience outside the public sector. We have had a bonfire of the quangos. Now [we] are having a bonfire of the quangocrats.”

The communities department has since refused Ffreedom of information requests to reveal any legal advice it sought after some civil servants reportedly raised concerns that they could be considered defamatory. Watson has not spoken publicly about the row.

The special advisers’ code of conduct sets out their role in developing policy, writing speeches, liaising with the party, civil servants and the press. It says: “Special advisers should conduct themselves with integrity and honesty.”

There have been wider concerns about the inexperience of some so-called “spads” – special advisers to ministers who specialise in media or policy development. Downing Street restricted the number of media spads to one per cabinet minister, promising to reduce the numbers compared with the Labour government. But some senior figures in Whitehall now believe that has left ministers exposed.

Caroline Flint, the shadow communities secretary, said that any advisers making such comments should be sacked. “It would be disgraceful if the prime minister and local government secretary were protecting the identity of someone responsible for smearing a public official.”

Anna Bligh and the cyclonic communication

ANYONE who works in corporate communications or PR will be familiar with the famous Tylenol case in the 1980s, when Johnson and Johnson immediately withdrew all its products and reinvented its packaging after a deranged extortionist killed seven people by lacing the painkiller with cyanide.

In years to come, Anna Bligh’s management of the Queensland flood and cyclone crisis will stand as a comparable case study in how political leaders should best handle a natural disaster.

In the past two weeks, and particularly this week, Bligh has created a new template for political communication. It’s been based around honesty, decisiveness and plain speech. It’s been based around saying what government can do, and what it cannot do.

And it comes at a time in the political cycle when the public is more cynical than ever, fed up with glib sloganeering, message management, one-liners which have been tested on focus groups, politicians who won’t go near a podium unless they’ve got their press secretary standing alongside like one of those nodding puppies you put on the dashboard of your car.

Was Gordon Brown spied over while in office?

Former British Gordon Brown called police in over fears his phone was hacked while he was in office, it was revealed yesterday.

But the Metropolitan Police have still not given the former PM an answer – months after he made the inquiry.

Brown’s fears were revealed as senior Labour figures blasted the police handling of alleged illegal phone hacking by newspapers.

PM David Cameron’s top spin doctor, Andy Coulson, was forced to resign from his Downing Street job on Friday amid continuing allegations about phone hacking at the News of the World during his time as editor there.

Coulson has denied knowledge of any hacking when he was editor. But the news that a former PM believed his mobile messages might have been intercepted has put the issue under the spotlight again.

Brown wrote a letter to police about the issue last summer, sources close to him have confirmed.

Other politicians, including Peter Mandelson and John Prescott, and celebrities including actress Sienna Miller, are taking civil court action over allegations their phone messages were hacked.

Labour deputy leader Harriet Harman said yesterday: “Hacking into people’s phones is illegal. The criminal law has got to be complied with and if it is broken, then it should be investigated by the police and it should be enforced.

“Nobody is above the law – no newspaper editor, no journalist.”

Tony Blair’s former Downing Street spin doctor Alastair Campbell also denounced the “lacklustre” way in which the police had investigated the phone hacking allegations.

He said: “When you compare and contrast the way the police pursued Tony Blair on the so-called cash-for-honours nonsense and the lacklustre way in which they handled this, there is a very big difference. There must be reasons behind that which will, I think, become part of an unfolding scandal.”

Meanwhile, a media lawyer has claimed the phone-hacking allegations were not confined to one newspaper.

Mark Lewis said he was representing four people who believe they were targeted by other newspapers.

Energy Secretary Chris Huhne yesterday attacked the News Of The World’s claim that the phone hacking which led to their royal correspondent being sacked was a one-off.

Huhne said: “It seems to be totally implausible that this was … limited to one journalist.

“I was rather surprised the police accepted that story rather than investigate it further.”

The Met declined to comment on individual cases.