Not charging readers of online newspapers does seem barmy. It is damaging newsprint sales and depriving publishers of millions of pounds of revenue. Imagine a restaurant which charged customers the normal price for sitting down at a table while offering the same meals free of charge for people who came in at the back. That is the lunacy of the present situation.

Deputy Editors are often not especially important figures. They fill in when editors are on holiday, and otherwise do the boring jobs which their bosses don't want to do. They are acutely conscious that the paper they are allowed to edit for a few weeks a year is not their own.

The story about Damian McBride's smears of leading Tories has been interpreted largely in political terms. It also casts a fascinating light on the general workings of the press, and in particular on the relationship between The Daily Telegraph, a Tory newspaper, and No 10.

Since newspapers make little or no money out of their websites, it is tempting to ignore the latest Audit Bureau of Circulations Electronic figures, which register soaring online usage. But however unprofitable websites may be, newspapers are pouring vast resources and energy into them, and some are achieving extraordinary results.

If there are any young psychologists looking around for a subject for a PhD thesis, may I suggest a subject? It would be something along the lines of "Guilt, expiation or displacement at The Guardian".

Last week Colette Bowe took over as the new chairman of Ofcom, the broadcasting and communications regulator. She was appointed by the Business Secretary, Lord Mandelson, and will work for three days a week at a salary of £200,000 a year.

The economic crisis has shaken the faith of many in capitalism itself. I can’t pretend to be entirely immune from such feelings. But I suppose the bigger shock to one’s system is the realisation that the suave bankers counting their bonuses in the boardroom don’t have any more idea of how to run their businesses than the doorman twenty floors below.

Peter Chernin may not be a name on every baby's lips, but as number two to Rupert Murdoch he is a very powerful man. Last week, he announced his resignation after 12 years in his present job at News Corp, having been unable to agree a new pay deal. He was already being paid amounts that make Sir Fred "the Shred" Goodwin look a like a cheapskate.

Much ink has been split recently over the future of Channel 4. Should it stay the same, or merge with channel Five, or be folded into BBC Worldwide? There is, in fact, a much bigger question which has scarcely been addressed. It concerns ITV. Does it have a future?

From the moment of its birth, people have been trying to kill off The Independent. On the day before its launch, Max Hastings, then editor of The Daily Telegraph, sent a bottle of champagne to our offices in City Road, wishing us luck and promising to "bury" us. The following day he dispatched a wreath, complete with a trailing black ribbon.

Alexander Lebedev looks the last person in the world one would like to own the venerable London Evening Standard. He is a Russian oligarch – not my favourite breed of men. He worked as a young man for the KGB – not my favourite organisation.

The New York Times is almost certainly the most famous paper in the world. It may be pompous and self-regarding, but it is also authoritative, serious minded and generally fair. Even journalists who dislike its liberal world view tend to respect it, and would be sorry if it disappeared.

The front page of The Times last Tuesday will have shaken the teacups at Tory HQ. At the top was a photograph of David and Samantha Cameron standing alongside David Ross and his girlfriend. Mr Ross is the chap in the soup over his shareholding in Carphone Warehouse. The headline over the picture was "The Party's over for Carphone playboy". The unwritten headline was "And Cameron is a silly ass for accepting donations from such a man".

No one has a higher regard for Media Guardian than I do, but I sometimes wonder whether it does not occasionally report newspaper redundancies involving its competitors with a little too much relish. After all, the axe could soon fall – will do so, I fear – at The Guardian. Redundancies are not necessarily a sign of weakness. They are affecting even the best-resourced titles.