The war that split the Tory press

The leadership battle has seen the traditional Tory papers being wooed by spin doctors from both camps ? with mixed success.

"Alastair Campbell must be killing himself laughing," said the gloomylooking Tory MP. "We, on the other hand, are just killing ourselves." After six days in which the Conservatives made fratricidal warfare their official sport once more, at least one of the party's politicians hadn't lost his bone-dry sense of humour this week.

But apart from the sheer fun of watching the enemy self-destruct, what the Prime Minister's Director of Communications and Strategy would have been watching most closely was the way in which the media both chronicled and influenced the whole gory spectacle.

While Mr Campbell will have logged each move meticulously, the question is whether the Tory Party has learnt some of the lessons of what has worked and what has not in terms of news management. Whether the next Conservative leader is Kenneth Clarke or Iain Duncan Smith, it's not just how they won the war that matters, it's how they spun the war, too.

With the Government deciding to shut up shop for the summer (even John Prescott failed to gift the tabloids their annual "gaffe-a-minute" story), news desks have undoubtedly been grateful to the Tories for conducting their leadership contest with such gusto. And just when it looked as if the race might be beginning to suffer from over-exposure, the past week has seen it reach new heights of bitterness and score-settling.

From "Big Tobacco" to the "Return of the Mummy II", the stories have come thick and fast, providing front-page splashes each day for both tabloid and broadsheet alike.

Crucial to the opposing camps have been the editorial stances taken by each of the papers. The Daily Telegraph led the charge for Mr Duncan Smith. Although it admitted that he was "not a glittering speaker" and would "need charisma lessons" (both of which are sure to be logged by Mr Campbell and the Millbank computer for future election posters), the ex-Army man was the party's best hope, it argued.

The Sunday Telegraph had come to a similar conclusion in its own leader column. "Though a man of strong views, Iain Duncan Smith has a naturally reasonable tone which should enable him to present the Conservatives as a civilised and intelligent movement rather than a dying pressure group," it declared.

Having seen its favourite, Michael Portillo, eliminated from the race, The Times gave a rather more reluctant endorsement to Mr Duncan Smith. "Conservatives should gamble that for the party and the country, 'the devil you do not know' is the better choice this time," the Thunderer whimpered. The Sunday Times was only slightly more enthusiastic, claiming Mr Duncan Smith could possibly, maybe win in 2009.

The Sun had perhaps the most coherent leader of all, despite its own recent support for T Blair in the general election. "People will vote Tory one day, if the party pledges to lower taxes, keep the pound and sort the NHS. But first the Tories have to keep themselves alive... and that means electing Iain Duncan Smith, who, unlike Kenneth Clarke, is actually a Tory." So far, so predictable. But last week also saw a bombshell dropped by one of the most Eurosceptic papers of all. The Daily Mail thought the unthinkable and backed Ken Clarke.

Under a banner headline "Time to End the Insanity", the Mail began its leader in typical style. "Along with death and taxation, there are two other certainties in life: the Mail will always revere Margaret Thatcher's historic achievements and we will continue to be implacably opposed to losing the pound," it declared.

But – and it was a big but – the Tories "desperately need a formidable leader who can score off New Labour", and only Ken Clarke fitted the bill.

The importance of this conversion to a man whom the Mail would normally despise is hard to overstate. Political staff would have advised that Mr Duncan Smith, called "IDS" by his friends, is more in tune with the paper's politics.

However, Paul Dacre, the paper's editor, is nothing if not his own man. According to insiders, Dacre's decision was taken at the very last minute, as other papers showed their hand. It was only at 9.30pm last Tuesday, the night before publication, that he sent over the historic leader to stunned executives at Northcliffe House in Kensington.

"It's high risk but basically, Paul's sick of being on the losing side. He wanted to back a winner for a change. Clarke could actually win the next election, IDS couldn't. It was that simple," said one source.

Some at the Mail's offices claim that within hours of hitting the doormats of Middle England, letters of disgust were winging their way in from readers pledging to tear up their subscriptions.

The Duncan Smith camp claimed the Mail's decision didn't matter, but privately was furious. In an election dominated by inactive Tory members drawn from the lower-middle classes, the Mail has arguably more influence than The Telegraph and The Times combined.

But despite the loss of the Mail, it seems that the Duncan Smith media strategy has been impressive. Up against a much more famous rival, the main task was to get their man on the map early and often, giving interviews in the first weeks of the campaign.

While Mr Clarke took a more leisurely approach ahead of his holiday in Australia, The Times and Telegraph were worked assiduously by the IDS team with letters of support from big backers ("Sir, As a life-long Conservative..."). Crucially, the Duncan Smith camp vetoed any live debates other than Newsnight, and chose that only because it went out at a time when average Tory members were tucked up with their Ovaltine.

Most of the credit for his campaign must go to Mike Penning, Mr Duncan Smith's loyal press officer throughout the last Parliament. A former journalist, fireman and Territorial Army man, Penning knows what makes a story and when deadlines are.

Even when The Mirror were on to the BNP story last week, it was Penning who advised that the whole story be put on the wire services so all papers could report how swiftly his boss had sacked Edgar Griffin.

The Clarke press team is headed by the relatively inexperienced Richard Chalk, a Central Office recruit whose first contact with most of the Lobby was on William Hague's General Election battle bus.

Of course, Mr Clarke famously abhors spin doctors and focus groups, and so it would be a brave man who tried to tell him what to do. But, as with Ann Widdecombe, behind his protestations lies an acute media awareness. It was Mr Clarke who instructed his team, correctly, that the BBC's one o'clock News was watched by far more elderly Tory members than any other news programme.

Despite their inexperience, the Clarke camp has been effective in defusing the rehashed BAT stories used to smear their man and gained maximum publicity in using Steve Norris to give their views on the BNP story.

Yet in the final analysis, the clear difference between the two camps has been in their focus. Mr Duncan Smith has ruthlessly targeted Tory members through the two Telegraphs, while Mr Clarke has been prepared to woo all sections of the media.

Even if Mr Duncan Smith wins, this strategy will have to change – and quickly. Canny Conservatives know that William Hague's big mistake in the last Parliament was to spin stories only to the Tory "White Commonwealth" of the Mail, The Telegraph and The Sun.

Whereas Alastair Campbell in Opposition saw he needed to win over his newspaper enemies, Mr Hague retreated to a newspaper range as narrow as his core vote. If the Tories really want to wipe the smile off Mr Campbell's face, they may do well to remember that.