The Stalin & Guacamole set in Highgate had their Harvey Nickers in a twist last week over an ad for the BNP in their local organ The Hampstead & Highgate (Ham & High). The paper's owners were hauled over Red-hot moral coals for running the ad 'in a high Jewish minority area'. (Presumably it would've been fine to run it in Surrey or Oxfordshire then?) Most outspoken of all was a man described modestly in the strangely alerted national media as 'local Labour councillor Theo Blackwell'. From the lofty heights of his thirty-eight hands horse, Mr Blackwell described the paper's decision to run the BNP's drivel as "the shameless pursuit of profit over principle". Hold that thought.

We've been here a million times before, but to recap: it is the BNP's libertarian right in a free society to place advertisements in the media, where such publicity is (a) allowed by law - so eg, not on the BBC - and (b) within the race relations legislation in terms of opinion expression. Equally, it is the owners'/editor's right to run such commercial messages - for which of course they must face the commercial consequences. In my view, the 'spirit' of all this is straightforward: I would give unfettered freedom of speech to any organisation prepared to accept the same rights for others.....within the confines of pre-existing law. As most of the BNP's ideas are loathsome, the more publicity they get, the more they will remain somewhere several light years off the scale of mainstream voter consideration. I am unaware of anything in the BNP's literature demanding a One Party State, so while many of us won't like it, if they wish to plaster the Moon with laser messages, so be it.

But the trouble with Theo Blackwell's mob (and we're coming to more on this) is their shameless pursuit of persuasion over principle. As an experienced rentaquote and political fixer, Blackwell knows perfectly well that his orchestration (for that is what it was) of the Ham & High episode depended upon hiding his real background, while demonising a capitalist organisation of which he is rather less than fond. Let's examine Theodore's theology a little more closely.

Although nicely suited and cleaned up these days, Theo Blackwell is from the Old Luvvie-to-Bennite Left of the Labour Party. My chief argument (although there are many) against such folk is their fervent desire to cover over those tramlines of youthful thought: it is their type who first made the Party unelectable for twenty years, and then (having discovered media 'marketing') sold out everything decent for which the Labour Movement had ever stood.

Blackwell is far from being just 'a local Labour Councillor' - he is on the Executive of Camden Council's Labour Party. He is a bit of a one for the conference and seminar circuit. He has a much-admired blog on Politics and Opinion. In 2006, he attended a course called The Future of Local Government. I wouldn't be surprised if you and I paid for his course fees: either way, the consolation is that it didn't do Theo much good, as a few months later his Party was routed in the local elections. More to the point, he bears a grudge against the Ham & High. A whingeing letter to the 'paper ('you never gave us much when we were in power' and so forth) attests quite strongly to some of the history in this regard. Mr Blackwell doesn't thrive on criticism.

How different every thrown stone looks when turned over.

He works with a whole range of heavy-hitter 'social market' quangos and think-tanks. And as a day job, our Theo is a senior lobbyist for the Anglo-American political consultants Mandate. An excerpt from the company's website might be instructive at this point:

'Media are more fragmented, politicians more sceptical, campaigners more vocal and the news cycle never stops. To win, you must engage, persuade and convince, not just talk.'

Let's be clear about this: Theo is a PR guy. Mandate describes itself as a diversified consultancy working in corporate and consumer PR, crisis management and public affairs news management. Or put another way, spin. Their promise on the Home page is:

'We won't just get you noticed. We'll make you admired'

And the only two costs, of course, will be everything you ever ever believed in....and the truth.

Were I well known as Brigadier Oswald Torche-Theworkers of East Sussex or Johnny Agitward the Maoist Brixton activist, this minor investigation could be easily dismissed as the pre-Alzheimic raving of an ageing grey-hair. But the reality is (as anyone looking round the site can see) my politics are very simple: I am against privilege in all its forms, and nothing makes me angrier than deception. In politics, commerce, communities and families, deception is a virulent cancer - and it is completely untouched by any therapy beyond radical surgery.

Ha-haaa-ha-ha-haaa I hear you laugh - that's rich coming from an ex-adman. Well, not really. Advertising is biased, but is open about it - the law forces us to be, and quite right too. We put forward a brand's good points. You try it: if we lied, you don't buy it again. This is both more honest and less important than the betrayal of a whole culture by lies twisting reality out of any recognisable shape. By people who pretend they are other than they are. People who make themselves an exception to rules of the Advertising Standards Authority. People who lie their heads off in the name of an end they long ago forgot.

So you decide. Theo Blackwell - manipulator or Man of Principle?