Handshakes and trouser legs – secrets of the Freemasons

I remember reading a number of years ago about how (only) journalists have access to the media. Their power and influence over every day thought was immense. It was also said that you don't argue with people who buy ink in barrels, an expression that still evokes a chuckle in me. I have been tracking the media's attitude to Freemasonry for over 20 years now. So I was fascinated at today's article from The Telegraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/features/9124269/Handshakes-and-trouser-legs-secrets-of-the-Freemasons.html#disqus_thread

Journalists have been writing with a rather dull regularity about the "secrets" of Freemasonry. The handshake, the trouser leg rolled up and the 'strange' symbolism. It may be new to them, but it isn't to over 250,000 of us. There is less emphasis on the secrecy these days (so-called 'investigative' journalism): instead journalists are focusing on the theme of eccentricity.

Define eccentric? How can 250,000 people be eccentric? This is roughly the equivalent number of people who work for Tesco's. Are they eccentric? The population of Iceland, that well known group of eccentrics, all of them? Or the population of Northumbria? Sorry Northumbria, but you're eccentric as well according to the logic of Neil Tweedie.

Or it could just be that Freemasonry is a culture that is different to what most people have encountered? This is an example of 'asymetric information' - being a Freemason is knowledge of 'felt acquaintance'. That is to say to be one is to understand Freemasonry. Masonic culture outside of Freemasonry is as strange as youth culture is to me today (in my late forties), innit.

Thus, what has improved is Freemasonry's ability to articulate its unique culture to a cynical world outside. Journalists seem far less suspicious of the 'dark side' of social capital that endured through the 70s. In addressing craftaphobia UGLE has one hand tied behind its back. By constitution it is a non-political and non-religious organisation, therefore cannot conceive of itself as a lobby group, which is what most other organisations would seek to do in contemporary society.

Thus in addressing the boundary that exists between 'mason' and 'non-mason' it appears the next stage is to build a public understanding of Freemasonry, exactly in the same way that science seeks to explain an understanding to a general public who are not familiar with an esoteric and complex system of expertise. This is, of course, what UGLE has done in commissioning this report, and I for one can't wait to read it.