Suez Crisis: How a 1956 editorial stance boosted Manchester Guardian sales
Despite Prime Minister Anthony Eden's attempts to silence the paper, circulation rose as the Manchester Guardian challenged the government's military campaign in Egypt.
By Lucas Navarro ·
For readers of the Manchester Guardian in 1956, the paper's daily columns became a measure of the political tension in London. Instead of aligning with the government's push for military action, the newspaper took a firm stand against the invasion. This editorial choice did not alienate its audience; circulation numbers went up, particularly in the southern regions of the United Kingdom.
The conflict began on July 26, 1956, when Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser nationalized the Suez Canal Company. The move stripped British and French interests from the waterway, which had been operated by their joint enterprise since 1869. In response, the two nations coordinated with Israel to launch a military operation to reclaim the zone.
Hostilities intensified in late October. Israeli troops entered the Sinai desert on October 29. Two days later, British and French aircraft bombed Egyptian military targets. Although the coalition made early gains, pressure from the United States forced a diplomatic retreat. On November 6, Britain and France agreed to a ceasefire mandated by the United Nations.
Under the direction of new editor Alastair Hetherington, the Manchester Guardian opposed the use of force from the start. The paper described the ultimatum given to Egypt as folly without justification. By November 5, the tone had grown sharper. Editors called the government's actions "hideously miscalculated and utterly immoral," arguing that the attack was a disaster of the first magnitude.
Prime Minister Anthony Eden found this criticism difficult to ignore. He tried to limit the paper's reach by asking the BBC not to quote its reports. He also attempted to bar the paper's diplomatic correspondent, Richard Scott, from appearing on the radio. Public frustration spilled into the streets. A glass window in the paper's Fleet Street office in London was smashed. Historian David Ayerst noted that reporters covering the story often faced hostility.
The political mood in London shifted after the ceasefire was announced. On November 7, the prime minister declared the halt in the Commons. Allied forces had stopped 30 miles south of Port Said. The prime minister stated that the ceasefire was subject to confirmation by Egypt and Israel, which the UN Secretary-General provided from New York. He assured Parliament that troops would not advance from their existing positions, though he left open the possibility of supplying them.
The United Nations deployed an emergency peacekeeping force into Egypt that same day to enforce the stop. Egypt regained full sovereignty over the canal. The waterway reopened to commercial shipping in April 1957. This outcome confirmed the validity of the Manchester Guardian's early skepticism regarding the military adventure.
The episode demonstrated that challenging the government during a national crisis could strengthen a newspaper's standing. The paper maintained its independent voice while its readership grew. This historical instance is frequently cited as an example of how a press can hold power to account without losing its audience.
