I've read it since I was a schoolboy 50 years ago.

Editor David English and now his protegee Paul Dacre were and are brilliant. But I've always felt the paper is at the same time the nastiest as well as the best paper in Britain.

NASTY because it believes it represents Middle England and Middle England can be very conservative; almost fascist - homophobic and fascistic.

The Mail often reflects that.

But that is also a compliment to the Editor; if Middle England changes, so does the attitude reflected on the pages. And in recent years I've noticed a subtle alteration.

I think Dacre has spotted that Middle England - always keen on fairness - is getting very disturbed by certain aspects of society.

It was only the Mail that dared to print the less populist but more accurate view of the Satanic Abuse scandals. And these days there are more and more features about miscarriages of justice; false claims of sex abuse and the appalling ramifications on the innocent; the ghastly crime of "pinging" a girl's bra...

I think Dacre, shrewd and competent as ever, has noticed that the majority are turning.

It was the Mail On Sunday that dared carry the story that the CCRC (Criminal Cases Review Commission) had decided to open a review into my wrongful convictions because I had a cast iron alibi that I was on another continent at the time one of the crimes was meant to have been committed in London.

Could it be that the Mail might be the paper that dares to point out the Emperor has no clothes?

My favourite paper is probably the Guardian but I've noticed an unwillingness to carry the torch of truth over there. The failure to run the Observer broken story about Max Clifford was significant.

It was and is a great story attacking the prime British virtue of hypocrisy. But you know what? I bet, if any paper picks it up and runs with it, it will be the Mail.