The Times attacked for weekend magazine featuring Mandelson

Molly Stubbs

The Times Magazine has received hundreds of complaints on their Instagram after revealing this week’s cover star as the disgraced Lord Peter Mandelson.

Lord Mandelson was revealed to be in ‘The Epstein Files’, the cache of documents, images and videos related to billionaire pedophile, trafficker, and rapist Jeffrey Epstein, in September 2025.

Their friendship is believed to have begun in 2002, spanning almost a decade and continuing after Epstein pleaded guilty to procuring a person under 18 for prostitution and was sentenced to an 18-month jail term in 2008.

Mandelson was appointed to the role of British Ambassador to the United States in February 2025 after being nominated in December 2024.

That same month, when preparing to take up his role, Mandelson said: “I regret ever meeting [Jeffrey Epstein] or being introduced to him by his partner Ghislaine Maxwell.

“I regret even more the hurt he caused to many young women.

“I’m not going to go into this. It’s an FT (Financial Times) obsession and frankly you can all f*** off. OK?”

Following the release of “independently-acquired” emails by Bloomberg News in September 2025 that showed Mandelson had described Epstein as his “best pal”, and despite Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer initially expressing confidence in him, he was removed from his post as British ambassador to the US on 11 September.

On 30 January 2026, following the release of another batch of documents, images, and videos from the Epstein Files by the US Department of Justice, it was revealed Lord Mandelson, while acting as business secretary, had told Epstein he would lobby British ministers over a tax on bankers’ bonuses.

The emails also show Epstein was given internal UK Government discussions by Mandelson. Additionally, bank statements from 2003 and 2004 appeared to show Mandelson receiving payments of over £50,000 from Epstein.

The release also included various images of Mandelson in his underwear in what appears to be a hotel room.

On 3 February 2026, the UK Government Cabinet Office referred material to the police relating to Mandelson’s contact with Epstein, namely his past warnings to the pedophile that the EU intended to provide a €500bn bailout to save the Euro, and that Gordon Brown would resign from the office of Prime Minister.

Mandelson then resigned his Labour membership, stepped down as a peer from the House of Lords, and the Metropolitan Police opened a criminal investigation.

Revealing him as their cover star for the 7 February 2026 edition of The Times Magazine, the supplement wrote: “The interview with Lord Mandelson in the Magazine went to press before police began investigating him over the leak of sensitive government information to Jeffrey Epstein and he resigned from the House of Lords.

“In tomorrow’s magazine: The latest Jeffrey Epstein files lay bare Peter Mandelson’s friendship with the late paedophile, including financial gifts of $75,000 and leaking a confidential government memo. For the first time he addresses some of the allegations. Exclusive interview by Katy Balls.”

The cover shows Mandelson in jeans and shirt, cooking in the kitchen with his dog and looking directly at the camera, with a cover line reading: “‘I’ve had a lot of bad luck, no doubt some of it my own making’. Peter Mandelson, from ambassador’s residence to Wiltshire domesticity.”

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by The Times Magazine (@thetimesmagazine)

Instagram viewers reacted with outrage to the post on 6 February, which has since received 1,200 comments, the top-voted from artist Paloma Faith, “Where are the stories by the victims?”

Other commenters agreed with the sentiment that The Times should not have contributed to the centring of Mandelson in the ongoing story while seemingly ignoring victims.

“Why did you guys do this? Why not put one of the victims on the cover instead? This man doesn’t need another platform to try and influence his way out of his reckoning,” a comment reads.

“I wish I could be shocked,” another wrote. “But we all know reputation laundering is the primary business of British mass media. Posh people protecting each other at all costs; what else is new.”

Some suggested that, even if the interview was complete and Mandelson was the planned cover star prior to the most recent Epstein Files release, The Times should have refused to publish.

“You should have pulled this magazine if it was too late to reprint. Yes it would have been expensive to do but you should have,” a commenter said.

Another agreed: “This is genuinely disgusting. Your moral compass is completely off, and the assumption that the public would react with anything other than outrage shows a serious disconnect from reality.”

Some put it more simply, however, writing: “Sorry this is fucking insane actually.”