I have done a post in ReadG about suspending dis belief ahead of the Richmond election. The Guardian may do a reasonable job on this sort of thing. Reporting Corbyn can wait as far as print is concerned ( continues as social media obviously , % of 500,000 members who tweet is unknown, also unknown % decline of Guardian print number but in the crossover news is still a puzzle)
Anyway back on this blog the scope has to be based on the part of the political life that is reported. The Brexit Press is doing a thorough job in attacking Tony Blair for example.
But the Mail on Sunday has reported that the price of tea is going up. This sort of thing may get wider interest. Devaluation of the pound has not yet been much of a worry. The Mail on Sunday may just be trying to balance things out depending on how the situation develops. But they seem much more effective than the soft end of the newspaper world. Will there be attacks from other papers on those who repeat facts about the price of tea? Only time will tell.
Monday 31 October 2016
Saturday 29 October 2016
The Miss Speak is not the headline, even for a chaos breakfast, sorry Brexit
More tomorrow on the continuing story of how Fleet Street reports on Europe and how things develop in cyberspace. Seems to be back into much the same as during the referendum but a bit more clear.
Fleet Street always was close to the City of London. Soft and Hard get into a muddle as in either Brexit or pro City. Problem at the moment is that the City may need Labour to get out of Brexit, Tories getting stuck in as it appears. But no sign of this so far. Reporting on what Labour says is still hard to find.
A few links before I close all the tabs for the day. I may be unfair, have now found a Guardian report on John McDonnell. But it may have been online only. I can only say I did read a print version each day this week and cannot remember anything.
Much more interest in chance reference to "chaos breakfast" meaning "chaos Brexit". Picked up by Amanda Platell in Mail and John Crace in Guardian ( print versions ) Only Morning Star mentions content of speech.
Just checked website, Guardian is featuring Chuka Umunna asking questions about Nissan and variable deals. My guess is the Guardian will do more of not reporting Labour front bench and concentrating on people they would prefer, including the Liberalos and the interesting Tories. Trouble is they miss out the news about what happens in Parliament.
Keep searching on Twitter for a complete picture.
Sorry, gone off topic a bit. I did try to shift some to another blog just about the Guardian. But I still think the weakness of the Remain case in print has not been helped by the policy to blame Corbyn whatever happens and whatever the topic that gets wasted as a sideline.
Express, Mail and Sun still doing a fantastic job in their own terms.
Fleet Street always was close to the City of London. Soft and Hard get into a muddle as in either Brexit or pro City. Problem at the moment is that the City may need Labour to get out of Brexit, Tories getting stuck in as it appears. But no sign of this so far. Reporting on what Labour says is still hard to find.
A few links before I close all the tabs for the day. I may be unfair, have now found a Guardian report on John McDonnell. But it may have been online only. I can only say I did read a print version each day this week and cannot remember anything.
Much more interest in chance reference to "chaos breakfast" meaning "chaos Brexit". Picked up by Amanda Platell in Mail and John Crace in Guardian ( print versions ) Only Morning Star mentions content of speech.
Just checked website, Guardian is featuring Chuka Umunna asking questions about Nissan and variable deals. My guess is the Guardian will do more of not reporting Labour front bench and concentrating on people they would prefer, including the Liberalos and the interesting Tories. Trouble is they miss out the news about what happens in Parliament.
Keep searching on Twitter for a complete picture.
Sorry, gone off topic a bit. I did try to shift some to another blog just about the Guardian. But I still think the weakness of the Remain case in print has not been helped by the policy to blame Corbyn whatever happens and whatever the topic that gets wasted as a sideline.
Express, Mail and Sun still doing a fantastic job in their own terms.
Tuesday 25 October 2016
Labour Remain top priority could be to blame Corbyn
Recent tweet made me think if we are still in the referendum phase, same political prerssures working on a direction.
Tweet from Labour Remain
Tweet from Labour Remain
I just wonder what priority they have. Was it always to "blame Corbyn" . Just waiting for a good time to launch a way to get a different leader. May explain some reluctance to work too closely with them.
Not much about all this from proper journalists. There must be some info on what the Labour Remain supporters were up to and how this sort of tweet can continue.
Guardian not reporting Corbyn in Europe
Recent post in ReadG blog noted my impression that Guardian and Observer have now decided to largely ignore what Corbyn actually has to say. This is now confirmed by following up an item that was on a bit of BBC radio news I heard and then seemed not to repeat. Corbyn did speak in the commons after the PM made a statement on visit to Brussels. I have since checked on the BBC iPlayer and know that Corbyn reported opinion he found on his own visit to Brussels and talks to trade union and socialist groups. UK reputation is damaged since May's statements at the Conservative conference. Have a look yourself for more detail.
My point at the moment is that the print Guardian page 2 has nothing on Corbyn at all. There is report on Edward Leigh and Steve Baker, both Tories. Maybe the journalists believe debate between Tories is the most interesting news.
My guess is that soon there will be another Observer editorial demanding that Corbyn is more obvious in his opposition to Brexit. Is the Guardian Media Group ready to report him when he has something to say?
I did check with the Times in a cafe. Patrick Kidd sketch did mention Corbyn, his "ramble" was easy for May to "swat away". But at least there was a mention. Hard Fleet Street has more confidence than the soft end.
My point at the moment is that the print Guardian page 2 has nothing on Corbyn at all. There is report on Edward Leigh and Steve Baker, both Tories. Maybe the journalists believe debate between Tories is the most interesting news.
My guess is that soon there will be another Observer editorial demanding that Corbyn is more obvious in his opposition to Brexit. Is the Guardian Media Group ready to report him when he has something to say?
I did check with the Times in a cafe. Patrick Kidd sketch did mention Corbyn, his "ramble" was easy for May to "swat away". But at least there was a mention. Hard Fleet Street has more confidence than the soft end.
Monday 24 October 2016
Fleet Street Post Geography
Sorry not much posted recently. I have lost track a bit but will update soon. Things may get out of sequence though.
Thinking about a book version I realise my own views may be too strong. I still think Brexit is a disaster. I do not want a second referendum any time soon but I expect opinion to change when the economy damage is obvious. Could take several years. So I will structure any long term test around this probability.
But just to test the ideas, and in the tradition of writing several opinions at once just to wind up the readers, I will think about a positive Brexit outcome. "Post Geography" seems to suggest that UK trade can be global online and things will work out well. Fleet Street itself should be an example. So I will start looking at how this works for the main news organisations.
Thinking about a book version I realise my own views may be too strong. I still think Brexit is a disaster. I do not want a second referendum any time soon but I expect opinion to change when the economy damage is obvious. Could take several years. So I will structure any long term test around this probability.
But just to test the ideas, and in the tradition of writing several opinions at once just to wind up the readers, I will think about a positive Brexit outcome. "Post Geography" seems to suggest that UK trade can be global online and things will work out well. Fleet Street itself should be an example. So I will start looking at how this works for the main news organisations.
Sunday 18 September 2016
Is @LabourRemain official? what else to follow?
I am trying to find out what is going on with the organisations that operate now. This may offer clues to what happened during the referendum.
So @Open_Britain and @Change_Britain I can just about follow.
But @LabourRemain seems to be the same name but just concerned to oppose Jeremy Corbyn. I just had a look and it seems whoever is writing the tweets may be under pressure to moderate somewhat. they may or may not represent some scale of Labour opinion.
But was this take on Corbyn always there? If some were looking for a chance to blame Corbyn for a poor result would this explain some lack of communication? I still think we have not had much of a story from the proper journalists. They know much more background than has yet been published.
Meanwhile I will try some checks to find other tweets.
I thougt Corbyn was very effective during the referendum on social media, but I may just be in a bubble.
Bloomberg television, how to link in a blog?
I am starting to rethink this blog and how it can work with television. I have not updated the YouTube playlist but may start on this soon. TV is tending towards clips, some just loaded up by the publi9c some from official channels. It is ok to embed these in a bloog but they are not always available.
I was very interested in an interview with Jeremy Corbyn on Bloomberg this Friday morning ( UK time ). Anna Edwards did a very straightforward interview, allowing Corbyn to answer the questions and explain his policy. An interest in jobs but also worker rights. Then it cut to the studio and Francine Lacqua asked Lord Bilimoria if Corbyn should resign. Answer was yes he should as he had been "invisible, ineffective" during the referendum.
Couple of main issues. Is it ok journalism not to offer Corbyn a chance to comment? (He may not even know how the broadcast suddenly switched ) But the main one is this line about blaming Corbyn in any way true? I think not, but whatever you think should Bloomberg offer some sort of context?
Now I think about it there is a third issue. If the business community want bUK opinion to shift in favour of something like the EU, access to the market for example, is there any aspect of Corbyn views they might consider as legit for a TV audience? My impression was that Cameron was largely responsible for the #remain defeat because he said almost nothing about worker rights, only threats to the economy. The media went along with this and I do not think Corbyn was reported.
Anyway, more on this if I could find the clip somewhere. I have it on a VHS tape so there may be a way for me to upload it. But is this legal? Better if Bloomberg put it somewhere. Guidance welcome.
Wednesday 24 August 2016
Radio 4 on Brexit
There is a documentary online now and I think broadcast again on Sunday.
Anne McElvoy is from the Economist. she has a longer view than most radio journalists. There is background from previous elections when the Cameron approach worked well. I will listen again and write more later. But a couple of points.
She sticks to the failures of Corbyn story but the show indicates a bit more about Will Straw. Lord Mandelson is not quoted directly but the issues around Corbyn wanting some distance from "Blairism" are well indicated. I am getting the impression of a main Remain campaign run from Downing Street with support from Straw and Mandelson. Alan Johnson is interviewed about his doubts on the Cameron emphasis on economics and "project fear". But he did nothing at the time to argue about it. Straw talks about clearing the media schedule for Labour when the polls went bad. But his complaints about Corbyn lack detail on what space he was allowed. Nothing in this story about Brown or Lord Darling though at the time they got most of the space. There may be more to come on this, however slowly.
It is pointed out that Cameron did not have the backing of Fleet Street as in previous election campaigns. Not much time on this but the role of the press is another thing to come back to. Radio and TV best placed to do this.
Anne McElvoy is from the Economist. she has a longer view than most radio journalists. There is background from previous elections when the Cameron approach worked well. I will listen again and write more later. But a couple of points.
She sticks to the failures of Corbyn story but the show indicates a bit more about Will Straw. Lord Mandelson is not quoted directly but the issues around Corbyn wanting some distance from "Blairism" are well indicated. I am getting the impression of a main Remain campaign run from Downing Street with support from Straw and Mandelson. Alan Johnson is interviewed about his doubts on the Cameron emphasis on economics and "project fear". But he did nothing at the time to argue about it. Straw talks about clearing the media schedule for Labour when the polls went bad. But his complaints about Corbyn lack detail on what space he was allowed. Nothing in this story about Brown or Lord Darling though at the time they got most of the space. There may be more to come on this, however slowly.
It is pointed out that Cameron did not have the backing of Fleet Street as in previous election campaigns. Not much time on this but the role of the press is another thing to come back to. Radio and TV best placed to do this.
Saturday 13 August 2016
Trying embed code from BBC , should be Lord Mandelson
Here it is
See other posts on my take
during the referendum I thought that Corbyn was not being reported
I still do not know how the Remain campaign was organised. Mostly Cameron and Downing Street. Lord Mandelson was in the official bit. How was it decided who went on which TV show? Corbyn went on Last Leg but channel 4 blocked his use of a clip on YouTube.
more later, just a test.
But could be interesting. Many clips from TV now showing up in ways that can be part of a blog. Will try more if this works.
See also Guardian story from peviously.
See other posts on my take
during the referendum I thought that Corbyn was not being reported
I still do not know how the Remain campaign was organised. Mostly Cameron and Downing Street. Lord Mandelson was in the official bit. How was it decided who went on which TV show? Corbyn went on Last Leg but channel 4 blocked his use of a clip on YouTube.
more later, just a test.
But could be interesting. Many clips from TV now showing up in ways that can be part of a blog. Will try more if this works.
See also Guardian story from peviously.
Book link, more about MacMillan still a possibility
The Guardian has a review by Colin Kidd of a history book - Continental Drift - covering the period since World War 2 . Very interesting, especially about Churchill and focus groups.
although this is only too true I still think MacMillan is worth another look. Why did he decide in favor of application to Europe? What was the problem with existing outside? He is rarely mentioned though, not at all in the referendum as far as I could tell.
A zesty and ingenious Remain campaign – of the sort we conspicuously lacked – might have presented the Europhile Churchill as a patriotic anti-Brexit icon. Alas, a truth that defies popular cliche would have sunk at the first focus group.
although this is only too true I still think MacMillan is worth another look. Why did he decide in favor of application to Europe? What was the problem with existing outside? He is rarely mentioned though, not at all in the referendum as far as I could tell.
Continental Drift: Britain and Europe from the End of Empire to the Rise of Euroscepticism
- Publisher: Cambridge University Press (26 May 2016)
- Language: English
- ISBN-10: 1107071267
- ISBN-13: 978-1107071261
more on this later when I read the book
#nonconspiracy as in #remain and also #corbyn
This is an attempt at some way to explore what may be happening. There is an area that seems to happen but is not reported. Words like "conspiracy" are too vague and there is not enough public info to support them. #nonconspiracy finds quite a lot as a search term but maybe too much. I will also try #remain for the main period of this blog during the referendum. Also #corbyn for the continuing story.
I am still moving some content to the readG blog mostly about the Guardian. They know who they talk to so presumably could report on who is #savingLabour for example. But they choose not to, presumably to maintain a flow of stories. There was no conspiracy to get rid of Corbyn apparently, just a series of coincidences. seems to be some sort of connection with how the #remain campaign turned out.
Apparently Corbyn press relations are improved as part of his own leadership compared with through the Labour Party as in the office that just won a legal case. see Buzzfeed and /or make a guess from what turns up.
This is just speculation but if Lord Mandelson has been considering the "blame Corbyn for lost votes" option for a while, might this have influenced Corbyn's approch to Mandelson's suggestions during campaigns such as the referendum? Will Straw has been included in the Cameron honours so he may have been regarded as close to the Downing Street agenda.
Again, there is no conspiracy as there is little information. Probably there is no need of a conspiracy as in detailed conversations. Understandings exist. The Guardian and the BBC know how to report things.
Anyway this post is to explain possible use of #tags just to try to understand a bit more. It may be that the nonconspiracy around Remain has some similarity to moves around the non coup plot or whatever it was. This is only a blog. Maybe there will be a proper telly prog some time later with full interviews available as an online extra.
I am still moving some content to the readG blog mostly about the Guardian. They know who they talk to so presumably could report on who is #savingLabour for example. But they choose not to, presumably to maintain a flow of stories. There was no conspiracy to get rid of Corbyn apparently, just a series of coincidences. seems to be some sort of connection with how the #remain campaign turned out.
Apparently Corbyn press relations are improved as part of his own leadership compared with through the Labour Party as in the office that just won a legal case. see Buzzfeed and /or make a guess from what turns up.
This is just speculation but if Lord Mandelson has been considering the "blame Corbyn for lost votes" option for a while, might this have influenced Corbyn's approch to Mandelson's suggestions during campaigns such as the referendum? Will Straw has been included in the Cameron honours so he may have been regarded as close to the Downing Street agenda.
Again, there is no conspiracy as there is little information. Probably there is no need of a conspiracy as in detailed conversations. Understandings exist. The Guardian and the BBC know how to report things.
Anyway this post is to explain possible use of #tags just to try to understand a bit more. It may be that the nonconspiracy around Remain has some similarity to moves around the non coup plot or whatever it was. This is only a blog. Maybe there will be a proper telly prog some time later with full interviews available as an online extra.
Tuesday 9 August 2016
Laura Kuenssberg some added details re Corbyn and Labour
I realise an hour is not a long time in television. Some things are missed out in telling the story of a month or two. But I think the Brexit take on BBC from Laura Kuenssberg last night was missing a few crucial facts around Corbyn and Labour.
I have looked back in this blog to remind me of some dates. I think the time the Remain leaders started to worry was around the weekend 11th 12th June. This resulted in a window for LAbour when Cameron events were not scheduled. The Kuenssberg story thern showed Corbyn from the Last Leg. But this was actually broadcast the week before. Guardian headline on the Monday was that Gordon Brown would "lead the charge". So my impression was and is that the publicity support / TV scheduling around Remain was not doing much to boost Corbyn. The Last Leg option was probably direct to Corbyn, not part of an arrangement from Remain, which seems from most of Kuenssberg reporting to have been very close to Cameron.
There is a clip in the BBC take of Lord Darling in shot when Osborne announces the "punishment budget" but no mention of the shared platform in the comments. If there is to be blame for Labour there should be accurate reporting on who was making the case. Later studies may reveal how the decisions were made. The Will Straw organisation came over as based in the City. It is still unclear what was the role of Lord Mandelson, though he stated his regret at how Cameron came to dominate the Remain decisions.
If the BBC know more about this background, they may do some further shows.
It would still be good if Channel 4 allowed Corbyn to use a clip of his complete talk on his own YouTube channel. BBC can use clips to make their case so why not the full context?
The heckle clips seem to have gone. I think the Tweet take that they were planted by Portland Communications and the Lib Dems is probably correct. Not denied by MSM so far.
But for the archive a clear statement from Lord Mandelson is much more reliable. Corbyn to blame for lost votes. Except that some of the facts are still disputed or presented in various ways.
I have looked back in this blog to remind me of some dates. I think the time the Remain leaders started to worry was around the weekend 11th 12th June. This resulted in a window for LAbour when Cameron events were not scheduled. The Kuenssberg story thern showed Corbyn from the Last Leg. But this was actually broadcast the week before. Guardian headline on the Monday was that Gordon Brown would "lead the charge". So my impression was and is that the publicity support / TV scheduling around Remain was not doing much to boost Corbyn. The Last Leg option was probably direct to Corbyn, not part of an arrangement from Remain, which seems from most of Kuenssberg reporting to have been very close to Cameron.
There is a clip in the BBC take of Lord Darling in shot when Osborne announces the "punishment budget" but no mention of the shared platform in the comments. If there is to be blame for Labour there should be accurate reporting on who was making the case. Later studies may reveal how the decisions were made. The Will Straw organisation came over as based in the City. It is still unclear what was the role of Lord Mandelson, though he stated his regret at how Cameron came to dominate the Remain decisions.
If the BBC know more about this background, they may do some further shows.
It would still be good if Channel 4 allowed Corbyn to use a clip of his complete talk on his own YouTube channel. BBC can use clips to make their case so why not the full context?
The heckle clips seem to have gone. I think the Tweet take that they were planted by Portland Communications and the Lib Dems is probably correct. Not denied by MSM so far.
But for the archive a clear statement from Lord Mandelson is much more reliable. Corbyn to blame for lost votes. Except that some of the facts are still disputed or presented in various ways.
Monday 25 July 2016
Project Tough Love , act four for the "book" ?
As mentioned previously this blog could become a book when there is some clarity about facts and shape. Today the Guardian , well worth reading by the way you never know what it will include , has some opinion from Joris Luyendijk about the benefits of obvious Pain for the UK post Brexit, both for the coherence of the continent and the education of the UK for a European future.
The full text is HERE.
Thing is, there ought to alternative endings just to be fair and just in case.
one
The euro currency comes to an end. A return to nation states works out well for Europe.
two
The EU gets closer and deeper. The UK has so many trade deals all over the globe that it carries on regardless. Somehow this sort of globalisation has wide social acceptance.
three
The City loses any major role in Europe but UK becomes a tax haven for Asia and USA . Not much social acceptance by those outside London but Westminster just continues
Anyway , trying to be more open with this blog. Just think that Project Tough Love is well worth a look.
Any form of story has to have a crunch bit in the middle. It can still end happy though this is mostly in fiction.
The full text is HERE.
Thing is, there ought to alternative endings just to be fair and just in case.
one
The euro currency comes to an end. A return to nation states works out well for Europe.
two
The EU gets closer and deeper. The UK has so many trade deals all over the globe that it carries on regardless. Somehow this sort of globalisation has wide social acceptance.
three
The City loses any major role in Europe but UK becomes a tax haven for Asia and USA . Not much social acceptance by those outside London but Westminster just continues
Anyway , trying to be more open with this blog. Just think that Project Tough Love is well worth a look.
Any form of story has to have a crunch bit in the middle. It can still end happy though this is mostly in fiction.
Sunday 24 July 2016
Digital Storytelling - case study Newsnight and EU Referendum
Background, during the Radio 1 Academy in Exeter as part of the Big Weekend I went to a session on digital storytelling, mostly about news with Evan Davis as part of the panel. So far I have not edited out many clips but I will link to some later.
The EU Referendum could be an example of how stories can be written from different points of view. Also how they are rewritten as part of another story. During the election for a Labour leader we will hear various versions of what happened during the referendum. See previous posts for where I observed major contributions by Corbyn, quite unlike what is widely reported.
I realise the Newsnight report has to be short, but it misses out not only Corbyn but any LAbour involvement at all. It says the Remain momentum dropped away with the end of government resources (6.13 ) then around 6.33 there was a mid June "reach out" on immigration. It may be because of the same phase in the polls that there was a "reach out" to Labour by deliberately putting Cameron in the background.
I think there is still no information on how this decision was taken. If government had been driving the issues and presentation previously, what conversations happened between Britain Stronger in Europe , Labour In, and the Labour Party as in Corbyn? The sonsequence seems to have been to put up front several previous leaders, in particular George Brown.
Later in the Newsnight during the discussion Nick Clegg said that "the Punishment Budget almost made him want to vote Leave". No mention though that Lord Darling shared the platform with Osborne, that Osborne claimed Darling and LAbour would support such a budget if 60 Tory rebels voted against, or that Corbyn had to state this was not going to happen.
Around 9.18 Corbyn on EU described as "less than enthusiastic" on narrative and as a "nightmare" by Will Straw Executive Director Britain Stronger in Europe ( Labour )
My guess is that the sort of distance apparent in the leadership discussion could have existed before the EU referendum. Probably Will Straw and Alan Johnson were more relaxed about working with a Cameron agenda. Corbyn said he was "not a catastrophist" which I think meant he would not go along with extreme claims. His case for remain was very different, see previous posts.
Previously I uploaded to YouTube a clip including the heckle, widely assumed on Twitter to have been arranged by someone connected to Portland Communications. Now it seems Newsnight will be uploading loads of content anyway.
So digital storytelling can continue, in a multitude of versions.
The 800 page hardback may wait a few years, For inside info on who said what to who and who else knew when, we will just have to follow the tweets.
The EU Referendum could be an example of how stories can be written from different points of view. Also how they are rewritten as part of another story. During the election for a Labour leader we will hear various versions of what happened during the referendum. See previous posts for where I observed major contributions by Corbyn, quite unlike what is widely reported.
I realise the Newsnight report has to be short, but it misses out not only Corbyn but any LAbour involvement at all. It says the Remain momentum dropped away with the end of government resources (6.13 ) then around 6.33 there was a mid June "reach out" on immigration. It may be because of the same phase in the polls that there was a "reach out" to Labour by deliberately putting Cameron in the background.
I think there is still no information on how this decision was taken. If government had been driving the issues and presentation previously, what conversations happened between Britain Stronger in Europe , Labour In, and the Labour Party as in Corbyn? The sonsequence seems to have been to put up front several previous leaders, in particular George Brown.
Later in the Newsnight during the discussion Nick Clegg said that "the Punishment Budget almost made him want to vote Leave". No mention though that Lord Darling shared the platform with Osborne, that Osborne claimed Darling and LAbour would support such a budget if 60 Tory rebels voted against, or that Corbyn had to state this was not going to happen.
Around 9.18 Corbyn on EU described as "less than enthusiastic" on narrative and as a "nightmare" by Will Straw Executive Director Britain Stronger in Europe ( Labour )
My guess is that the sort of distance apparent in the leadership discussion could have existed before the EU referendum. Probably Will Straw and Alan Johnson were more relaxed about working with a Cameron agenda. Corbyn said he was "not a catastrophist" which I think meant he would not go along with extreme claims. His case for remain was very different, see previous posts.
Previously I uploaded to YouTube a clip including the heckle, widely assumed on Twitter to have been arranged by someone connected to Portland Communications. Now it seems Newsnight will be uploading loads of content anyway.
So digital storytelling can continue, in a multitude of versions.
The 800 page hardback may wait a few years, For inside info on who said what to who and who else knew when, we will just have to follow the tweets.
Friday 22 July 2016
notes on dates so far
This is a guide for anyone trying to work through this blog so far
started 7 march
16th march campbell on newsnight
18th aprill first worry about Guardian
24th April MacMillan
5th may elections
mandelson on immigration
16th may corbyn blindspot definite problem
early June, more Guardian worry
4 june Gaby
13th june Rawnsley
15th juned rave darling
18th june channel 4
25th June how the news agenda is set - heckles etc
==============
the basis of something is there, needs a sort out.
That is why it is creative commons or open. But please send a link.
the book is going as a format. This could become a book later.
from Jo Gedrych timeline just after Brexit result
Will Pollard Unless there is some democracy imagination has limited influence and it may be too late. Storytelling theory assumes this is only act three but this may be fiction.
Like · Reply · 29 June at 11:21
Andy Manson
Andy Manson Please elucidate about story structure. Thanks.
Like · Reply · 29 June at 13:46
Will Pollard
Will Pollard In fiction a story conflict is resolved. In life less so. but there may be another referendum after the damage, then happiness.
Like · Reply · 29 June at 14:05
Andy Manson
Andy Manson Ah. Thanks.
Like · Reply · 29 June at 14:14
----------------
yes a blog needs editing, feel free to join in
started 7 march
16th march campbell on newsnight
18th aprill first worry about Guardian
24th April MacMillan
5th may elections
mandelson on immigration
16th may corbyn blindspot definite problem
early June, more Guardian worry
4 june Gaby
13th june Rawnsley
15th juned rave darling
18th june channel 4
25th June how the news agenda is set - heckles etc
==============
the basis of something is there, needs a sort out.
That is why it is creative commons or open. But please send a link.
the book is going as a format. This could become a book later.
from Jo Gedrych timeline just after Brexit result
Will Pollard Unless there is some democracy imagination has limited influence and it may be too late. Storytelling theory assumes this is only act three but this may be fiction.
Like · Reply · 29 June at 11:21
Andy Manson
Andy Manson Please elucidate about story structure. Thanks.
Like · Reply · 29 June at 13:46
Will Pollard
Will Pollard In fiction a story conflict is resolved. In life less so. but there may be another referendum after the damage, then happiness.
Like · Reply · 29 June at 14:05
Andy Manson
Andy Manson Ah. Thanks.
Like · Reply · 29 June at 14:14
----------------
yes a blog needs editing, feel free to join in
Clue to when blaming Corbyn was first thought of
Reading the Guardian closely finds this in a G2 story about a Labour split, as in the SDP though there are several recent quotes, some not identified.
Just one for this post
So how long has this been going on. What would be a "real chance to fail demonstably". If that is what some are looking for, would they support Corbyn in an election or referendum or just wait to criticise afterwards? Since the people involved are not known journalists have only speculated so we just do not have any idea. But something like this may explain why the Labour campaign for Remain turned out as it did.
Currently there is still mystery as to who is involved in #savingLabour or where the funding comes from. I notice Will Straw has retweeted support for them. I just wonder how the discussion between Stronger in Europe and the official Labour leadership actually went along. The blog from Stronger In may only tell part of the story.
Just one for this post
The 1981 defector who doesn’t want to be named says: “The anti-Corbyn side have moved too quickly against him. They never gave him a real chance to fail demonstrably. They’ve been seen off, for now. If he holds on in the leadership ballot this September, a lot of power will accrete to him. A coalition of the [mostly pro-Corbyn] trade unions and all the young people in Momentum would take a lot of Commons seats from any anti-Corbyn party [at a general election].”
So how long has this been going on. What would be a "real chance to fail demonstably". If that is what some are looking for, would they support Corbyn in an election or referendum or just wait to criticise afterwards? Since the people involved are not known journalists have only speculated so we just do not have any idea. But something like this may explain why the Labour campaign for Remain turned out as it did.
Currently there is still mystery as to who is involved in #savingLabour or where the funding comes from. I notice Will Straw has retweeted support for them. I just wonder how the discussion between Stronger in Europe and the official Labour leadership actually went along. The blog from Stronger In may only tell part of the story.
Back to Harold MacMillan and EFTA
Starting on updates to the blog after looking back earlier in the day.
24th April post about Harold MacMillan. Query was why he seems to be forgotten even though there is still concern about Churchill.
I have now found some dates around EFTA (European Free Trade Association) from Blackwell Reference.
So it took a while to get out of alternatives to EEC ( later EU ) and back to negotiation. How far back will the Conservatives travel and will they then start to return? Unfair question probably but I still think this era is less studied than it could be.
24th April post about Harold MacMillan. Query was why he seems to be forgotten even though there is still concern about Churchill.
I have now found some dates around EFTA (European Free Trade Association) from Blackwell Reference.
EFTA could never be a substitute for the EEC, with its population of 170 million and so, only seven months after EFTA came into being in May 1960, Harold macmillan , the British Prime Minister, decided that he would try to take Britain into the EEC. Rebuffed twice by de gaulle , Britain and Denmark finally left EFTA in 1972 in order to join the eec (Portugal also left in 1985 for the same purpose).
So it took a while to get out of alternatives to EEC ( later EU ) and back to negotiation. How far back will the Conservatives travel and will they then start to return? Unfair question probably but I still think this era is less studied than it could be.
Wednesday 20 July 2016
Labour Leadership is a rerun story from EU Ref
Have just heard BBC Radio 4 Today prog on the Labour Leadership election. Conversation between Nick Robinson and Norman Smith. They mention #savingLabour, saying it has only had a fortnight to get together and is promoted by people like JK Rowling and Robert Harris.
In the blog about the Guardian I recently wrote about the Daily Mirror report on #savingLabour that mentioned Dr Reg Race. Recent Mirror stories have not included this but it was not that long ago.
You don't have to use the word "plot" or "coup" , previously mentioned on the Today prog as the sort of words some would find bullying if included in a tweet. Some may consider there is more organisation behind recent events than has yet been reported.
another thing
This is an official #savingLabour tweet. The charge is there that there was no "fight to remain in the EU". So this may come up again.
Interview with Dianne Abbott about this, she was told to "move on" . Heckles blaming Corbyn, both well reported by BBC, turned out to be connected with Portland Communications and the Lib Dems. At least as reported on tweets. So far no fact checking MSM wise as far as I can tell.
So hello BBC Radio 4 Today prog
What do you know about the people and finance around #savingLabour ?
When did you know it?
How do you choose what to tell your listeners?
During the #EUref
What happened?
How was it reported?
And hello Roy Greenslade
you write bias reporting, where is the harm? or maybe this was just a Guardian headline over which you have no control
Harm could include limited effect of Corbyn balanced and sensible views on EU
In the blog about the Guardian I recently wrote about the Daily Mirror report on #savingLabour that mentioned Dr Reg Race. Recent Mirror stories have not included this but it was not that long ago.
You don't have to use the word "plot" or "coup" , previously mentioned on the Today prog as the sort of words some would find bullying if included in a tweet. Some may consider there is more organisation behind recent events than has yet been reported.
another thing
This is an official #savingLabour tweet. The charge is there that there was no "fight to remain in the EU". So this may come up again.
Interview with Dianne Abbott about this, she was told to "move on" . Heckles blaming Corbyn, both well reported by BBC, turned out to be connected with Portland Communications and the Lib Dems. At least as reported on tweets. So far no fact checking MSM wise as far as I can tell.
So hello BBC Radio 4 Today prog
What do you know about the people and finance around #savingLabour ?
When did you know it?
How do you choose what to tell your listeners?
During the #EUref
What happened?
How was it reported?
And hello Roy Greenslade
you write bias reporting, where is the harm? or maybe this was just a Guardian headline over which you have no control
Harm could include limited effect of Corbyn balanced and sensible views on EU
Monday 18 July 2016
Changing stories, Larry Elliott on "ludicrous" punishment budget
This may be a bit unfair to Larry Elliott but as memory serves the punishment budget was not described as "ludicrous" by most of the Guardian reporting at the time. Today in an assessment of the UK economy post Brexit -,
So this is another occasion to ask about the good sense of a shared platform from a Labour point of view. See previous posts or do a search for how Osborne claimed Lord Darling and Labour MPs would support such a budget in a vote and how the Brexit Tories opposed this.
Also in Guardian some direct quotes from an interview with Jeremy Corbyn
So although time has gone by and we are where we are, the question still arises. What if Jeremy Corbyn had been allowed more influence on the EU Remain campaign? If reported, would his sort of approach have been more effective?
Just a long shot, if the BBC has some relevant emails what are the chances of them becoming public?
And change there has certainly been. Osborne has been fired, his ludicrous idea of a post-Brexit “punishment” budget has been scrapped, and the idea of balancing the budget by the end of the parliament rightly abandoned.
So this is another occasion to ask about the good sense of a shared platform from a Labour point of view. See previous posts or do a search for how Osborne claimed Lord Darling and Labour MPs would support such a budget in a vote and how the Brexit Tories opposed this.
Also in Guardian some direct quotes from an interview with Jeremy Corbyn
Corbyn said: “My message is going to be, as well as having the debate within the party, let’s do some campaigning to reach out to the parts of left-behind Britain that often voted to leave the European Union, and in some cases have turned to Ukip.”
So although time has gone by and we are where we are, the question still arises. What if Jeremy Corbyn had been allowed more influence on the EU Remain campaign? If reported, would his sort of approach have been more effective?
Just a long shot, if the BBC has some relevant emails what are the chances of them becoming public?
Sunday 17 July 2016
Looking back, how did this Labour EU problem get started?
I am going back to the beginnings of the EU referendum to better understand how the result happened and what people say about it. I am currently interested in the Labour Leadership campaign and also the case made against Jeremy Corbyn who is blamed for the Remain case being ineffective.
I have found a Guardian report from July 2015 on the appointment of Will Straw to the campaign. Here is a quote that strikes me as interesting.
Trouble with journalists they rarely say who the source was. But could this view have been shared by Jeremy Corbyn? Who decided what as the campaign went on? How many decisions did Jeremy Corbyn object to? Is there any focus group evidence on what response was to the shared platforms etc?
And how many emails has the BBC got a copy of? Will we ever see some?
Still shifting time focus a bit. I still think Corbyn was persuasive when reported. There will be a positive EU case eventually I think and Corbyn can develop his ideas as a part of this. So going baqck is still valid, what actually happened?
I have found a Guardian report from July 2015 on the appointment of Will Straw to the campaign. Here is a quote that strikes me as interesting.
Some senior Labour figures fear that an all-party campaign backed by business will do little to help Labour re-engage with disillusioned Ukip voters after the referendum. However, the funding is likely to gravitate to the all-party operation.
Trouble with journalists they rarely say who the source was. But could this view have been shared by Jeremy Corbyn? Who decided what as the campaign went on? How many decisions did Jeremy Corbyn object to? Is there any focus group evidence on what response was to the shared platforms etc?
And how many emails has the BBC got a copy of? Will we ever see some?
Still shifting time focus a bit. I still think Corbyn was persuasive when reported. There will be a positive EU case eventually I think and Corbyn can develop his ideas as a part of this. So going baqck is still valid, what actually happened?
Wednesday 13 July 2016
Still Fact Checking during Labour Leadership Debates
Now that Corbyn is on the ballot it looks like the first recap of the EU Referendum will be during the leadership election over the next couple of months. I will be looking at the blog again and trying to evaluate what sort of campaign Corbyn actually achieved.
I will be trying to check some dates. I still think Corbyn did well on social media but there is very little research or evidence that I can find. Some detail is coming out about the way campaigns were organised. The Guardian has reported at length on the Remain campaign and it appears Corbyn had his role constrained by organisations other than the Labour Party as such. It is not clear from the Guardian article how this was decided on. The most interesting phase is the time when it was decided to emphasise Labour as Cameron was getting some negative response. Why was there such a large role for Brown? who decided that Lard Darling should share a platform with George Osborne? When Corbyn denies being a "catastrophist" I think he is putting some distance from the sort of scare stories that Remain relied on. Has there been any polling on response to the "punishment budget"? I cannot see how Labour benefited or Labour voters could have been influenced. The Brexit Conservatives were able to state they would vote against such a budget so Osborne told the Today prog that he would rely on Lord Darling. Clarified by Corbyn at question time that nothing like that would happen so far as he was concerned but I don't think this was widely reported. I will check into this later. Main point is that I don't think the PLP can just blame Corbyn without a bit more study.
Still waiting for any mainstream media facts about the two heckles that appeared to balme Corbyn for the referendum result. On social media such as Twitter one is linked to Portland Communications, the other to the Liberal Democrats. Both reported on BBC as appearing to show lost support for Corbyn. What to think? How organised was the "coup" or "plot"? The Truthseeker has a view but there is other mainstream comment on when the PLP were thinking of a move against Corbyn, depending on election results. It might be that the referendum was seen as the best chance so the weakness of Corbyn's role has been over stated.
I still think the Guardian could have reported Corbyn with more positive attention. There was often a negative view from anonymous PLP sources in any report of a Corbyn speech or TV appearance. I will also try to track down why Channel 4 blocked the use on YouTube of a clip from the Last Leg. Corbyn's own channel blocked from uploading it though the fancy dress intro is available, just not the reasoned explanation of what Corbyn had to say.
More about the Guardian on the ReadG blog.
I will be trying to check some dates. I still think Corbyn did well on social media but there is very little research or evidence that I can find. Some detail is coming out about the way campaigns were organised. The Guardian has reported at length on the Remain campaign and it appears Corbyn had his role constrained by organisations other than the Labour Party as such. It is not clear from the Guardian article how this was decided on. The most interesting phase is the time when it was decided to emphasise Labour as Cameron was getting some negative response. Why was there such a large role for Brown? who decided that Lard Darling should share a platform with George Osborne? When Corbyn denies being a "catastrophist" I think he is putting some distance from the sort of scare stories that Remain relied on. Has there been any polling on response to the "punishment budget"? I cannot see how Labour benefited or Labour voters could have been influenced. The Brexit Conservatives were able to state they would vote against such a budget so Osborne told the Today prog that he would rely on Lord Darling. Clarified by Corbyn at question time that nothing like that would happen so far as he was concerned but I don't think this was widely reported. I will check into this later. Main point is that I don't think the PLP can just blame Corbyn without a bit more study.
Still waiting for any mainstream media facts about the two heckles that appeared to balme Corbyn for the referendum result. On social media such as Twitter one is linked to Portland Communications, the other to the Liberal Democrats. Both reported on BBC as appearing to show lost support for Corbyn. What to think? How organised was the "coup" or "plot"? The Truthseeker has a view but there is other mainstream comment on when the PLP were thinking of a move against Corbyn, depending on election results. It might be that the referendum was seen as the best chance so the weakness of Corbyn's role has been over stated.
I still think the Guardian could have reported Corbyn with more positive attention. There was often a negative view from anonymous PLP sources in any report of a Corbyn speech or TV appearance. I will also try to track down why Channel 4 blocked the use on YouTube of a clip from the Last Leg. Corbyn's own channel blocked from uploading it though the fancy dress intro is available, just not the reasoned explanation of what Corbyn had to say.
More about the Guardian on the ReadG blog.
Monday 4 July 2016
Soon be time to loop back and start this blog sequence again
Previous post about the Guardian just a guess but seems to fit with something. Zoe Williams considers ending up with two Labour parties. My guess there will still be one Labour Party and something like the SDP, soon to merge with the Lib Dems or whatever. Meanwhile the Times is reporting the Sunday Times and Lord Ashdown. A Guardian story on Chilcot quotes Prescott from Sunday
So who is talking about different parties? So much of the PLP messaging happens in secret or through journalists that it is hard to work out who is who. If the message is something like give up or we will split then it would be only fair to know who they are.
Something for proper journalists to tell us, or maybe just for tweet speculation. Often turns out to be more illuminating. Nothing today from the crowd sourced trip to Liverpool. Maybe there are only reports once a week and otherwise mostly from Westminster.
The relevance for this blog is that once the coup is over there can be attention for what Jeremy Corbyn is saying about Europe. I would also like to go back and look at the Lib Dem contribution. At the moment I don't remember much if anything. Tim Farron has been critical of Corbyn and it seems likely that the heckler widely reported at a recent Corbyn meeting was a LibDem not a lapsed Momentum supporter as supposed by the BBC reporting. As with the heckler that tweets have suggested is linked to Portland Communications, there has been no mainstream reporting to either confirm or deny the online views.
As it is suggested that future Corbyn leadership could allow for a wider range of roles and opinion, it would be interesting to know more about how the various events during the EU referendum were organised. Corbyn was not the only speaker. Did Alan Johnson influence the decision as to how Lord Darling shared a platform with George Osborne? Is ther any poll evidence on how George Brown was perceived? Maybe Tim Farron has some info on this sort of thing or would like to comment. If it is only Jeremy Corbyn he is prepared to comment about, has he already spoken about who would like to join the Liberals? Only asking the question. Honest info about the heckler would contribute to trust.
Boris
Reading the Telegraph on a Monday is still essential but I fear the column this week may fall apart faster than last week. All critics are in the same sort of mob, chanting slogans outside his window. No sort of defence or apology for his remaining fans who expected more conventional leadership as in a visit to parliament. The absence of a Brexit plan is something to blame on HMG before the result. Current public mood is "hysteria". Looping back in this blog will consider "hysteria" as an explanation of how the vote went.
Just as interesting is Ben Wallace on Gove. Apparently he tends to gossip, often after a drink. Could this be a contributing factor in working out that Gove may be the source for a Sun story about the Queen, published soon after Gove dined with Rupert Murdoch? Someone should ask Ben Wallace if he would hazard a guess. Loops back in blog with background on IPSO, Leveson phase two and soforth.
Times claims UKIP plot to back Leadsom. Shares Sun story about tax issues that may be more fully reported. It seems the Murdoch preference for Gove rather than Boris, ( widely suggested in tweets and not much denied in print ) is shared by the Times and the Sun. Gove may be a traitor for Boris fans and even a bit of a gossip, but he may also be the only Brexit candidate without a tax issue. Please follow for yourselves during the week. Sun and Times are behind paywalls and I don't plan to buy one every day just to check this out.
Still part of the Boris story really, or how Tory MPs mix leadership plans with newspaper backing. Going back on the story will add to understanding of how it ends. Sun says "if Leadsom had been in the Cabinet her earlier remarks against Brexit would not have emerged until yesterday."
If she were not standing against Gove, then in some newspapers they may not have emerged ever. Just a thought.
“Bitter division within the PLP talking about different parties can only be made worse by very angry statements about Iraq,”
So who is talking about different parties? So much of the PLP messaging happens in secret or through journalists that it is hard to work out who is who. If the message is something like give up or we will split then it would be only fair to know who they are.
Something for proper journalists to tell us, or maybe just for tweet speculation. Often turns out to be more illuminating. Nothing today from the crowd sourced trip to Liverpool. Maybe there are only reports once a week and otherwise mostly from Westminster.
The relevance for this blog is that once the coup is over there can be attention for what Jeremy Corbyn is saying about Europe. I would also like to go back and look at the Lib Dem contribution. At the moment I don't remember much if anything. Tim Farron has been critical of Corbyn and it seems likely that the heckler widely reported at a recent Corbyn meeting was a LibDem not a lapsed Momentum supporter as supposed by the BBC reporting. As with the heckler that tweets have suggested is linked to Portland Communications, there has been no mainstream reporting to either confirm or deny the online views.
As it is suggested that future Corbyn leadership could allow for a wider range of roles and opinion, it would be interesting to know more about how the various events during the EU referendum were organised. Corbyn was not the only speaker. Did Alan Johnson influence the decision as to how Lord Darling shared a platform with George Osborne? Is ther any poll evidence on how George Brown was perceived? Maybe Tim Farron has some info on this sort of thing or would like to comment. If it is only Jeremy Corbyn he is prepared to comment about, has he already spoken about who would like to join the Liberals? Only asking the question. Honest info about the heckler would contribute to trust.
Boris
Reading the Telegraph on a Monday is still essential but I fear the column this week may fall apart faster than last week. All critics are in the same sort of mob, chanting slogans outside his window. No sort of defence or apology for his remaining fans who expected more conventional leadership as in a visit to parliament. The absence of a Brexit plan is something to blame on HMG before the result. Current public mood is "hysteria". Looping back in this blog will consider "hysteria" as an explanation of how the vote went.
Just as interesting is Ben Wallace on Gove. Apparently he tends to gossip, often after a drink. Could this be a contributing factor in working out that Gove may be the source for a Sun story about the Queen, published soon after Gove dined with Rupert Murdoch? Someone should ask Ben Wallace if he would hazard a guess. Loops back in blog with background on IPSO, Leveson phase two and soforth.
Times claims UKIP plot to back Leadsom. Shares Sun story about tax issues that may be more fully reported. It seems the Murdoch preference for Gove rather than Boris, ( widely suggested in tweets and not much denied in print ) is shared by the Times and the Sun. Gove may be a traitor for Boris fans and even a bit of a gossip, but he may also be the only Brexit candidate without a tax issue. Please follow for yourselves during the week. Sun and Times are behind paywalls and I don't plan to buy one every day just to check this out.
Still part of the Boris story really, or how Tory MPs mix leadership plans with newspaper backing. Going back on the story will add to understanding of how it ends. Sun says "if Leadsom had been in the Cabinet her earlier remarks against Brexit would not have emerged until yesterday."
If she were not standing against Gove, then in some newspapers they may not have emerged ever. Just a thought.
Sunday 3 July 2016
Is Guardian Media Group trying to split the Labour Party?
Just a question. Has to be quick but more on Monday. From Andrew Rawnsley in Observer today, if Corbyn not unseated after another election " hard to see howparty" ....."can avoid formal split". So presumably this may be based on conversations with MPs. So my question is about how long this has been known. I still think that Corbyn made a solid contribution to the EU referendum remain case. It was not well reported, especially in the Guardian. Very often their report had a negative view from a secret source.
Back to fact checking. First heckle, was it from a known individual and are they linked to Portland Communications? Second heckle, was it from a known individual and are they linked to the Liberal Democrats? Clue, suggest checking Twitter. What to think?
Sunday Times has interesting weblink to Paddy Ashdown and a plan to work with current Labour MPs. Who is involved in this? Secret ballot notwithstanding I think we should be told. Of course the mainstream media are best place to find the reality. Otherwise speculation on social media may well continue.
Back to fact checking. First heckle, was it from a known individual and are they linked to Portland Communications? Second heckle, was it from a known individual and are they linked to the Liberal Democrats? Clue, suggest checking Twitter. What to think?
Sunday Times has interesting weblink to Paddy Ashdown and a plan to work with current Labour MPs. Who is involved in this? Secret ballot notwithstanding I think we should be told. Of course the mainstream media are best place to find the reality. Otherwise speculation on social media may well continue.
Friday 1 July 2016
Tidying up tweets, call for politeness, Buzzfeed plug
Busy weekend, mostly holiday next week so this post is note form sometimes. More below on social media / mainstream media and why you should keep looking at Buzzfeed.
Tweets at the end of this week have often been about heckles and BBC reporting. Portland Communications often mentioned, just do a search. It seems well established that the first heckler is connected to Portland Communications. No contrary claims as tweets but no reporting in mainstream media. Second heckle could have been a Lib Dem. The BBC is happy to report the heckle, could there be some fact checking on the tweet claims?
No further discussion I can find on the truth of what sort of campaign Corbyn had during the EU referendum. the BBC did not allow Diane Abbott time to refute the attack but it is so often repeated without question that one might think the actual record will be checked at some time.
Also I got the impression listening to Margaret Beckett that many senior Labour people were involved in the various Remain organisations. How was it decided who did what? Lord Darling sharing a platform for example. See previous posts, just expanding a bit on a tweet. I think there should be more care to consider what actually happened before just claiming that Corbyn is to blame.
By the way even the Sun praised him for honesty is saying that freedom of movement was a condition for access to the market. Despite the various poses that something else can be negotiated this may turn out to be a position that stands the test of time. Beckett may think that integrity is not enough, but it should be part of the mix.
Other tweets mention Iraq, Chilcot next week, and background on Maria Eagle website. Apparently this was set up before the announced dates for what is known in shorthand on some tweets as #coup but Eagle had no idea it was happening. My guess is that Chilcot has something to do with it. Plan A may have been that Corbyn should resign before Chilcot is published. The closer it gets to Wednesday the more likley it is that Eagle will have to deal with some Iraq related issues. So whoever it is organising this situation may have to consider another front to the leadership.
The guess that this is run by a PR company gains strength because all the quotes in the papers are anonymous. Somehow a story gets into the Observer and the Sunday Times but Benn has no idea how it got there. Somehow a website is set up. Anyway I am sure the facts about Portland Communications will become clear. Chilcot will be mentioned in the Sunday newspapers , one supposes, and the consequences for the Labour Party.
Meanwhile on Mainstream Media
I am getting worried about the tone of some printed comments when the Guardian refers to social media. Gaby Hinsliff only has space for the downside when writing about Twitter.
There is rarely any reference to anything positive that may come from tweets. Sorry, not enough time to go into detail, more later.
As in previous posts and other blogs and various txt to the @Guardian over the last decade or so the drift has been from smashing Guardian Unlimited Talk to Comment Is Free and more or less open to concentrating on staff celebs to rubbishing social media outside the protected space. Again sorry not enough time to put in all the quotes here but at least this is more clear than a tweet.
Warning for Labour MPs and others caught up in this. Just my opinion. Print media is facing a bit of a crunch. They may be tempted to rubbish social media if they think their online efforts are not working. (The print pose is not that helpful for online culture) MPs can go to Twitter and YouTube directly and then respond to the comments, the politeness thing is encouraged by some feeling of connection ( best way of keeping the language on track imho )
(If they stay voting in secret and leave the Sunday Times to speak for them on Sky News they may get the occasional heckle when they do surface, just a guess )
Story re written yet again
Post Boris a look at the Times and Telegraph reveals that the EU Referendum was about immigration after all. The Boris article on Monday got it all wrong. So the first part of this blog is very much a rough guide and the central part of the book will now have even more versions. Book may take some time, summer break coming up so even this blog will have gaps.
Buzzfeed is on the case
Something I notice is that a) Jim Waterson is diligent in tweeting links to stories b) the stories in the Canary are well sourced. Jim Waterson is on Twitter @jimwaterson and edits UK politics for Buzzfeed.
Suggestion, check this for links during next week. I may or may not be posting, depending on holidays etc.
-----------
PS final check shows the New Statesman has got a report on the Portland Communications story but assures us that the story in the Canary "is not true". I cannot find any fact check of the claim that the first heckle was from someone linked to Portland. It is the sort of thing that makes one wary. The News Statesman has the clout to ask the BBC how many heckles have made it to the main news in the past three months. My guess is two, both of Jeremy Corbyn. I am open to any explanation.
Tweets at the end of this week have often been about heckles and BBC reporting. Portland Communications often mentioned, just do a search. It seems well established that the first heckler is connected to Portland Communications. No contrary claims as tweets but no reporting in mainstream media. Second heckle could have been a Lib Dem. The BBC is happy to report the heckle, could there be some fact checking on the tweet claims?
No further discussion I can find on the truth of what sort of campaign Corbyn had during the EU referendum. the BBC did not allow Diane Abbott time to refute the attack but it is so often repeated without question that one might think the actual record will be checked at some time.
Also I got the impression listening to Margaret Beckett that many senior Labour people were involved in the various Remain organisations. How was it decided who did what? Lord Darling sharing a platform for example. See previous posts, just expanding a bit on a tweet. I think there should be more care to consider what actually happened before just claiming that Corbyn is to blame.
By the way even the Sun praised him for honesty is saying that freedom of movement was a condition for access to the market. Despite the various poses that something else can be negotiated this may turn out to be a position that stands the test of time. Beckett may think that integrity is not enough, but it should be part of the mix.
Other tweets mention Iraq, Chilcot next week, and background on Maria Eagle website. Apparently this was set up before the announced dates for what is known in shorthand on some tweets as #coup but Eagle had no idea it was happening. My guess is that Chilcot has something to do with it. Plan A may have been that Corbyn should resign before Chilcot is published. The closer it gets to Wednesday the more likley it is that Eagle will have to deal with some Iraq related issues. So whoever it is organising this situation may have to consider another front to the leadership.
The guess that this is run by a PR company gains strength because all the quotes in the papers are anonymous. Somehow a story gets into the Observer and the Sunday Times but Benn has no idea how it got there. Somehow a website is set up. Anyway I am sure the facts about Portland Communications will become clear. Chilcot will be mentioned in the Sunday newspapers , one supposes, and the consequences for the Labour Party.
Meanwhile on Mainstream Media
I am getting worried about the tone of some printed comments when the Guardian refers to social media. Gaby Hinsliff only has space for the downside when writing about Twitter.
Yeah, but Corbynites get abused on social media too!
There is rarely any reference to anything positive that may come from tweets. Sorry, not enough time to go into detail, more later.
As in previous posts and other blogs and various txt to the @Guardian over the last decade or so the drift has been from smashing Guardian Unlimited Talk to Comment Is Free and more or less open to concentrating on staff celebs to rubbishing social media outside the protected space. Again sorry not enough time to put in all the quotes here but at least this is more clear than a tweet.
Warning for Labour MPs and others caught up in this. Just my opinion. Print media is facing a bit of a crunch. They may be tempted to rubbish social media if they think their online efforts are not working. (The print pose is not that helpful for online culture) MPs can go to Twitter and YouTube directly and then respond to the comments, the politeness thing is encouraged by some feeling of connection ( best way of keeping the language on track imho )
(If they stay voting in secret and leave the Sunday Times to speak for them on Sky News they may get the occasional heckle when they do surface, just a guess )
Story re written yet again
Post Boris a look at the Times and Telegraph reveals that the EU Referendum was about immigration after all. The Boris article on Monday got it all wrong. So the first part of this blog is very much a rough guide and the central part of the book will now have even more versions. Book may take some time, summer break coming up so even this blog will have gaps.
Buzzfeed is on the case
Something I notice is that a) Jim Waterson is diligent in tweeting links to stories b) the stories in the Canary are well sourced. Jim Waterson is on Twitter @jimwaterson and edits UK politics for Buzzfeed.
Suggestion, check this for links during next week. I may or may not be posting, depending on holidays etc.
-----------
PS final check shows the New Statesman has got a report on the Portland Communications story but assures us that the story in the Canary "is not true". I cannot find any fact check of the claim that the first heckle was from someone linked to Portland. It is the sort of thing that makes one wary. The News Statesman has the clout to ask the BBC how many heckles have made it to the main news in the past three months. My guess is two, both of Jeremy Corbyn. I am open to any explanation.
Wednesday 29 June 2016
Request for online interview, fair use flexibility, and heckle report case studies
OK this blog is getting more like a rave but still more or less on topic. The story of Fleet Street during the EU referendum may turn out to be a mirror image of the story of Jeremy Corbyn, There could be at least three versions already being crafted. A defence version from supporters of Corbyn in the coming leadership election, the attack version from MPs who would accept the decision if Corbyn was elected once more so this version could be softer and later revise, and then again the attack version from those MPs who would not accept any vote decision and would leave for another SDP or join the Liberals direct saving a lot of wasted time.
Sorry, you will just have to sort out the bias from the facts for yourselves.
Not sure who reads this anyway. A few according to stats but they may be robots. My questions and tweets may not get any response but at least they serve as notes to come back to when the answers crop up somewhere else.
Sticking to the main story, how was it decided that Alistair Darling share a platform with George Osborne and that Gordon Brown should front the phase described as the Labour window in the Cameron schedule? Maybe the BBC has the emails. The impression I get is that many senior party figures have been phoning the leader office with suggestions and their advice not always welcomed. But somehow decisions were made which may or may not have been the first idea that Corbyn supported. So is there any info about this or how the "punishment budget" went down with the youth vote or Labour heartland ?
More recent / current.
Last night I watched Jeremy Corbyn live on Sky and switched to BBC News when they faded him out. The first BBC comment was about the heckle. Also heckle report on the World Tonight on radio. Heckle reports are rare so I am curious as to how this happens. Heckle makes the case that Corbyn was weak in referendum campaign. Same point put to Corbyn supporter on BBC Radio 4. But earlier of Today prog Dianne Abbott was prevented from refuting this sort of thing because we a re "moving on". If the BBC allows people to assert that Corbyn was weak during the EU referendum they should at least allow some time for discussion of the facts. Just my opinion.
Meanwhile on Twitter there is growing concern about Portland Communications. there may be a link with a previous heckle, with Tony Blair, and the destabilisation of the Labour Party. Who knows? But without some fact checking from mainstream media and /or public statements by Portland Communications the developing story on Twitter will gain credibility.
The problem is that now any heckle is suspicious for some. So far not much info about the heckle yesterday evening as reported by the BBC. But maybe someone will look into it. Meanwhile there is again some Twitter interest.
By the way, I am not listening to the Today prog just now, trying to concentrate and avoid typos. I probably will turn on the radio soon. But often I am just trying to work out the spin. For all the dross on Twitter it is still possible one or two tweets turn out to be true.
Anyway, much media is now available for remix or linking. I hope the conversation continues without the mainstream media blocking the archive ( Corbyn prevented from using a Channel 4 clip on his own YouTube channel is rare example otherwise )
Also please send links to reports of heckling. Any studies of how often a heckle is reported? Is there a PR guide on how to promote a heckle?
Sorry, you will just have to sort out the bias from the facts for yourselves.
Not sure who reads this anyway. A few according to stats but they may be robots. My questions and tweets may not get any response but at least they serve as notes to come back to when the answers crop up somewhere else.
Sticking to the main story, how was it decided that Alistair Darling share a platform with George Osborne and that Gordon Brown should front the phase described as the Labour window in the Cameron schedule? Maybe the BBC has the emails. The impression I get is that many senior party figures have been phoning the leader office with suggestions and their advice not always welcomed. But somehow decisions were made which may or may not have been the first idea that Corbyn supported. So is there any info about this or how the "punishment budget" went down with the youth vote or Labour heartland ?
More recent / current.
Last night I watched Jeremy Corbyn live on Sky and switched to BBC News when they faded him out. The first BBC comment was about the heckle. Also heckle report on the World Tonight on radio. Heckle reports are rare so I am curious as to how this happens. Heckle makes the case that Corbyn was weak in referendum campaign. Same point put to Corbyn supporter on BBC Radio 4. But earlier of Today prog Dianne Abbott was prevented from refuting this sort of thing because we a re "moving on". If the BBC allows people to assert that Corbyn was weak during the EU referendum they should at least allow some time for discussion of the facts. Just my opinion.
Meanwhile on Twitter there is growing concern about Portland Communications. there may be a link with a previous heckle, with Tony Blair, and the destabilisation of the Labour Party. Who knows? But without some fact checking from mainstream media and /or public statements by Portland Communications the developing story on Twitter will gain credibility.
The problem is that now any heckle is suspicious for some. So far not much info about the heckle yesterday evening as reported by the BBC. But maybe someone will look into it. Meanwhile there is again some Twitter interest.
By the way, I am not listening to the Today prog just now, trying to concentrate and avoid typos. I probably will turn on the radio soon. But often I am just trying to work out the spin. For all the dross on Twitter it is still possible one or two tweets turn out to be true.
Anyway, much media is now available for remix or linking. I hope the conversation continues without the mainstream media blocking the archive ( Corbyn prevented from using a Channel 4 clip on his own YouTube channel is rare example otherwise )
Also please send links to reports of heckling. Any studies of how often a heckle is reported? Is there a PR guide on how to promote a heckle?
Buzzfeed is on the case #plot #coup #Corbyn #Blair #Chilcot
I am now running about a day late as I am catching up with other things.
But BuzzFeed is keeping up. Tweets search find this
But BuzzFeed is keeping up. Tweets search find this
Jim Waterson @jimwaterson This theory that the anti-Corbyn coup is the work of Portland Communications is absolutely blowing up on Facebook.
Links to Canary story that looks to be well researched. The claim is that Portland Communications is organising more than just a video or a heckle. This might explain why the Parliamentary Labour Party seems to behave with on challenging leader and prefers to vote in secret. It might just be background PR drift without a known leader or plan. who knows but something will become clear soon.
Also on Twitter a clip from the Sunday Politics yesterday. Paul Mason talks about a Blairite coup and seems to know something. Having now watched it all I notice Jo Coburn asks about the Corbyn weakness during the referendum as if iot was a fact. The Today prog refused Dianne Abbott a chance to refute this. Now Cameron has blamed Corbyn in the Commons. Will the BBC allow some space to investigate what actually happened?
Sorry if this blog is becoming a bit partisan. It started as a comment on what happened during the referendum. Now that story is disputed so the blog is about versions of what was covered in the earlier posts.
Paul Mason suggests that Corbyn was opposed to the decision that Alistair Darling share a platform with George Osborne. Maybe someone at the BBC has copies of the emails. As memory serves the consequence was that Osborne used Darling as a defence when the Today prog pointed out that the Brexit Tory MPs would oppose any such budget. So they seemed to be the NHS supporters and Labour the backers of the "catastrophists" as Corby has described them.
Gordon Brown writes in the Guardian
Yet every time migration threatened to become a headline issue, the remain campaign escalated the rhetoric about post-EU doom, and so the extravagant leave claims about migration went unanswered.
Well, is there any research on how the public or Labour voters responded to Alistair Darling? Labour is in trouble but not everything can be the fault of Jeremy Corbyn. See previous posts for why I think his strength in social media is better than the newspapers suppose. Time will tell, quite soon.
Chilcot report mentioned in Commons but no link yet to Labour Leadership Election. My guess is that Corbyn will still be leader when the report is published.
Tuesday 28 June 2016
Joke, please don't rubbish blogs just because of this post
It is just a coincidence. I was trying to think why the Labour coup came at this time. There has been a tweet pointing out that the Chilcot Report is due out soon and that Corbyn will not back off from issues around war crimes should they be in the news.
I was wondering about the Parliamentary Labour Party. Why do they meet in secret? Is there a leader or organisation for what has gone on? I was trying to find the exact quote from the Godfather when who should come on Sky but Jack Straw....
Our true enemy has not yet shown his face
As in the title above, this is not a plot claim just a ramble about things as they turn up.
By the way, Straw has a definite go at Corbyn with stories of scripts muddled in the wind and rain. The myth ( my word, just my guess ) of Corbyn's bad campaign is just being repeated even if the Today prog will not allow time to refute it.
Google search on the quote also turns up this from YouTube, a scene set obviously nowhere near Westminster.
I was wondering about the Parliamentary Labour Party. Why do they meet in secret? Is there a leader or organisation for what has gone on? I was trying to find the exact quote from the Godfather when who should come on Sky but Jack Straw....
Our true enemy has not yet shown his face
As in the title above, this is not a plot claim just a ramble about things as they turn up.
By the way, Straw has a definite go at Corbyn with stories of scripts muddled in the wind and rain. The myth ( my word, just my guess ) of Corbyn's bad campaign is just being repeated even if the Today prog will not allow time to refute it.
Google search on the quote also turns up this from YouTube, a scene set obviously nowhere near Westminster.
Video clips for review and comment
Fact and opinion are getting mixed up but I can't see how to avoid this. If you have a different take there should still be something in this blog to contribute to the evidence. We have reached the phase where the story of media and the referendum is being revised as part of continuing ploitics. Personally I think Jeremy Corbyn has constructive things to say. Also by looking at social media I guess that his campaign was more effective than believed by most people in Westminster or working on newspapers. Time will tell.
I have borrowed a couple of clips for upload to YouiTube. It seems the attack on Corbyn is well supported by the news agenda.
Between 1.26 and 1.33 short clip of Jeremy Corbyn and heckle blaming him for the EU referendum result. It has been reported by WikiLeaks that the heckler is a PR professional called
Tom Mauchline.
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archiv...
On the clip it is stated that Corbyn's performance was "underpowered" , no opinion source quoted just a BBC fact.
At some point in time there will be a study of media and the EU referendum. Blog started as Fleet Street in Europe and Cyberspace. this blog will be updated as history is revised. One guess is that Corbyn did quite well in reaching a youth audience and others on social media. this could be tested soon in a leadership election.
Comments welcome. especially links to mainstream media fact checking of the WikiLeaks story. The promotional tweet has 1,172 retweets and 658 likes but the story is not showing up on newspaper websites as far as I can tell at this time.
Dianne Abbott is moved on by Sarah Montague from discussing the Corbyn campaign during the EU referendum Full clip as mp3 from BBC Radio 4 website, link below. At some time in the future the nature of the media coverage of the referendum will be studied at length. See blog Fleet Street in Europe and Cyberspace for my take, This edit by @will789gb for review and comment. Whether Corbyn connected with a yout / social media audience would be tested by a leadership election , quite possible at the time thjis is written.,
direct link
more mp3 from Today
It seems the BBC follow the Fleet Street news agenda. The reality of Corbyn's campaign is something to come back to.
Meanwhile earlier this evening on Sky News there was trade union speaker defending Corbyn and James Lyons from the Sunday Times speaking against. Not quoting sources , just his own opinion. He may well have spoken to the MPs meeting in secret but I think this role used to be unusual. Then again Fleet Street could soon be running the country as the only political organisation with any stability.
I have borrowed a couple of clips for upload to YouiTube. It seems the attack on Corbyn is well supported by the news agenda.
Between 1.26 and 1.33 short clip of Jeremy Corbyn and heckle blaming him for the EU referendum result. It has been reported by WikiLeaks that the heckler is a PR professional called
Tom Mauchline.
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archiv...
On the clip it is stated that Corbyn's performance was "underpowered" , no opinion source quoted just a BBC fact.
At some point in time there will be a study of media and the EU referendum. Blog started as Fleet Street in Europe and Cyberspace. this blog will be updated as history is revised. One guess is that Corbyn did quite well in reaching a youth audience and others on social media. this could be tested soon in a leadership election.
Comments welcome. especially links to mainstream media fact checking of the WikiLeaks story. The promotional tweet has 1,172 retweets and 658 likes but the story is not showing up on newspaper websites as far as I can tell at this time.
Dianne Abbott is moved on by Sarah Montague from discussing the Corbyn campaign during the EU referendum Full clip as mp3 from BBC Radio 4 website, link below. At some time in the future the nature of the media coverage of the referendum will be studied at length. See blog Fleet Street in Europe and Cyberspace for my take, This edit by @will789gb for review and comment. Whether Corbyn connected with a yout / social media audience would be tested by a leadership election , quite possible at the time thjis is written.,
direct link
more mp3 from Today
It seems the BBC follow the Fleet Street news agenda. The reality of Corbyn's campaign is something to come back to.
Meanwhile earlier this evening on Sky News there was trade union speaker defending Corbyn and James Lyons from the Sunday Times speaking against. Not quoting sources , just his own opinion. He may well have spoken to the MPs meeting in secret but I think this role used to be unusual. Then again Fleet Street could soon be running the country as the only political organisation with any stability.
Monday 27 June 2016
New Phase , misc queries , Guardian
This blog is in a new phase, mostly going back over the information so far. There seems to be a lot of revision to how things are presented. Or how it seemed at the time.
For example Boris in the Telegraph
It is said that those who voted Leave were mainly driven by anxieties about immigration. I do not believe that is so.
We can go back and look at the newspapers and try to understand what happened.
My own bias is that this result is a mistake. There will be a cost and a revised decision later. It may take many years.
At the moment there seems to be some drift in government but the newspapers are clearly running the country as much as anybody. To understand Boris you have to buy the Telegraph. It still may leave some mystery. Apparently the German BDI has stated that the UK will still have access to the single market. Possibly the retreat has already started from what many people thought was on offer when they voted.
Some queries.
Previous post mentioned a WikiLeaks story about a video heckle of Jeremy Corbyn. I have just done a search on Twitter for "Tom Mauchline heckle" . It only finds one tweet,
Apologies for the word "goon". Yes social media can get heated, but then again I cannot find any coverage in mainstream media of whether the claims in WikiLeaks may be true. The clip was used on Newsnight in a Brexit special on Saturday. No mention of the Corbyn speech the same day. So this is a possible case study for digital storytelling. Evan Davis was part of a panel in Exeter during the Radio 1 Academy. Since this blog is now going back in time as well as staying current I will try to find out more about what digital storytelling means.
You would have thought a short interview with Lord Mandelson would be more in the Newsnight style.
Second query, still no response or comment on whay Channel 4 blocked Jeremy Corbyn Official Channel from using his own words on YouTube. With all respect for the last laugh there can be no more obvious evidence for Corbyn dedication to the Remain cause than to be covered in goo, crawl through mud and suffer every Saturday night indignity only to be left without even a clip he can try to promote for himself. Media bias or what?
By the way, he did not advocate uncontrolled immigration. He pointed out that the EU is very unlikely to offer access to their market without free movement of people. Honesty may be a good longterm approach.
I will be moving comment about the Guardian to another blog - Read G . This has been dormant for a while. Mostly about citizen journalism and the way the Guardian has responded. I realise my response to the Guardian is taking up space in this blog out of proportion to the main issues. So in future I can concentrate on the main aspect of Fleet Street - total Brexit and definitely in control.
Final query just in case somebody knows the answer. Lucy Bell MP told the Today program that she resigned because Benn was sacked and that there is no coup plot. Guardian reports ( page 2 ) that 9.59 on Saturday was the time for a report in the Observer. By the way much the same in Sunday Times. Guardian also reports claim by Benn that he was not the source of the story. So how do these things happen? I get the early versions of print stories in Exeter. Later versions started with the sacking. From the earlier versions I don't see how any party leader could allow the level of dissent implied and it turns out the journalists were not making it up on this occasion. I strongly suggest that Lucy Bell MP takes a look. Also anyone with clues please send a link. Maybe there is a leaked email known to the BBC.
For example Boris in the Telegraph
It is said that those who voted Leave were mainly driven by anxieties about immigration. I do not believe that is so.
We can go back and look at the newspapers and try to understand what happened.
My own bias is that this result is a mistake. There will be a cost and a revised decision later. It may take many years.
At the moment there seems to be some drift in government but the newspapers are clearly running the country as much as anybody. To understand Boris you have to buy the Telegraph. It still may leave some mystery. Apparently the German BDI has stated that the UK will still have access to the single market. Possibly the retreat has already started from what many people thought was on offer when they voted.
Some queries.
Previous post mentioned a WikiLeaks story about a video heckle of Jeremy Corbyn. I have just done a search on Twitter for "Tom Mauchline heckle" . It only finds one tweet,
When lone heckle gets this much media, we smell a rat. Stinker shill:Tom Mauchline, Alistair Campbell's goon.
Apologies for the word "goon". Yes social media can get heated, but then again I cannot find any coverage in mainstream media of whether the claims in WikiLeaks may be true. The clip was used on Newsnight in a Brexit special on Saturday. No mention of the Corbyn speech the same day. So this is a possible case study for digital storytelling. Evan Davis was part of a panel in Exeter during the Radio 1 Academy. Since this blog is now going back in time as well as staying current I will try to find out more about what digital storytelling means.
You would have thought a short interview with Lord Mandelson would be more in the Newsnight style.
Second query, still no response or comment on whay Channel 4 blocked Jeremy Corbyn Official Channel from using his own words on YouTube. With all respect for the last laugh there can be no more obvious evidence for Corbyn dedication to the Remain cause than to be covered in goo, crawl through mud and suffer every Saturday night indignity only to be left without even a clip he can try to promote for himself. Media bias or what?
By the way, he did not advocate uncontrolled immigration. He pointed out that the EU is very unlikely to offer access to their market without free movement of people. Honesty may be a good longterm approach.
I will be moving comment about the Guardian to another blog - Read G . This has been dormant for a while. Mostly about citizen journalism and the way the Guardian has responded. I realise my response to the Guardian is taking up space in this blog out of proportion to the main issues. So in future I can concentrate on the main aspect of Fleet Street - total Brexit and definitely in control.
Final query just in case somebody knows the answer. Lucy Bell MP told the Today program that she resigned because Benn was sacked and that there is no coup plot. Guardian reports ( page 2 ) that 9.59 on Saturday was the time for a report in the Observer. By the way much the same in Sunday Times. Guardian also reports claim by Benn that he was not the source of the story. So how do these things happen? I get the early versions of print stories in Exeter. Later versions started with the sacking. From the earlier versions I don't see how any party leader could allow the level of dissent implied and it turns out the journalists were not making it up on this occasion. I strongly suggest that Lucy Bell MP takes a look. Also anyone with clues please send a link. Maybe there is a leaked email known to the BBC.
Saturday 25 June 2016
Social Media and Mainstream Media, different takes on Corbyn leadership
Up early for a Sunday, alarmed by the radio. Have now bought an Observer and Sunday Times. They are not quite as reported on the BBC. Both have reporting of moves by Hilary Benn but not the sacking. I cannot see from the stories what else Corbyn could do. the info must have come from somewhere even if Benn was "unavailable for comment".
Peter Preston in Observer defends the tole of newspapers against the assumed attack that several of them are controlled by the very rich and they have influenced the voters with stories about immigration for example. He has some numbers about how voting and source of news varies by age. He thinks the views of newspaper readers have been formed before they read anything. I think we should come back to this later when there is more info on how opinion shifted in the various pahases of the debate and how this might reflect the stories of the day.
He questions the role of TV, claiming that the policy of balance prevented much critique of what was being claimed. I don't see why newspapers should not have that role also. They are not just there to reflect the bias of readers.
Looking at Twitter I find a WikiLeaks tweet about the heckler video from yesterday. The headline is "How the news agenda is set" .
What makes a single individual heckling a politician newsworthy? There are dozens such examples every single day that are not newsworthy.
The answer is simple. Normally the hecklers are promoting an anti-establishment view, so it does not get reported. Whereas this heckler was promoting the number one priority of the establishment and mainstream media, to get rid of Jeremy Corbyn. So this heckler, uniquely, is front page news and his words are repeated at great length in the Guardian and throughout the broadcast media.
The impression is deliberately given that he reflects general disgust from young people, and particularly gay young people, at Corbyn over the EU referendum. The very enthusiastic reception for Corbyn at Gay Pride is not reported.
Nor is the fact that the incident was not a chance one. The “heckler” is Tom Mauchline, a PR professional for PR firm Portland Communications, a dedicated Blairite (he describes himself as Gouldian) formerly working on the Liz Kendall leadership campaign. Portland Communications’ “strategic counsel” is Alastair Campbell.
So far from representing a popular mood, Mauchlyne was this morning on twitter urging people to sign a 38 Degrees petition supporting the no confidence motion against Corbyn. Ten hours later that petition has gained 65 signatures, compared to 120,000 for a petition supporting Corbyn. Mauchline formerly worked for 38 Degrees, unsurprising given their disgraceful behaviour over the Kuenssberg petition. I am waiting for the circle to be squared and Kuenssberg to report on the significance of Mauchline’s lone heckle.
Of course this may not be true. But the facts can be easily checked. Comparing 65 to 120,000 may be the sort of ratio for discussion outside Westminster and the lobby. Not sure how to describe this better, but it may clarify over the next week or so.
Back to my opinion. I think during the referendum Jeremy Corbyn was visible on social media but maybe only the younger voters noticed this. Possibly by arrangement with the shadow cabinet he was rarely on TV debates except for Sky News and the Last Laugh. When he did make a speech it was often not reported.
I have had no dispute about my screenshot , twice tweeted , showing that Channel 4 blocked a clip from the Last Laugh on Corbyn's own YouTube channel. How is he expected to get a message across if he is not reported for what he has to say?
His speech yesterday, by the way most considered and constructive on policy and immigration, is not much reported today. Those MPs wanting a change of leadership have provide the media with a more interesting story. Below is a YouTube clip of the speech. Notice how the BBC distract with news of challenges after a couple of minutes.
Peter Preston has also noticed how things turn up on YouTube. It will be very interesting to see how the newspapers and TV report the Corbyn leadership and the related world of social media. I will tend to rely on Corbyn talking directly to camera. ( newspapers not so much)
continues as tweets and retweets will789gb
Friday 24 June 2016
Thank You LA Times
On Thursday British voters willfully walked off a cliff when they decided to leave the European Union. The “Brexit” victory is a defeat for Britain, Europe and the global economy.
LA Times, link HERE.
Meanwhile I am in a bit of shock and breakdown. Fleet Street obviously did well but at the same time I am very much looking at media outside the UK for opinion and fact. When I say they did well this is at a technical level or as you would judge fiction.
Tweets suggest Polly Toynbee has been on BBC with comments about Corbyn. Maybe more tomorrow on this, I will check what appears in print.
But if you are looking for where to put the blame then the Guardian could be on the list. Corbyn can only get a message across to the extent he is reported.
Wednesday 22 June 2016
NY Times has authority to comment on UK press
Heard about this on Radio 4 press review and there was a printed copy in Exeter. Only £2 so compares with the Guardian. You can get up to ten stories a day I think before you need to subscribe.
The link is HERE.
Martin Fletcher used to work for the Times. He knows what he is writing about.
Much more detail. sample headlines. please have a look.
Now closing down probably till there is a result. I may be losing balance, spending too much time as critic of sources that may be slightly positive in the short term.
Whatever the result there will be a difficult situation. Lessons so far,
direct access to politicians through YouTube seems to work better than spin through journalists
New York Times good starting point in a world of conflicting claims and unreliable reporting. Even though I subscribe will probably buy another print cop later in the week.
By the way, if you take up the trial sub at a UK trade show you may get a free umbrella.
The link is HERE.
Martin Fletcher used to work for the Times. He knows what he is writing about.
It is often said that newspapers no longer matter. But they do matter when the contest is so close and shoppers see headlines like “BeLeave in Britain” emblazoned across the front pages of tabloids whenever they visit their supermarket. They matter if they have collectively and individually misled their readers for decades.
Much more detail. sample headlines. please have a look.
Now closing down probably till there is a result. I may be losing balance, spending too much time as critic of sources that may be slightly positive in the short term.
Whatever the result there will be a difficult situation. Lessons so far,
direct access to politicians through YouTube seems to work better than spin through journalists
New York Times good starting point in a world of conflicting claims and unreliable reporting. Even though I subscribe will probably buy another print cop later in the week.
By the way, if you take up the trial sub at a UK trade show you may get a free umbrella.
Tuesday 21 June 2016
Trying Out Twitter to Communicate with the Guardian #2
I think this started with the quote below, the kicker in a text by Gaby Hinsliff about Jeremy Corbyn
So presumably the nice normal people are face to face. The shrillness is on social media.
And another thing. It is one thing to get a series of reports completely wrong during a leadership election. It is another to behave as if the leadership of the Labour Party was something for journalists to decide, ignoring actual events and giving space to figures from the past or anonymous sources that fit the rest of their argument.
Going back to the topic for this blog I still think that Jeremy Corbyn has been making a consistent and positive Remain case as followers on Twitter will know. The problem has been that he is not reported. Anyway, leaving that aside for a couple of days, just looking at the social media aspects.
Not sure how to link so here are some screenshots
Why are journalists so concerned to assert the negative aspects of social media? Why would Gaby Hinsliff take time out from the Jo Cox tribute to make a general purpose remark about the sort of people who contribute to Twitter?
It might help to back to some facts. I have been trying for a while now to communicate with the Guardian on the basis that includes the experience of Guardian Unlimited Talk , a talkboard that was widely supported then trashed without notice. Max would be an offer of the archive for those who wrote it. Minimum would be to admit it existed when writing about social media. We seem to have reached a stage when print journalists are mostly negative about social media except when mentioning their own contacts. So they must realise where the audience is going. Myself I buy the paper less and go direct to Twitter online. It may find the Guardian, maybe not.
Back on topic for the blog, my impression is that TV comment is also very concerned about the negative aspects of social media and so far is reluctant to comment on the recent print media reporting on immigration. But let us leave that for a while, trying to stay positive.
And so to many commentators, his victory just didn’t compute. It made no sense. We treated it like a glitch in the system, almost a mistake.
Time may or may not prove it to be both those things, but in retrospect we could have been more curious about why those who backed him did so; we should be asking even now whether and why they still feel the same. (For every shrill social media warrior there are dozens of perfectly nice, normal people who backed Corbyn. They’re a lot more fun to ask.)
So presumably the nice normal people are face to face. The shrillness is on social media.
And another thing. It is one thing to get a series of reports completely wrong during a leadership election. It is another to behave as if the leadership of the Labour Party was something for journalists to decide, ignoring actual events and giving space to figures from the past or anonymous sources that fit the rest of their argument.
Going back to the topic for this blog I still think that Jeremy Corbyn has been making a consistent and positive Remain case as followers on Twitter will know. The problem has been that he is not reported. Anyway, leaving that aside for a couple of days, just looking at the social media aspects.
Not sure how to link so here are some screenshots
Why are journalists so concerned to assert the negative aspects of social media? Why would Gaby Hinsliff take time out from the Jo Cox tribute to make a general purpose remark about the sort of people who contribute to Twitter?
It might help to back to some facts. I have been trying for a while now to communicate with the Guardian on the basis that includes the experience of Guardian Unlimited Talk , a talkboard that was widely supported then trashed without notice. Max would be an offer of the archive for those who wrote it. Minimum would be to admit it existed when writing about social media. We seem to have reached a stage when print journalists are mostly negative about social media except when mentioning their own contacts. So they must realise where the audience is going. Myself I buy the paper less and go direct to Twitter online. It may find the Guardian, maybe not.
Back on topic for the blog, my impression is that TV comment is also very concerned about the negative aspects of social media and so far is reluctant to comment on the recent print media reporting on immigration. But let us leave that for a while, trying to stay positive.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)