Quote recently from Jean-Claude Juncker as reported in Guardian online
The then prime minister asked me not to interfere, not to intervene in the referendum campaign. It was a mistake not to intervene and not to interfere because we would have been the only ones to destroy the lies which were circulated around. I was wrong to be silent at an important moment.
Cameron started out very reluctant to mix it with other Conservatives about facts. He did change tack later.
Did the newspapers and broadcast media do enough to check facts?
The election could well be a time to explore further how we got here.
Brexit started as an issue inside the Conservative Party . Fair enough to report it as such. But BBC reporting has continued in this manner, whatever else was happening. They met a lot of Conservatives while negotiating new streams of licence fees so this may have clouded their view.
During referendum, both sides of Conservative argument, not much about Corbyn . My take, other clips evidence links welcome. Very little fact checking. Balance of info from various sources, even when contradictions. No distinction Johnson / Farage so no questions. Clips please if memory wobbly.
After referendum Brexit project seen as national interest. Not much reporting of Remain case. Ever closer to May for lead news announcements.
Trump / Brexit issues reported by Carole Cadwalladr have not been well reported on BBC. Marr invited Isabel Oakeshott to help interview. Andrew Neill has been just a bit rude on Twitter some would say. DG claims there has been an apology but is this so?
My guess the BBC realise previous reporting is open to question, so they hope to carry on with the Brexit project. Government policy is sound, previous case well developed, etc.
Any clips of Steve Hilton during the referendum? As memory serves he was presented as an expert.
Other channels are available. RTE has reporters in Brussels.
Thinking about the EU elections as a way to find out about the referendum. What happened? Maybe some story will be recalled. The characters from the previous plot still mostly exist and have similar roles. So maybe some clues.
See previous post for "Fantasy Brexit" as promised, to be delivered by ERG some time later. Also "Brexit in Name Only" the version negotiated by May.
Mail and Express sometimes support May in a patriotic sort of way. Telegraph and Sun more likely to talk of betrayal or going back to Brussels to tell them about changes required, or just crashing out.
My guess is that many people recognise the fantasy element but it helps to sell newspapers, also works well with members of the Conservative Party. So can help future leadership bid unless caught out in government trying to do actual policy.
Complicated during EU elections by Brexit Party. Can it be managed just to help shifts inside the Conservatives without actually wrecking it?
Meanwhile the readers for newspapers are fewer and older, more settled in their ways. Less budget for reporting. So complex explanations about the latest wheeze for damage containment, aka Brexit in name only or how this gets through UK politics / EU negotiations could be a boring story too expensive to cover. Loud opinion might be more probable. Time will tell.
Johnson for Telegraph, Gove for Murdoch both probable staying in Conservatives. Step forward Anne Widdecombe for the Daily Express.
Thinking about the EU elections as a way to find out about the referendum. What happened? Maybe some story will be recalled. The characters from the previous plot still mostly exist and have similar roles. So maybe some clues.
Based on results and Twitter, seems that a wide range of views , mostly Remain, turn out to be supporting the Lib Dems. Guardian often seems a mess , various columnists with various views.
But assume Lib Dem.
Then the apparent bias on Corbyn and Labour will not disappoint.
This could also explain falls in circulation. This blog is about newspapers as a business, not just what they publish. Recent advice to Corbyn to forget about Leave voters in North because there are so many Remain voters in the South might reflect a distribution policy. Look out for facts on where the print Guardian is available.
Thinking about the EU elections as a way to find out about the referendum. What happened? Maybe some story will be recalled. The characters from the previous plot still mostly exist and have similar roles. So maybe some clues.
Bias against Corbyn started with the first leadership election and may have come from some Labour supporters, not just Conservative newspapers. Lord Mandelson for example has been quoted as wanting a change following a clear election setback. Corbyn was not really in control of Labour during the referendum. Alan Johnson has been quoted since. Mandelson very close to Cameron for policy . The newspapers and broadcast probably influenced by some other than Corbyn circle.
When the polls looked dodgy and Cameron decided to make space for Labour, how was it decided to focus on Gordon Brown, and Lord Darling to share a platform with George Osborne?
Why did Channel 4 block Corbyn from uploading to YouTube a full copy of his appearance on Last Leg? Misleading edits abound btw .
What energy went into preparing the "blame Corbyn" meme for the result? Two heckles were reported by BBC News. Turned out on Twitter info that one was from Portland, one from LibDems. Was there ever any apology? Other info welcome.
Before the second leadership election Hilary Benn was quoted in both Sunday Times and Observer though he denies he had anything to do with it. What happened?
Main question. My memory ( see previous bits of this blog ) Corbyn was active in referendum , but with different arguments to Cameron / Mandelson. Emphasis on worker and consumer rights, environmental standards. Not reported well, who decided about this?
Compare recent speech from Corbyn about uniting the party / country. Media only report "fudge" , they may have a point, but Corbyn should at least be reported in his own words as part of this. Result is a boost for Leave as the Remain case is not heard by the part of the UK that supports Corbyn on other issues.
This blog should get more frequent during the EU election. I realise there is objection to the expense and it may be a waste of time if Brexit actually happens this year. But it is very interesting to compare with the referendum time when this blog started.
More as it continues, these are just notes.
There seem to be three main options as reported in newspapers. ( shorthand for my bias but keeps the blog together )
"Fantasy Brexit". This is the real thing as the ERG are holding out for. Could not be negotiated but this may not matter. Works well as a betrayal narrative to sell newspapers and build a base for conservative politics.
"Brexit in Name Only" seems to be what May is working on. Some other support for this as well.
"Remain" probably more informed about EU than in 2015
---
Newspapers mostly backing "Fantasy Brexit" - Mail, Sun, Telegraph , Express . BBC seems pro Conservative and has reported Brexit as a Conservative story. After the referendum thay seem to have got more into Brexit as a project so the Remain case has not been well reported.
Mail and Express claim to be less racist than during referendum. ( see previous post ) But support for Brexit Party / Fantasy Brexit continues. No distinction between ERG and Brexit Party most of the time. Sun and Telegraph still very supportive. Times fluctuates a bit and their circulation holds up better. Compared to the referendum it is clear that circulation for fleet Street is way down. But still matters. Twittering still a minority.
Hard info unknown on ages of remain / leave supporters and / or which media they follow. My guess BBC R4 Today /Telegraph dropping away with the youth but look forward to facts emerging over the next few weeks. ( Obviously I listen sometimes but this is a habit )
Responding to a request on Twitter I sent in my question. Probably a coincidence but my question came up. Sophy Ridge did ask about UKIP and racism, also asked about Oldham. My concern is that so far there seems to be very little questioning of how the new party is different to the old party. Or what Farage has said recently.
(By the way, makes blogging / twittering more interesting even if the connections are in my imagination )
I thought the interview was searching enough for this stage of the EU election. Definitely different to the BBC approach which seems to be more about a platform for Farage views. Not many questions. Maybe I just find a misleading sample when I watch / listen. Clips very welcome for future posts on this blog.
So far most interest in refusal to say where the funding comes from. This may be another connection with UKIP. Or maybe not. Suggest follow @CaroleCadwalladr .
But I have found some links around Oldham story.
Some cut and paste in best blogger style
Mail Online strikes some balance and quotes contrary opinion
Not surprisingly, his comments were met with condemnation in some quarters. Oldham MP Jim McMahon accused him of trying to ‘stoke up tensions and create division’ with his ‘us and them’ rhetoric.
Had Farage been speaking in Britain, instead of playing to an American audience in an area full of Trump supporters, he might well have chosen his words more carefully. He thrives on controversy, but he is no fool. The fact of the matter is there are relatively few ‘black’ faces in Oldham. Only 2,797 — 1.2 per cent of the 219,000 population — were classed as ‘black ’in the 2011 census.
But they go back to a pub firebombing and riot in 2001 and find many issues in the later reports.
The Sun quotes local resident Graham Foulkes whose verdict is that Farage is “playing on people’s fear” to win votes in the European Elections.
"I’m angry that someone who doesn’t know Oldham, who’s only been here once, is stoking up racism … I challenge Farage to come to Oldham and find one street that matches his description. They don’t exist."
The Sun adds that
That’s perhaps not strictly accurate: plenty of areas of Oldham are predominantly Asian or white – like Waterloo Street in the overwhelmingly South Asian area of Glodwick, where colourful fabric shops and stores selling exotic vegetables and spices nestle alongside rows of small terraced housing.
Nazir Afzal , former chief prosecutor in Greater Manchester, and now chairman at Rochdale's Hopwood Hall College, said Mr Farage was 'stoking racial tension'. He said: "I know Oldham very well and this is dangerous scaremongering again from Farage, 'integration' is not 'assimilation'. "All towns have their problems, but none are improved by him stoking racial tension.
It will be interesting to see if Sophy Ridge takes up the offer to visit Oldham with Farage. Others can comment also.
More stories may come from the USA. Farage has spent some time outside the UK while between parties.
