Skip to main content

The Press puts the boot in to the Lib Dems... and we know why

The British press are having a field day with the Liberal Democrats. Day after day a little more juice is wrung out of the allegations that former chief executive Chris Rennard groped women in the Lib Dem office. 

I think we are entitled to ask "Why?"

It is not that such usually misogynist newspapers as the Daily Mail have discovered a new compassion for women abused in their workplaces. Similar allegations are made against journalists every few months, if one believes Private Eye.

It is not even about whether the allegations were properly handled. They probably weren't.

It is about politics pure and simple. The timing of the story- a few days before a critical by-election that the Liberal Democrats must win if they are to have any chance of an electoral come-back- is the real clue.

The fact is too that the scale of the coverage is a real giveaway- the Press has an agenda that is overtly and implacably hostile to the Liberal Democrats: their party, their leader and their policies. In particular their policies towards the Leveson inquiry. 

The attitude of 95% of journalists to the Liberal Democrats is "if you can't beat them, smear them". From the absurd allegations that "Nick Clegg helped a charity" (also helped by his wife), the coverage of the Lib Dems has been alternately contemptuous and ridiculous.

What seems to be interesting is that the voters of Eastleigh may not be playing ball. Poll after poll seems to show the Lib Dems squeaking through- which is most certainly not what the British press wants to have as the coda for the story.

If the Lib Dems do claim an improbable victory, then it really asks two questions of the media in the UK: firstly since they have continued to publish smear and innuendo- convicting a man before he can even make his case and damning all his associates- many would ask whether this shows that Leveson is even more necessary. 

Secondly, and far more worrying for the Fleet Street editors, will be whether Eastleigh is a demonstration of the limits of their power. Despite all guns blazing on the story, the intended target, the Eastleigh electorate, seems not to be responding.

I have long ago learned to dismiss headlines which use capital letters for emphasis, as in the typical Daily Mail headline; "a MILLION Bulgarians coming to YOUR town will give you cancer". Perhaps the voters are straining out the rest of the headlines now too. 

Such a failure of the Press in Eastleigh- I suspect- will simply accelerate the transformation of the Dailies Mail and Telegraph into becoming the political wing of "Hello" magazine.

I guess we will see on Friday morning.  

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Waiting for the Barbarians

What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum? The barbarians are due here today. Why isn’t anything going on in the senate? Why are the senators sitting there without legislating? Because the barbarians are coming today. What’s the point of senators making laws now? Once the barbarians are here, they’ll do the legislating. Why did our emperor get up so early, and why is he sitting enthroned at the city’s main gate, in state, wearing the crown? Because the barbarians are coming today and the emperor’s waiting to receive their leader. He’s even got a scroll to give him, loaded with titles, with imposing names. Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas? Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts, rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds? Why are they carrying elegant canes beautifully worked in silver and gold? Because the barbarians are coming today and things like that dazzle the barbarians. Why don’t our distingui...

Lib Dem v. Tory (Round 2)

The Liberal Democrats stand for a distinct political ideology. It is an ideology built around both socially and economically liberal precepts. In as far as our ruling Labour government can be said to have an ideology at all, it coincides with Liberalism only incidentally. Labour stands for pragmatism, and where it does not there is still a core of values that are collectivist and not individual. Sometimes people are prepared to claim the moral high ground for policies of social solidarity and redistribution of wealth. Liberals may argue in favour of equality of opportunity, we can not argue in favour- as Socialists do- of "and equal society". The reason is simple: Socialism does not work. If one places equality above freedom, then eventually we get tyranny. This is why, while we may argue in favour of a more equal society as being a stronger society, the tools that we may use to gain -in our view- socially desirable outcomes must rest upon freedom above all else. As PJ O'...

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...