The Tories went into the 2017 campaign having been the party that just lost a national referendum a year earlier. Splits were already starting to show. No real plan for implementation of that vote they humiliatingly lost already evident. If you just look at that it's absolutely criminal that the opposition went into that campaign with everyone fearing a disaster. Labour should have gone into that campaign with high expectations, not with them on the floor. Labour should have went into that campaign expecting to win and had it lost at all been bitterly disappointed. The reality was they went into the campaign expecting it to be a disaster and were pleased when the defeat wasn't as bad as everyone feared. Spinning that into a positive is something I cannot get my head around.
Jeremy Corbyn - Not Not Labour Party(?), not a Communist (BBC)
- Thread starter unchanged_lineup
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
This is a meaningless rant created in a vacuum since you have no answer as to why your 2010 predictions failed, or how to mobilise the Labour base given the context of Brexit.
Presenter: Now over to our new political editor Rick from Hull for all the latest from Westminster...
Rick: Yeah thanks Tim. Yeah so Theresa May said some stuff today, didn't understand most of it, more importantly though when the FOOK, are Manchester United gonna sack that prick Josey Mooreeneyo?
Presenter: Thanks Rick. You can of course follow Rick's latest analysis at twitter.com/rickprick
What's wrong with that ? Theres a clearly a problem with the media being full of white middle to upper classes, to the where they themselves admit to having no fecking clue whats going on politically.
Also whats that thing on the guy head ?
Depends on what he's actually suggesting. Doing analysis and reporting what the percentages are for each social class might be fine. Declaring what each person's background is should really be up to them individually (if they choose to do so).
Don't think the media being full of white, middle to upper classes is necessarily something to cry conspiracy over either.
Who decides what is public oriented journalists that needs tax funding?
Well yeah I doubt the policy is blast it across the airways which school Andrew Marr went to.
Who said that ?
Must have misread you there.
I just think it's pretty normal for it to be filled (a large % of them) with white people from the middle/upper classes. I don't see it as necessarily a problem.
Oh no worries. I just thinking about the courage of things like the fire at Grenfell tower and the almost silent courage before the disaster, Brexit and the left be hide towns,2017 election etc. Broad parts of the media were quite open at the time at just how far removed they where from basically rest of the country. After the last election Channel 4 Jon Snow had a opening segment basically saying yeah we know feck all at the moment and this very worrying.
But it shouldn't be right ?
Not sure how anyone can disagree with the statements
1) the demographics of the news media skew upper-middle class, white and male.
2) Your socioeconomic background has an affect on your experience of the world and your politics.
3) Your experience has an impact on your politics, affects what you deem newsworthy, and influences the way in which you analyse events.
It's clear that the media is completely out of touch with the average person on the street and that many commentators have no insight into, or interest in, the lives of ordinary people, much less the lives of marginalised groups. Generally speaking, the media has huge blindspots regarding poverty, inequality, the experience of disadvantaged groups and non-metropolitan Britain in general. The reason the media didn't see Brexit coming is because they had no understanding of why people in post-industrial areas which have been left to rot under various governments over the course of 40 years might not trust politicians telling them how to vote. The reason they didn't see Grenfell coming despite community groups and the left going on about dangerous and poor quality housing for decades is because they'd never lived in or visited a place like it so they couldn't believe they existed and wrote it off as the left getting overexcited over nothing.
A recent example relevant to this thread is when Corbyn raised buses in a PMQs and the media had a go at him for being out of touch with reality and raising such a niche topic. In reality, buses are the most relied-on form of public transport across the country and services are generally more-expensive and less-reliable then ever and it's a huge issue outside of the big cities.
1) the demographics of the news media skew upper-middle class, white and male.
2) Your socioeconomic background has an affect on your experience of the world and your politics.
3) Your experience has an impact on your politics, affects what you deem newsworthy, and influences the way in which you analyse events.
It's clear that the media is completely out of touch with the average person on the street and that many commentators have no insight into, or interest in, the lives of ordinary people, much less the lives of marginalised groups. Generally speaking, the media has huge blindspots regarding poverty, inequality, the experience of disadvantaged groups and non-metropolitan Britain in general. The reason the media didn't see Brexit coming is because they had no understanding of why people in post-industrial areas which have been left to rot under various governments over the course of 40 years might not trust politicians telling them how to vote. The reason they didn't see Grenfell coming despite community groups and the left going on about dangerous and poor quality housing for decades is because they'd never lived in or visited a place like it so they couldn't believe they existed and wrote it off as the left getting overexcited over nothing.
A recent example relevant to this thread is when Corbyn raised buses in a PMQs and the media had a go at him for being out of touch with reality and raising such a niche topic. In reality, buses are the most relied-on form of public transport across the country and services are generally more-expensive and less-reliable then ever and it's a huge issue outside of the big cities.
Last edited:
Yes, that’s all reasonable. Not sure how you fix it though to be honest.
hire the working class people to be journalists
Ultimately though you would still be making some kind of judgement on who is the right sort. Because it’s not all Grenfell campaigns and saving bus routes.
Corbyn has lost me on this issue. Why do the media need to branch out into wider social classes? It isn't as if they got Brexit and an election on both sides of the Atlantic massively wrong because they operate in an echo chamber of privately educated wanks who only got where they are because of who their parents were.
I love this. How many people complaining about this buy local papers? I’m going to guess, none. That’s where a lot of these local issues used to first get surfaced. The media is dying - is weaker than it has ever been, because people aren’t paying for it. Journalist jobs are being slashed across “the media” because punters won’t pay and advertisers have moved their spend to Facebook and google. You get rubbish local news because it largely has ceased to exist in any meaningful form. That’s why nobody sees this stuff coming - because nobody is being paid to watch and report. And we aren’t at the end of this. So get used to it.
Re: class - one of the best ways 8n to journalism for working class kids was local journalism and the music press. Spot the pattern.
Last edited:
Maybe not but (a) it undermines any perception of moral authority he or his supporters might claim to have over other parties, and that can be corrosive (b) it makes him look weak and unable to solve or confront an issue of significance, again that can be corrosive (c) it potentially reminds people of some of his more unsavoury connections which shines a light on his character issues.
It is the drip drip of the above which can cause damage over time.
Lol wot?
It strikes me how peripheral these issues that he cares to talk about often are and how annoyed he is whenever anyone asks him about Brexit.
#theywillbemymedia
Are the media really operating in an echo chamber and out of touch more the Caf posters? Maybe I’m wrong, but from memory whenever there have been polls on major political events, such as General Elections, Brexit and US elections, the Caf poster results seem to be massively different to the public at large.
It's the new Corbyn logic that because the media didn't predict a within margin of error victory for leave that means that they didn't understand why people wanted to leave the EU in certain places in the country. The logic only works however if you assume that the entire Brexit vote was working class and driven by social-economic concerns and ignore the evidence of a huge Brexit demographic of rich, white and rural voters.
See also the argument (that I've seen here before as well) that if you care think Brexit is the biggest issue facing the country you're comfortable and therefore don't understand the plight of the country's housing problem (or the NHS or whatever it is this week) as if they're unrelated things that won't get worse thanks to Brexit.
Last edited:
The charade of pretending that Labour's position on this issue isn't to placate the pro-Brexit ideology of the leadership is becoming increasingly difficult to sustain.
Not sure what you mean, at the time most commentators predicted a Remain win and it was a genuine surprise to many in the big cities that Leave won. Cameron only called the referendum because basically every source was calling that he'd win, they did so right up til polling day.
Hell even Farage was saying on polling day that Leave losing wouldn't mean the campaign was over. He was resigned to it.
Last edited:
Leave was ahead in the polls though. I think what may have thrown people was the Scottish Referendum and the last minute swing to No even though Yes was ahead in the polls. So maybe the media were guilty of interpreting the polls as being under representative of Remain when in fact they were accurate.
Corbyn is driving me fecking crazy. Are the majority of the country giving two fecks about the social status of journalists right now? Is that the kind of big button message that is going to swing voters across to Labour? For christ’s sake, all he needs right now are a few big, well planned policies to improve people’s everyday economic situations, and a strong position on Brexit. Instead we keep getting this ideological wank that allows the media to slap him around for a few more weeks before the next one comes along.
The media have treated him despicably, but they’re not suddenly going to stop now. He has to start messaging better and he has to do it now, otherwise the silly cnut will never see the inside of Downing Street and we’ll be stuck with these incompetent Tory twats for years.
The media have treated him despicably, but they’re not suddenly going to stop now. He has to start messaging better and he has to do it now, otherwise the silly cnut will never see the inside of Downing Street and we’ll be stuck with these incompetent Tory twats for years.
The membership is lapping this stuff up though. Do not forget that part of the project is gaining control of the Party (It could be said that this is the most important part). Corbyn and Formby et al need to appeal to the membership to get the new measures to do with leadership elections and deselecting MPs through Conference.
I agree Cameron thought when he called the referendum he would win, most of us did, but not the rest. As time wore on it was pretty clear from the polls and debates that it would be a close run thing.
I don't get this idea that somehow he's been treated badly by the media. I've mentioned before his predecessor in his role had his dead father attacked and smeared in the national press and his predecessor was ridiculed and belittled and accused of being unfit for office because of his disability. This pretence that the coverage of Corbyn has touched upon that due to reporting of the things he's said, the places he's been and the people he's associated with being deemed unhelpful to his cause is something I've little time for.
He's the leader of the opposition struggling against the worst govt any of us can remember, who doesn't engage with the media and only ever seems to have something to say when he's saying something utterly irrelevant at a time of pending national emergency. How do we expect him to be portrayed in the press? Far more competent people have been treated far worse very recently.
He's the leader of the opposition struggling against the worst govt any of us can remember, who doesn't engage with the media and only ever seems to have something to say when he's saying something utterly irrelevant at a time of pending national emergency. How do we expect him to be portrayed in the press? Far more competent people have been treated far worse very recently.
He is incapable of it and right now appears utterly incompetent. The sooner Labour get rid the better imo
John McDonnell towing the Farage line and warning of violence if a second referendum takes places.
“But despite those reservations, McDonnell insisted that the Labour party was not ruling out a second referendum and that another vote remained an option if parliament was deadlocked in the autumn.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-second-brexit-referendum-risks-social-unrest
Labour led by someone who wants to leave the EU "not ruling out" a second referendum is hardly a huge step in the right direction. There's more than enough ammunition for an opposition party to be campaigning tirelessly for a second referendum, necessarily lending its weight behind a movement that seems to have gained ascendancy in the field of public opinion entirely without any real mainstream political support. Other than the SNP and Lib Dems who are an irrelevance to most of and all of the country retrospectively, that is. Imagine if one of the two major political parties had been arguing for a second referendum for the last 12 months or so, what public opinion would be then on the issue.
Thanks for sharing that, great read. Bush is such a good thinker.
I think this is a case of having to wait for Corbynism to fail, which will be one, two or three elections away. Most likely two or three, depending on how close the next election is. I understand the moral dilemmas for the MPs discussed in the article, but FPTP just means that there’s no option bar ‘waiting it out’ in Labour or defecting to the Lib Dem’s. And the latter isn’t even really an option if you’re in a LabCon constituency.
Actually, Remain was narrowly ahead in the polls, the poll of polls in the FT had it as 48% Remain to 46% Leave on the eve of the vote. The YouGov poll conducted on the day of the vote predicted 52 - 48 in favour of Remain. Of the 10 polls that were taken between the suspension of campaigning after Jo Cox's murder on the 19th and the vote, 3 predicted a Leave win, and none of those 3 predicted Leave to poll above 45%. And, as Frosty said, the expectation was that Remain would get a higher vote than polled as voters tended towards the status quo last minute.
I think it's pretty cut and dry that the national media misread the mood, my contention is that the fact that the metropolitan middle classes are overrepresented in both print and broadcast media was a major factor in that.
I can't tell whether you're disagreeing with what I said but I agree with most of that.
So as far as both the polls and the result go it was indeed a close run thing.
As for the national media, most of the print media pretty much campaigned for Leave so I don't see how you can say they misread the mood. They did a lot to create the mood of course, but that's a separate thing. If some but by no means all of the 'metropolitan middle classes' didn't know what was going on maybe those ones should be asking themselves why?
What I'm saying is there's no point in blaming the media. Its decline - due to changing consumer behaviour - means there is a widening gap in in our civic politics. It is not clear what the answer is to that, but hiring more journalists or blaming them for being too metropolitan or middle class isn't it. The vast bulk of the print media will be dead in a few years.
Indeed... Studdy below shows 45% of articles pro leave... 27%remain and the rest mixed / undecided
http://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2016-05-23-uk-newspapers-positions-brexit#
What a load of bollocks, any tax of any sort all goes into the same pot. Ends up paying for the NHS, in general.