Bless Them That Curse You
The media - red in tooth and claw like a Campbell on the trail of a Gilligan or a Downing Street spokesbeing driving a David Kelly towards the cliffs - hunts like a feral beast, tearing people and reputations to shreds. Tony says it, so it must be true. His reverence believes that media standards have declined since 1997, when many journalists attacked his opponent, but said his speech was "not a whinge about how unfair it all is", even though many journalists are now attacking him. His reverence believes that this regrettable decline has caused the extended, joined-up sofa interface that is British public life under New Labour to be "damaged in a way that needs repair". It would have been so much better had it been damaged in a way that didn't need repair, but life can be cruel sometimes.
His reverence particularly deplored the Independent for being "avowedly a viewspaper not merely a newspaper"; unlike, presumably, the Sun and other stalwarts of the Murdoch stable of objectivity. His reverence deplored the "confusion of news and commentary" which apparently prevents many journalists presenting the simplest Downing Street leak from the appropriate angle, and said that the damaged relationship between the public and himself "reduces our capacity to take the right decisions". I'm afraid I have neither the urge nor the gastric fortitude to read the sermon in full, but I have no doubt that his reverence was careful to specify which wrong decisions he took as a result of the media's feral pressure.
In speaking of the decline in public trust, his reverence may possibly have had in mind a poll which found that only seventeen per cent of Britons now believe that the government "can be trusted to put the interests of the country ahead of their party". Given Tony's idea of the interests of his party, this is perhaps a little unfair; Tony has rarely, if ever, hesitated to sacrifice the interests of Labour party members in the service of British interests, so long as the interests were appropriately vested. More surprising is the fact that, despite the best efforts of the feral beast, the belief that "official figures are distorted to support leaders' arguments" is held by only sixty-eight per cent of the populace. Noted historian, Shakespearean and military strategist Andrew Marr ("I want to put the Macbeth option: which is that we're so steeped in blood we should go further", Observer, April 18, 1999) noted that it was wrong to confuse a decline in deference with a rise in scepticism: "Deference is about social status and I think the end of deference is almost wholly to be applauded. This shows that authority and respect have to be earned", as in the case of Rupert Murdoch, the People's Princess, Andrew Marr, etc.
Simon Kelner, the editor of the Independent, replied to the Vicar of Downing Street's sermon by noting that the newspaper "whether it be news or views, was the product of its editorial staff, and was untainted by allegiance to a political party", like the Sun, "and uninfected by proprietorial influence", the need to turn a profit being quite outside the owners' remit. Simon Kelner also regards his reverence's mention of the Independent as "a vindication of our stance on Iraq". The Independent's stance on Iraq is that the war is a "mistake".
His reverence particularly deplored the Independent for being "avowedly a viewspaper not merely a newspaper"; unlike, presumably, the Sun and other stalwarts of the Murdoch stable of objectivity. His reverence deplored the "confusion of news and commentary" which apparently prevents many journalists presenting the simplest Downing Street leak from the appropriate angle, and said that the damaged relationship between the public and himself "reduces our capacity to take the right decisions". I'm afraid I have neither the urge nor the gastric fortitude to read the sermon in full, but I have no doubt that his reverence was careful to specify which wrong decisions he took as a result of the media's feral pressure.
In speaking of the decline in public trust, his reverence may possibly have had in mind a poll which found that only seventeen per cent of Britons now believe that the government "can be trusted to put the interests of the country ahead of their party". Given Tony's idea of the interests of his party, this is perhaps a little unfair; Tony has rarely, if ever, hesitated to sacrifice the interests of Labour party members in the service of British interests, so long as the interests were appropriately vested. More surprising is the fact that, despite the best efforts of the feral beast, the belief that "official figures are distorted to support leaders' arguments" is held by only sixty-eight per cent of the populace. Noted historian, Shakespearean and military strategist Andrew Marr ("I want to put the Macbeth option: which is that we're so steeped in blood we should go further", Observer, April 18, 1999) noted that it was wrong to confuse a decline in deference with a rise in scepticism: "Deference is about social status and I think the end of deference is almost wholly to be applauded. This shows that authority and respect have to be earned", as in the case of Rupert Murdoch, the People's Princess, Andrew Marr, etc.
Simon Kelner, the editor of the Independent, replied to the Vicar of Downing Street's sermon by noting that the newspaper "whether it be news or views, was the product of its editorial staff, and was untainted by allegiance to a political party", like the Sun, "and uninfected by proprietorial influence", the need to turn a profit being quite outside the owners' remit. Simon Kelner also regards his reverence's mention of the Independent as "a vindication of our stance on Iraq". The Independent's stance on Iraq is that the war is a "mistake".
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home