Recently in Media Category

Another extraordinary round of cybernat activity is drawn to my attention, this time on an article about Holocaust education. For some reason, there are people out there who believe that the Holocaust (6m+ dead, less than 60 years ago) is less relevant than Glencoe (78 dead, more than 300 years ago):

I've long bemoaned the poor standard of discussion on newspaper websites, with slavish, abusive and irrational SNP supporters usually the main culprits. A challenger arrives today, though, on this Telegraph article (note: I hit the complaint button, so the comment may disappear). 

Now, plenty of cybernats use appalling comparisons, with Brown normally compared to Mugabe using the super-clever phrase "ZaNu Liebour", but this comment goes right to the classic idiot's favourite - Hitler. 

Now we're to have a proper Scottish TV channel, we need a Scottish version of the Daily Show. I am a massive fan of Jon Stewart, who mixes absurdist satire, rigorous fact-checking and whimsical face-pulling in equal measure. But who would front it up over here?

As a recent convert to RSS, sometimes there's just too much to read. Make time for spEak You're bRanes, though. It's like the Cybernats times Private Eye's Dumb Britain, filtered through the Daily Mail, and is of course a Chris Morris reference. The content comes from the BBC forums. The final part of this is magnificent. And here's a little Day Today, just because.

Regular readers will know I am a fan of Alan Cochrane's writing, however much I disagree with his actual politics. 

Despite the ascent of Salmond to power as the "new king of Scotland" (and I think we can all agree that he's better than the "last king of Scotland"), the cybernats remain full to bursting with bile and bad puns. I think everyone else has left the Scotsman and Herald discussion boards to them, now they're such polluted spaces.

In their eve-of-poll programme, Newsnight Scotland tonight again had representatives from Labour, the SNP, the Tories and the Liberals. Their lengthy roundup of the campaign showed campaigners from those four parties, plus a moment where The Curran Sisters met. Dr Eileen Duke, our candidate (left), was simply airbrushed out.

Surely not? Not another high-profile departure?

This article was sent in speculatively to the Scotsman around the half-anniversary of their green masthead edition. However, it didn't make the cut. I can see why. The tone didn't exactly fit with theirs.

"Six months ago The Scotsman made one of those very rare and striking changes to its masthead, turning the paper very visibly green, and partnering with the SNP government on the environment.

The public were invited to make ten modest pledges, from reducing car usage to turning the taps off while brushing their teeth.

Since then the paper has provided a substantial contribution to reporting about a range of environmental crises, including the threats to Scotland's seas, to the Balmedie dunes, and to our bees. One morning, readers were warned that the nuclear weapons at Faslane could explode in sequence as part of a phenomenon called "popcorning". Hardly a single issue has gone by without some discussion about climate change.

Those same six months have, however, seen almost total inactivity from the SNP government. Where is the environmental leadership they promised? On transport, they rammed through the M74 Extension despite opposition from the local community and every environmental group in the country, while letting bus fares rise and blocking progress on the railways.

Any occasional step forward is more than offset by some new step backwards. Several new wind projects have been cleared, and last week the SNP announced a renewables research joint project with the Irish Green Party's Minister for Energy. However, the previous press release had heralded "Scotland's largest ever coal supply contract", tying us into a long-term commitment to the dirtiest fossil fuel there is.

Most scandalously, the SNP manifesto pledged binding 3% annual cuts in greenhouse gas emissions. Before their Climate Change Bill even came to Parliament, that's been dropped. At best, Salmond and Swinney have gone native. At worst, they recognise that they could never make cuts even that timid with their current policies on energy, food, transport and so on.

It's now up to Parliament to improve this legislation, otherwise the best we can hope for is that SNP Ministers keep brushing their teeth with the taps off."

My friend Adam recently had the pleasure of meeting Jon Stewart of the wonderful Daily Show.

Or, more accurately, it looks like the rest of the media have a problem. The most recent Scottish circulation figures from the ABC show pretty consistent drops across all titles since the last time I looked at this, back in December.

To pick some semi-random examples, the News of the World is down more than 7% to 279,674, the Mail on Sunday is down 8.5% to 110,357, and the FT is down almost 7% to 5,151.

Now, maybe the month of June is a bad one for sales, with people too busy watching Euro 2008 etc. I can't tell because I don't have access to their trend data.

But even so there are two exceptions to these numbers that I've spotted. The Telegraph, up 3.7%, and the Sunday Telegraph, up a fraction. Could it be some inexplicable Cochrane effect?

BT is of course Brian Taylor, one of the few authoritative Scottish political commentators. He's famous also for his love of Dundee United, despite the evidence, and his affection for brightly coloured-braces (tartan at left: Disney is more usual). His blog is highly recommended, and always fair-minded, as per the football affiliation discussion here. However, nothing's appeared on it since July 5th.

And why the silence? I'll let Brian's out-of-office explain:

I am currently on leave. I will be back in the UK on Tuesday July 22. Just in time for the by-election. And the Labour leadership. And the LibDem leadership. And any other vacancies which may emerge. Urgent inquiries meantime should be addressed to the newsdesk on 0141-422 7800.
Brian Taylor

Personally, I think all of Scotland's other leaders are pretty secure, even Annabel. That's despite Brian Monteith (remember him?) calling for her to be deposed in favour of Murdo Fraser or Gavin Brown. Don't worry, Brian, I don't see your holiday being disturbed by that.

So Murdo MacLeod, Scotland on Sunday's longstanding political correspondent (and tech correspondent, and Gaelic correspondent, well you get the picture), had his leaving do last night.

Drinks were taken, more by some than others (I still want to hear what Mao's point was, Mark).

Murdo's away to work for a substantial oil company in Kazakhstan, and despite him being the bane of my life when I worked for the Parliament's first two Presiding Officers, I'll miss him.

When I say "bane of my life", what I most obviously mean is this article, which appeared ten days after I started work in Parliament.

It was factually correct, except for the species of oak, their colour, the number of them, the cost (massively less), their likely country of origin, the status of contract negotiations at the time. Oh, and the final price of the project, which sadly went a little higher than £280m while I was there.

There's a lot of debate going on about where aircraft carriers should be built. But surprisingly, given the £4bn cost, no debate about whether they should be built.

This despite many in the near-pacifist left in the SNP knowing that the carriers are designed, in the Navy's own words, to provide "a coercive presence worldwide".

So late last night we chipped in, arguing that the carriers shouldn't be built at all, and that the skills on the Clyde and the money from the Treasury should instead be redeployed to develop cutting-edge renewables industries and other similar green tech.

The prize for the best response goes to the following, found in my inbox this morning.

"Are you suggesting that we shouldn't be spending billions on the world's biggest floating cocktail party venues? Where will Prince William be able to land his jets? This all sounds dangerously close to treason to me."

"Green politics matter now more than ever. It is not woolly to be green at this time. It has never been more hard-headed. The crisis over the oil price is just one of many indicators that it is even more imperative to wean ourselves off fossil fuels and make the radical moves necessary to become a low-carbon economy. The fortunate countries of the future will be those with political and business leaders with the foresight to plan for that world by encouraging investment in clean and renewable energies, carbon capture and green transport."

I do disagree with the statement before that, though. But I recommend you read the whole article. Right through to the last perfect paragraph.

Unlike my old man, who wears his kilt nearly daily (see Mackenzie tartan to the left), I only seem to find myself in one when I'm about to encounter drink. Weddings, mostly. Or, once a year, at the Scottish Political Journalists' Association dinner. 

Last night I went to the first of the Scotsman's current round of big debates, topic: the constitutional future of Scotland. Even though the paper's editor admitted these events are a cynical attempt to boost circulation, they are also a good contribution to the gaiety of the nation. Here's how I think all the participants did, in order of appearance.

1. Michael Crow (moderating). After a very funny introduction, equally scathing about all the politicians on the panel, he adopted a pretty hands-off approach. This worked well, except where it didn't. See #9 below.
   
2. Malcolm Chisholm (Labour). Having been described as "a serial resigner", with all the licence that implies, Malcolm gave a pretty wet performance. Under the vagueness, I believe a man of principle lurks, but he didn't even make hay when invited to oppose Trident. Also claimed it was now clear what Labour's policy is on the referendum. How we laughed.
   
3. Patrick Harvie (Green). My unbiased view.. no, wait, I can't pretend I have one. Best line of argument: if Scotland and the rump UK were both EU members, we'd have twice the voice when we agree, and when we don't, the UK wouldn't be making the case against us on our behalf. Backed this up with Eurovision argument that an ex-UK could be a powerful voting block.
   
4. Prof Tom Devine (History). Very interesting, the only outsider perspective and all the more valuable for it. Also worked out that if you more or less swallow the microphone you can intervene on anyone. His book's for sale.Tom, now you owe me a tenner.
   
5. Margo Macdonald (Margo). I always think Margo comes across as persuasive, much as I find her politics frustrating. However, a voice next to me, when asked about her, said simply "demagogue". Certainly speaks her mind clearly, which makes her more interesting to listen to than many on the panel.
   
6. Nicola Sturgeon (SNP). Didn't set the heather alight, but a decent performance from the Deputy First Minister. Spent too long talking about the ins and outs of various polls, though, and wasn't clear about whether she wanted a low-tax, low-services Scotland, the Irish model, or a more Scandinavian approach. They do talk about both, but we can't have both. Did her best to be conciliatory with others on the panel.
   
7. Nicol Stephen (Liberal). Again, it's hard to be unbiased. Patrick pointed out that the Calman Commission is a creature purely of three parties, not the people, and Nicol more or less agreed. He made the odd argument that the Liberals wouldn't necessarily even back a referendum on that Commission's own proposals. Incoherent, unpersuasive, and only had one friend with him, if the clapping is anything to go by.
   
8. Murdo Fraser (Tory). Michael Crow told us Murdo had gotten into politics because his school was short a Tory for a mock election, and it did indeed feel like inertia had carried him all the way from that to the party's deputy leadership in Scotland. He had a good moment where he declared himself a devolutionist heretic, but wouldn't go further for fear of a handbagging.
   
9. The Audience (SNP). With a few honourable exceptions, like the young man to my left who put the panel on the spot over nuclear weapons (an actual issue, an issue, thank God!), the audience were poorly prepared, confused, or just plain bonkers.
   

We got interminable history lessons about the Claim of Right instead of questions about what independence should be for, we got discussion of a sticker from the window of a British Midlands flight (no, I don't know either), we got what would have been a run-through of every historical event since the Darien project. We got depressed and dispirited listening to people who simply adored the sound of their own voice.

At least half of the questions reminded me of the approach taken by the SWP and the SSP in their heyday - monomaniacal oddballs entirely unaware of the effect of their approach. It was like seeing the Herald's and Scotsman's online comments sections in person.

Other than that, though, I had a good time, a decent busman's night out. Thanks to the organisers for their efforts.

Here's today's short piece about the debate, and I think David's doing a longer one for tomorrow. Links to other blog reviews will follow. Come on Kez, don't tell me you're actually working today!

I read Peter Hitchens' blog fairly regularly, because however wrong I believe him generally to be, I think he's sincere, and also a good writer. Every once in a while (and I racked my brains to think of the last time) I find myself agreeing with chunks of his stuff.

I meant to stick this up yesterday, but was too busy blogging other things working. Patrick put in another great appearance on Newsnight on Monday night, trying to drum into the SNP's head the idea that oil is running out, and that's why prices will inexorably continue to rise. Why worry about that, though, when you can make a short-term cut the costs of fuel and postpone any efforts to tackle the root causes? That seems to be the Nats' position.

Note that it took Patrick to explain the role of the Competition Commission. Enjoy the muted ramblings of his SNP debating partner at the end too.

 

Here's a great bit of London analysis, covering the effect (the cliche is "corrosive") that the Standard's election campaign had on the mayoral election, and the dubious level of public understanding that the Standard certainly aggravated.

In particular, the circle jerk goes as follows.

Andrew Gilligan was "resigned" from the Beeb over the David Kelly affair, and rehabilitated by Johnson at the Spectator. He then moved to the Evening Standard, where he led an unapologetic campaign to "get Ken unelected". The Standard is part of the Daily Mail family, as is the dire London Lite. The decision on which free rag gets given to Londoners on the tube is coming up, and will be taken by.. Mayor Johnson.

So the whole thing is best understood as a battle by a propagandist and rabidly right-wing rag to protect its control over its audience. Boris may or may not be Cameron's loyal puppet, but he's definitely Associated's puppet. Think about it. "Dave" may or may not be Prime Minister when LOLBoz is up for re-election in 2012, but the Evening Standard will be there for sure, ready to re-elect him or destroy him as circulation demands.