Quoth the raven, nevermore
Did something really dramatic just happen without anyone noticing? Yesterday we passingly noted a curious new trend in the Scottish media: that of Unionist papers complaining that the problem with independence is that it isn’t independent enough.
But it wasn’t until we went back and had a closer look at yesterday’s Daily Record that the full strangeness of the picture became clear.
The Record’s vitriolic attack on the Scottish Government’s transitional welfare plan was bookended in the print edition of the paper by two opinion columns – one a “Record View” editorial and the other an analysis by the paper’s virulently anti-SNP political editor Torcuil Crichton.
First, let’s have a couple of extracts from the former:
Crichton’s piece on the facing page doesn’t seem to be online (we’ve attached it below), but it more or less mirrors the View editorial line-for-line. Buried among Crichton’s usual anti-Nat seething, the key paragraph is the third from last.
But what on Earth could the Record be getting at here? It knows full well that “devo max” is still widely held to be the constitutional preference of most Scots, and while that hasn’t actually been backed up by opinion polls for quite a while it’s certainly true that in a three-way choice the status quo is the least popular option, with support for independence and devo-max combined nudging the 70% mark.
Why, then, is the avowedly Unionist Record effectively encouraging devo-max supporters to back independence by telling them that a Yes vote is really a vote for safe, cuddly, harmless old devo-max? Is it softening its readers up for what would be the seismic shock of coming out for Yes?
It seems almost impossible to imagine. But we’re at a loss to offer any other explanation – it’s hardly as if the Record can be hoping to persuade pro-independence voters to switch to No with such a line of argument. The only rational conclusion is that the Record has realised what we’ve been saying for months – a No vote will annihilate any hope of greater devolution.
The paper has for months been bitterly attacking the coalition’s welfare reforms AND Labour’s gutless opposition to them, in particular Labour council evictions over the bedroom tax and the vicious assault by Atos against the disabled. Could it be that it’s finally seen that One Nation Labour offers Scotland no alternative within the Union, and the only hope for the Record’s beloved party is to be rejuvenated by independence?
That, of course, is something else we’ve been saying for a long time. The quality of Labour representation in Scotland is in a death spiral, with its Holyrood benches being filled by an ever-more-dismal collection of D-list seat-warmers and over-promoted councillors. Independence would radically change that picture, with the party’s Scottish A-team (these things being relative, of course) returning from Westminster to replace the current diddy team, and future Scottish talent being drawn to Holyrood rather than London.
A few days ago the Record even ran an article by Labour For Independence leader Allan Grogan, titled “Labour greats turning in the grave”, about Alistair Darling’s appearance at the Scottish Conservatives conference and Ed Balls’ betrayal of Labour values over welfare.
Could it be that the Record’s loyalty to Labour outstrips even its loyalty to the Union, in a situation where the latter might imperil the former? A few months ago we picked up on its Sunday sister paper seemingly doing a little bit of tentative ground preparation, and the Mail’s pleas back in February for less fear and more positivity from the No camp have gone unheeded.
The Record coming out for Yes would be almost as unthinkable as another totemic icon of Britishness leaving the Tower of London. But perhaps, from their windows overlooking the Clyde, the men and women of Central Quay can see the tide turning.
Nah, it’s just another stick to beat the Yes campaign with.
It’s a really rubbish one, then.
I disagree Rev.
Its the “Nothing will change so why bother” gambit…
They hope apathy and despair will prevail
A good piece and I hope it proves to be accurate. An alternative explanation could be that the Record is staffed by clueless morons. Just sayin’.
No, it’s none of these things, it’s just that they haven’t thought through the consequences of their position. The fact that this has been a theme in all the unionist papers suggests that it’s been led from BT HQ. Seems likely in view of their numerous comms faux pas that they haven’t considered that criticising the Yes side for being insufficiently independentist doesn’t put off committed Yessers but attracts those who are wavering.
I’d say the clueless morons analysis is the most likely explanation.
The importance of Labour for Independence cannot be overstated. And that the Record chose to publish that (fantastic) piece by Allan Grogan does seem another straw in the wind of change.
We shall see
The other possibility Rev Stu, is that is the start of a softening up strategy to con the electorate to vote No and get a Devomax bounty from our trustworthy and super honest Westminster Executive?
We all know that such an offer could not be made to be 100% fulfillable but remember we are talking Perfidious Albion here and they are arrogant enough to believe we, the unwashed northern savages, would swallow it hook line and sinker.
And that final paragraph, does anyone understand what it means? talk about laboured.
Could the Record be trying to hint to Unionist Parties…”Quick..change tactics and start promising Devo Max style promises” to swing them towards a safe “Devo Max + Same” No instead of “Devo <ax + unknown Yes” coalition
Does anyone believe that individuals political opinion is influenced by the Daily Record?…Scottish Labour on the the other hand,,,,
@Scott
I tend to the same view. But …
… this position DOES allow for a shift of support by the paper without it seeming a total U-turn (Papers position in August 2014 becomes “Vote YES for full powers” – “No we haven’t U-turned, look at what we were saying in June last year”). In other words, they are preparing the paper to jump whichever way the wind is blowing.
The Herald is also playing both horses (both publicans are not outright YES, but have some mixed messages that could be perceived as looking both ways) with the HoS being far more objective in its coverage lately as a contrast to much of the more rabid articles during the weekly editions. Even Gardham has had a couple of articles that were not anti-SNP diatribes.
Watch this space, says I
Scott Minto:
“Apathy and despair” is surely good for the Yes campaign. Turnout is a key factor. If the No voters have been hammered by endless negative drivel many may actually decide the best option is not to vote.
It’s great that the press are attacking the Scottish government’s attempts to provide practical certainties (through minimal change, business as usual, Scottish policies, …) at a time when everyone can see Labour ditching core values.
@Scott Minto “Its the “Nothing will change so why bother” gambit…”. Sorry Rev. I have to agree with Scott on this one. This is the line being spun by Labour and Ken Macintosh in particular. The DR is just one element of a large unionist cabal tasked with keeping Scotland under Westminster control. I was at the Deeside YES Q&A last night and along with another person in the audience, put my concerns over the BBS and the press in general to Blair Jenkins. Blair acknowledged that there was a problem with some newspapers, but said that if YES Scotland felt the BBC was displaying bias then there were appropriate channels they could follow. I said that unless we can sort out this black propaganda now, we will lose referendum. Quite a number in the audience agreed with that prediction.
The idea of Labour MPs ‘returning’ from Westminster to an Independent Holyrood holds a lot of problems for Labour.
Everything they didn’t do, but should have done, will come up for scrutiny.
When the 50 or so Labour MPs should have been working together to secure better conditions for Scotland, they weren’t really doing much at all.
I would look to all the political capital they made from the Thatcher policies and the damage these did to Scotland. But when Labour had complete control of Westminster for 13 years, they didn’t demand a share of the oil and gas revenues to regenerate and retrain workers in Scotland; I can;t really think of any specific policies Scottish Labour came up with.
We know that Devolution was designed to stop Independence, so that is hardly positive for them, and one of the costs was the redrawing of the Maritime boundaries, by Donald Dewer and Tony Blair, to move a further 6000sq miles of Scottish Sea into the England sector, ( just in case).
Scott, Bill: I think it’s very hard to disguise these lines:
“If what the SNP mean by ‘independence’ is really devo max or home rule then they should have the courage to say so. That would put the party bang in middle of mainstream Scottish opinion and change the game completely.”
The words “what the SNP mean by” don’t suggest a call to vote No. They suggest a barely-veiled plea to the SNP to just call independence something else so the Record can back it without being embarrassed about switching.
@Sapheneia says:
Scott Minto:
“Apathy and despair” is surely good for the Yes campaign. Turnout is a key factor. If the No voters have been hammered by endless negative drivel many may actually decide the best option is not to vote.
Can’t agree on two counts: 1. Apathy is the last thing we in the YES camp want. We need a resounding YES vote to ensure that Westminster don’t try to pull a 40% con trick.
2. “endless negative drivel” is having an effect, it is strengthening the no vote. I have spoken to a good number of folk who actually believe what the unionists are peddling.
The lies, smears and distortions must be effectively countered.
If Labour MPs ‘return’ from London (and many of them seem to live there and visit their unfortunate constituencies), there will be a bloodbath when it comes to selection.
When unitary councils were created, there was blood and snotters on the carpet in Edinburgh as LRC and EDC councillors vied for the reduced number of seats. I imagine Glasgow must have been the same.
Unfortunately, there was no social media then.
This time – buy popcorn and sit back!
@ Rev. I genuinely hope I am wrong and you are right on this one Rev. Your journalistic instincts might well prove me wrong and I sincerely hope that is the case.
By the way, I think the DR article is more of the Better No “there’s nae point, we’re a’ doomed” narrative.
However, if they overplay it, their vote won’t bother to come out. We have to make sure the Yes vote do get out. Certainly, our voters will be more motivated!
It’s Schrodinger’s Newspaper. It’s potentially supporting both Yes and No, but we won’t know which until the ballot box is opened, the superposition is resolved and we discover that they supported whatever the people of Scotland voted for.
Oceania has always been at war with East Asia?
They will Bowdlerise their archive?
@Sapheneia
Unfortunately it would be wavering Yes Voters it would put off…
Wavering No voters wouldnt think they are losing anything by voting no and yes ones would think whats the point in voting.
This is somewhat close to what happened in the Ukraine & Russia, the old guard Russian loving politicians worked and manipulated back into “dubious favour” then started dismantling the Independent minded Ukrainian system, gradually replacing it with the “Russian friendly” system they have long employed.Of course aided and abetted by the Russian government, and their “services”.
Who says labour could not do the same? Could Alex Salmond have charges trumped up against him ie a terrorist! and held in Barlinnie in solitary!
Similar again to what has disgracefully been done against the leader of the Independence movement in the Ukraine.
I would never doubt that labour having won a mandate in Scotland under whatever auspices would work again under Westminster instruction to re unite the UK, Scotland be dammed, do not think they could not once more be bought for English Gold, high expenses, house of Lords, coveted Uk positions etc. History may be repeated.
I would never, after all they have done during this campaign, trust them with anything ever again. Scotland needs opposition parties but not labour as it stands today, or in the foreseeable future.
I have thought for a long time that the Daily Record might change its stance. Even if it becomes generally more open to the idea over the longer term then I would see that as being a welcome positive. Nothing wrong in holding those in power to account – but the same needs to be applied to the opposition as well. Deeper analysis into stories/news would be very welcome. There is a place for good journalism in Scotland now and into the future. Fail to deliver and people will switch off/not buy your product and in the end they would only be listened to a handful of Scottish Tories with regards to politics coverage.
@Rev
Perhaps… or alternatively a ploy to say what the SNP really want is further devolution just in time for WM to ride up and offer (to maybe think about offering) devo max
Could it be they have hold, via a pie and a pint, of the H on S sales figures since the No rhetoric was nuanced down?
“I genuinely hope I am wrong and you are right on this one Rev. Your journalistic instincts might well prove me wrong and I sincerely hope that is the case.”
If someone can come up with a better explanation for why the Record would say “devo max is great”, and then immediately say “a vote for independence is really a vote for devo max”, I’m all ears.
Record View – Nov 11th 2011
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/voters-need-a-straight-choice-1086179
A major new poll suggests public opinion is evenly split between three different visions of Scotland’s future.
According to the survey, roughly similar numbers back independence, the status quo and so-called “devo max”.
But how reliable are the findings? On the face of it, it seems strange that devo max proved so popular.
The plan would put Holyrood in charge of almost all taxation and spending in Scotland while leaving Westminster to handle foreign policy and defence.
Beyond that, details are vague. No one knows how, or even if, it would work in practice.
There are even more unanswered questioned about devo max than independence and, tellingly, no political parties support the idea.
The high level of support enjoyed by devo max is all the more surprising given that the poll’s “status quo” hasn’t actually happened yet.
Significant new financial powers are already coming to Holyrood, though they won’t take effect until 2016.
Under the new arrangements, MSPs will have to set a Scottish income tax rate to make up for a cut in Scotland’s grant from Westminster.
It is a radical shift, designed to make Holyrood more accountable for the cash they spend.
And all the main political parties, including the SNP, have voted for it – so the lack of public support, before it has even begun, is a bit of a mystery.
Or is it? Perhaps this poll tells us more about psychology than politics.
Perhaps it confirms what experts have long believed – that the middle option in a vote like this has an in-built advantage.
If so, the poll raises further doubts over Alex Salmond’s plan for a multi-choice referendum.
The sooner he scraps the idea and promises a straight “yes” or “no” choice on independence, the better.
Ever so slightly o/t (hope you’ll forgive me Rev?). Here is a copy of my complaint to the BBC re. tonight’s Question Time and its’ propaganda in general: “I am absolutely disgusted (not for the first time) by the continuing bias of BBC Question Time in favour of the union. Tonight’s programme panel is biased 4 to 1 in favour of the union. Also, apparently Mr. Nigel Farage the leader of UKIP is to appear, a politician who has no representation in Scotland and Mr. George Galloway, a politician who has been rejected by the Scottish electorate. Both these politicians are known for their hatred of Scottish independence and they have absolutely no relevance in Scotland. Further as a BBC licence payer, I wish to complain in general about the constant anti-independence bias of BBC Scotland in general. The continual, insidious, anti-independence propaganda which BBC Scotland passes for serious journalism is an affront to democracy. It is a form of mass manipulation of its’ audience of which Joseph Goebbels would be proud. It also ironic that the BBC is quick to condemn such practices in dictatorships all over the world, yet happily peddles such dark arts in Scotland. I look forward to your comments on this matter!”
Just totally sick to death of living in a country where the state broadcaster punts PRAVDA like propaganda on a daily basis. However, I will not hold my breath on waiting for a reply, I am still waiting for a reply from a similar complaint last October. Holding your breath for that length of time can seriously damage one’s health!
D’you think somebody might remind them that devo max was removed as a possibility by their heroes and hailed as a masterstroke of political strategy by Moore and Cameron? Or mibbies that devo max doesn’t offer the possibility of a constitution or removal of nuclear weapons? Maybe these journos (and I use the term advisedly) should also remember that foreign affairs and said defence would still be under the remit of Westminster under devo max.
I’ve heard this bandied about a few titles ‘the Scots want to keep….’
Crown, currency, share of embassies, welfare admin, pandas….. etc.
So in that order the union of crowns pre dates the parliamentary union and unfortunately is already a separate piece of legislation. As I understand such things her maj is Elizabeth Queen of Scots already. Its not about wanting to keep, its what she already is.
Currency union is beneficial to both countries in the short term but more so for the BoE and the UK exchequer. It also gives us a bit of a bargaining chip as well as ensuring a smooth transition and trade continuity. The embassy share is a no brainer FFS, they don’t grow on trees and don’t just appear overnight and the fact that we helped pay for these assets kind of gives us the option.
Welfare administration equally not really hard to fathom. Not only do we administer a good deal of England’s benefits in Scotland, but it will take time to put in place the divergent policies, rates and spend which will be the natural outcome of independence. Now some people may be happy with bringing about overnight carnage north and south of the border, others actually take the time to consider such effects and plan for smooth if lengthy transitions, with the least amount of pain involved possible.
‘Course if you work for the daily whatever… considering another P.O.V is probably not in the contract. Nah, I’m not so sure they’re turning yet a few chinks of light just may be the false dawn.
I think it is a tactic of the No campaign, and most of the MSM, to say that the SNP’s vision of independence is not actually eh independence. I have heard this from Darling and other Scottish Unionists. I think Sneekyboy is correct in his view.
That said it just shows what a complete mess the No campaign has made of the whole more powers issue. From the moment they publicly rejected Devo Max (whether it is even deliverable another question) it became increasingly likely that the Scottish Government would plan the White Paper to be as close to Devo Max as possible. This is because they knew that support for independence and Devo Max combined is running at around 70 per cent in Scotland. If this is confirmed in October or November (when is the White Paper being published?), then Unionists have almost a year to explain to the people of Scotland why independence Devo Max style is so wrong. Good luck with that…. 😀
@ Bill C
A 50.01% Yes majority will win independence. Let’s not get too carried away with conspiracies. Credit to Cameron putting the process in a legal agreement and abiding by the outcome.
Turnout is key. There will be diminishing returns with negative campaigning. There are 15 months to go of this. How negative will it get? It’s a bit like a house of cards – once it begins to crack the whole lot falls apart.
You are absolutely right about rebuffing the drivel being peddled.
Here’s how it goes, according to Luigi:
Imagine devo max and Indy Lite as two points of a big pincer. Ever since the second question was ruled out, the unionist politicians have no means of escape. Since 2011, AS has been gently coralling them all into a sticky trap. They have become bogged down in negativity. With the devomax escape route no longer at their disposal, all they can use is constant negativity and increasingly ridiculous scare stories. The status quo is no longer acceptable to the Scottish public, and they know it, hence all the futile hints of something they cannot now even promise.
The final manouver is for devomax and Indy Lite to converge. Out of foolish knee-jerking and sheer frustration, the unionists claim “it’s not fair, what you are advocating is not real independence”. The silent majority, the devomax supporters, those still a bit worried about full independence are listening. And -SNAP – the trap is shut. If they never saw it coming, when the could have done something about it, they certainly do now!
In the next year or so theres gonna be more flip flops seen in the Scottish Media and heard from Unionist Parties than on Benidorms new prom!
Everyday seems to be another “DONT PANIC!” moment. All the while, the YES Campaign are thinking “Not yet…not yet…soon…soon
Well if the BBC are to invite Nigel Farage on QT alongside George Galloway then this programme won’t be about Scotland.
Bigotry combined ego may make good TV but it is certain that these two old boring farts will turn off the young audience.
Honestly the BBC don’t give a $hit about Scotland.
Max…all the better….they will wake up the day after the YES vote and think “How could we have got it so wrong?”
What a depressing thought; the labour “A” team from Westminster replacing those in Holyrood. For the likes of Curran, Davidson, Murphy & Sarwar, who continue to argue most vociferously for the union, a wicked witch of the west-style, evaporation, never to be seen or heard again, would be preferable.
Nigel Falange and Gorgeous George on the same QT panel, in Scotland too.
I wonder if Gerry Springer will a late shoe-in?
It is a fekin joke and we are paying them to take the piss.
Crichton seems to have done quite well for someone who clearly didn’t bother to read the report he cites.
@Luigi
That is how I pretty much see it as well.
@Max
Galloway is only concerned that with Scottish independence,he will be viewed as a foreigner by Londoners in his bid for fame and fortune.
Salmond does seem in fact to be offering home rule. Every announcement seems to go along the line of there wont be much change, just as long as we get control of the financial levers. The daily Record, looking on will say well if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck. There is a chance that if Salmond keeps travelling along this vein then the D.R. may just say, well why not!
I think it’s just deception. i.e. The SNP proposals are a shambles. Vote No and we’ll get a proper devomax style devolution settlement.
The truth of course is we’ll get bugger all-probably a reduction in the powers of the SP.
Re. Question Time, if Farage and Galloway are two cheeks of a bombastic, demagogic, narcissistic, Unionist arse, I really hope Anas is sitting between them.
Having read the D.R. editorial again, it is accepting that Devomax/ Home rule is the accepted will or wish of the majority of Scots, so will that put them in the same place as those individuals for whom the status quo is unacceptable?, They know the Unionists will offer neither option so they will need to make a decision at some point and I think that they may eventually switch to a YES.
If papers like the Record start saying that the proposed SNP policies are Devo Max or Home Rule then they do run the danger of undermining the daily scare fest from the Oh No! We are Doomed! brigade.
To me the vote in 2014 is for independence. This stands free from NATO, the EU, the Pound, the Monarchy and current UK systems. The party(ies) we elect in 2016 will determine the nature of policies applied regarding things like NATO etc., We are not voting for a once and for all policy on every fecking issue on the 18th of September 2014. We are voting for the right to choose our own policies thereafter on every fecking issue. I think people really need to understand that.
Critics want to know what an independent Scotland might look like and the SNP have a range or reports and policies that reflect their vision. The SSP and the Greens also both want independence as do some Labour members and some Tory members. Their vision of what an independent Scotland would be like is different. From 2016 onwards those competing visions will argue for votes to implement their blueprint. Westminster will cuddle up to parties in Scotland that they think will align with their wants and needs just as they do at the moment with other countries. The only thing that should be agreed is the Scottish Constitution. That will be the framework enshrining law, rights and politics. All the rest is subject to negotiation and circumstance.
I hope Nigel Farage gets the chance to explain the benefits of dissolving the Scottish Parliament for more direct Westminster rule. It’s really good to hear the views of someone who potentially represents 25% of the southern vote. These are the views that matter after a “No” vote and everyone should learn that.
@Sapheneia says:
@ Bill C
A 50.01% Yes majority will win independence. Let’s not get too carried away with conspiracies.
Sorry can’t agree. The figure you quote is the nightmare scenario and could well lead to civil unrest.. Can you imagine how organisations like the OO, the SDL, The BNP and the NF might react to such a slim majority?
As for conspiracy theories, I don’t think anyone would accuse Margo MacDonald of being into corn circles, yet she only recently warned of MI5 involvement in our referendum. Margo like many older nationalists (self included) will no doubt remember the dirty tricks waged on nationalists in the seventies and eighties. As I have said before on here, I have personal experience of how ‘our’ security forces operate and it was not nice.
I would make three points:
1. No one should doubt the seriousness of how the British Establishment view the spectre (their interpretation of Scottish democracy in action) of Scottish independence;
2. The danger of civil unrest in the event of a slim majority in favour of YES. Westminster’s security forces will have organisations like the OO primed for just such an outcome.
3. The above is not conspiracy, nor scaremongering, is it fact based on bitter personal experience of how perfidious Albion operates.
Anyone had a dog who dutifully sits whilst you eat a biscuit in your arm chair.
He waits and waits dutifully focusing on that biscuit you are eating and then you put a morsel on the chair arm, the one opposite where he is sitting. He sits and stares until he decides to move to the other side, at which time when he is distracted you move it to the other arm rest.
That is what the bastards are up to.
Now you see it, now you don’t.
It is all an illusion.
Vote No and get Hee Haw except gang raped by Westminster.
@Bugger (the Panda)
“That is what the bastards are up to.
Now you see it, now you don’t.
It is all an illusion.
Vote No and get Hee Haw.”
SUPERB!!!
In my opinion the Scottish newspapers have got to be concerned with their own mortality.The circulation free fall that they’re in won’t change after the referendum, Yes or no. They will continue to dive unless they come up with a cunning plan.
That plan seems to be to try and have a foot in both camps until they know what side is going to win, deviously clever it is not.
I could be wrong.
With the kind of stuff coming from the BBC, Herald, Daily Record etc., I wonder where Scotland would be on the Press Freedom Index – the UK’s at 29th place.
OT
Seems the Better Together Facebook is having a Likes day. 76 Likes over the last ten days, and just today, over 100 (and rising fast) since this morning. Someone has seen Yes Scotland`s Facebook leap ahead by 13,000 Likes.
I definitely smell shite.
Our local Yes Scotland leader said at our last meeting that he had been told that the newspapers perceive that anti-independence scare stories sell papers, and that’s why they do it. I have no information as to whether that is true or not.
Sorry Rev, but I wouldn’t credit the Daily Record with enough brains to think along the lines you suggest. And, even if it had them, it certainly wouldn’t risk being ahead of the curve – the polls are still showing the ‘Yes’ vote bringing up the rear. Like all newspapers at the moment, the Record knows it’s only chance of survival is to cling to its core readership. It won’t risk alienating that by conducting a fundamental political about face.
No, I’m afraid I’m with those who see this as just a new and interesting way to ridicule the Nats. It has thought no further ahead than the next day’s edition.
and BTP has just been reported to the SSPCA 🙂
Seems the Better Together Facebook is having a Likes day.
They’ve just paid for another facebook ad. The fact they need to pay for ads to attract anyone says it all. Yes don’t yet are generating far more interest.
Each BT ad has generated progressively less interest (law of diminishing returns). Also, they tend to generate interest for YesScotland but with a slight lag as, presumably, people visit BT, then go have a look at Yes (which is what you do unless you are a solid unionist).
Note that if people go to facebook and click the ad (should appear to the right) through to the BT site, it will not automatically generate a like. It will generate a small charge for BT though.
Morag says:
13 June, 2013 at 11:41 am
Our local Yes Scotland leader said at our last meeting that he had been told that the newspapers perceive that anti-independence scare stories sell papers, and that’s why they do it. I have no information as to whether that is true or not.
Jeez Morag I suppose you are scientist and are applying the norm of scientific proof?
At least I am assuming boldened question is about whether negativity sell newspapers or is about whether they believe to do so. A causal affect cannot be proved certainly on the first part but if the H on Sun is seeing sales climb recently and in parallel with their more nuanced not quite YES stance, I think we can probably conclude it does not?
I doubt its a change in the Record, its more likely that they’ve had norsewarrior on their boards and she, Doris, has promised to go away if they print her theme song.
Independence -Devomax style, would enable a Scottish government to question and debate Scotland’s view on UK defense and foreign policy, and of course funding. And Scotland would be required from taxes raised directly in Scotland, willing or not, to openly part-fund a Trident replacement and potential future illegal wars.
Scottish Labour, in government or opposition, would likely bow to Westminster demands, whereas I doubt that an SNP government or opposition would.
Devomax will not calm the political waters.It would be a fork in the political road, pointing to either full independence or assimiliation by Westminster (again).
Noting the variety of views expressed over what the Record is meaning, who knows, maybe their journalists are confused.
Note that if people go to facebook and click the ad (should appear to the right) through to the BT site, it will not automatically generate a like. It will generate a small charge for BT though.
The more people that click through, the higher the cost per click.
Now if, e.g. 60,000 people clicked through each time there was an ad….
Morag – I would say newspapers think scare stories sell more papers in general, not just in regards to the indy debate. That’s why they all love a “X will give you cancer” type story.
@Bill C
Maybe I have more faith in the great Scottish public to abide by the result of a democratic vote. I can’t see any civil unrest after either a slim No or Yes vote. Scots do abide by the law. We are not a nation of violent rioters and looters.
Rev Stu
I read the Record’s pieces and I saw them as spinning a different message to your musings. My take was that the Record was saying that since the SNP/YES campaign is more or less saying that (according to them) nothing important is going to change why bother with Independence so vote NO.
Mind you it would be good if you were right as it would be a major coup if it DID come over to our side.
@ Scott Minto I think you have it right. All the hand wringing not sure voters will be saved by WM charging in like John Wayne with the cavalry to save them at the last second. They will fall on their knees thanking them For the Devo Max option.
Scottish_Skier
Note that if people go to facebook and click the ad (should appear to the right) through to the BT site, it will not automatically generate a like.
Thanks for that. Very interesting. Yeah, I stay well clear of ad clicking on the BT Facebook page. I just add up the likes. As we both know, Yes Scotland, slow and steady, always upwards and onwards (usually by the hundreds).
The default setting for No seems to be stagnancy and, on average, maybe (and I`m being generous) a dozen Likes a day.
Some real belters leaving comments on the BT page, though. I can imagine reading that guff has resulted in more than a few Yes votes in 2014.
If scaremongering sold papers, you would think they could sell a lot more by genuine scare stories about the union
If someone can come up with a better explanation for why the Record would say “devo max is great”, and then immediately say “a vote for independence is really a vote for devo max”, I’m all ears.
I suspect it is to hold on to it’s readership among a certain demographic, especially in the west of Scotland, who are suspicious, if not against Independence. If you paint Independence a different colour e.g. “blue” (hint), then it’s more palatable for that certain demographic and the Record retains it’s readership.
Les Wilson/Vee Mack
History may be repeated.
I would never, after all they have done during this campaign, trust them with anything ever again. Scotland needs opposition parties but not labour as it stands today, or in the foreseeable future.
I’m with you both there – I sincerely hope that ALL the unionist parties and their MP/MSP’s are given their P45’s (Holyrood & Westminster) and 2016 will bring forward new parties in Scotland. The thought of any of the desk thumpers at Holyrood and ermine chasers at Westminster having any form of responsibility of governance in a newly Independent Scotland would make me very unhappy indeed.
Sorry but do people seem to think the simple Yes / No vote to independence is going to be modified by someone? That sounds deluded to me. If the Scottish people do not want to govern their country and it be recognised under international law then that is their choice. If people can’t be persuaded to take up that universal right then they have to take the consequences imposed by the vast rUK majority.
@yesitis
Over the past month (no BT ads)
BT = 22 L/day
YesScot = 245 L/day
BT even had a ‘negative’ day where more people unliked than liked. The unliking is interesting. Is rare as hen’s teeth for Yes, but regular with No.
OFF TOPIC AM I THE ONLY ONE BEING AFFECTED BY THE SUN?–that big round thing in the sky.
THE UNEMPLOYMENT FIGURES FOR THE WHOLE OF THE UK. show a drop of 5000, the same figure for Scotland is 6000—6000 minus 5000 leaves 1000—does this mean there are now 1000 more people unemployed in the remainder of the UK.? Blame it on old age and the sun but for me the figures do not add up. I surely must be mistaken for as far as I can see no one else has questioned these figures in relation to the employment figures for the rest of the UK., please help, my head is beginning to birrle.
If by some miracle my reasoning be correct we most certainly are better together, in the eyes of the Westminster regime, as it enables them to disguise the failure of their economic policy, if there be indeed a rise in unemployment in the rest of the UK. at this time.
I have seen an occasional BT advert/link appear on various sites. They are still trying hard.
@les calthorps
THE UNEMPLOYMENT FIGURES FOR THE WHOLE OF THE UK. show a drop of 5000
Was down 5000 in the ‘UK’, down 6000 in Scotland. So, using my abacus, that means up 1000 in… I’m surprised we’ve not had:
SNP accused of causing rising unemployment in England
Recently released figures show SNP policies are driving down employment in England, pushing jobs north to Scotland.
Newspaper like bad news and they like bad news that gets the hackles of their readership. The Daily Mail in England is forever banging on about immigrants and “lefties”. The Col Blimp UKIP types get their daily fix of righteous rage and the Mail has once again pandered to their readers’ prejudices. The Hootsman has tried to carve a similar right wing Unionist pitch for itself in Scotland and regales its perceived audience with evil nationalist horror stories. The Record is staunch Labour..if Labour softened its stance on independence then the Record would follow in a flash. Torcuil would still hate the SNP but he would be advocating a Labour run independent Scotland. So the question is, I suppose, does the Record perceive a shift towards Devo Max amongst the Labour insiders or is this just some ill conceived attack on the SNP?
To be honest it could be either and both.
I feel that there’s a subtle change from a year ago with a more nuanced or mixed view of the value of the Union or the status quo – now only the Scotsman seems to remain rabid, followed by the BBC perhaps. STV’s 3 part road to referendum is quite surprising for mainstream coverage too.
On an unrelated note, but showing the value of small nations:
“The top three most peaceful countries are Iceland, Denmark and New Zealand. Small and stable democracies make up the top ten most peaceful countries.”
taken from http://www.visionofhumanity.org/
I think it is not a very good idea top ascribe overmuch the personal perspective to what journalist write in Scottish newspapers, or even UK ones.
Journalists are just political whores with word processors and can only publish what is the party line of any particular journal the work on.
Tell them that they have to do a piece of 2,000 words for tomorrow on there being a real man alive on the moon and they will do it. They need to pay their bar bill too.
Brewer is much the same, I have the feeling that he is given a line to take by somebody higher in the Food Chain at the BBC and he has to do it.
Anybody seen Issy Fraser recently??????
You don’t get anywhere on BBC News and Current Affairs in Scotland without following the party line. Most of the journalists are on contract anyway, so their services can be dispensed with, as is thought “political.”
The key to it all is the stranglehold that Labour, egged on by the Tories and the LibDums, have on manipulating the news agenda in Scotland. London knows it is happening but either condones it or has other problems on their hands. Think of how the MOD sit on their fat erses in Whitehall, gumming up the pension plan, whilst the cannon fodder at the front line get poor equipment and conditions. Whitehall aka Westminster aka the SE England don’t give a monkey’s about anything outside their bubble, unless it pops and covers then in ordure.
It is not an issue until it becomes a problem for them.
Newspapers just have to sell enough to satisfy the profit requirements of some distant board of directors and even more distant shareholders.
The Johnson Press on the other hand are doing it deliberately but, who is paying them to commit financial suicide? Ask Margo?
Rant over,
red biddy time
a supporter,
since the SNP/YES campaign is more or less saying that (according to them) nothing important is going to change why bother with Independence so vote NO.
Indeed, but in their panic they forget the law of unforseen circumstances. Are people not equally, or slightly more likely to conclude:
“Why not then? I’m voting YES!”
WM has been used at least twice on here. What does it stand for?
Scottish Skier
It was down 6,000 in Scotland, 5,000 in Northern Ireland, static in Wales and up 6,000 in England. I’m not sure why this was not made clearer in the newspapers. Michael Moore’s comment about their policies working is bizarre. The bit of the country they have direct control over did worst of all.
The problem for the MSM telling people not to bother voting for independence (coz it ain’t really independence), is that you then have to make them “bothered” to vote against it. It ain’t going to happen. Why bother voting NO?
Anyone not particularly bothered or worried about independence is unlikely to be bothered enough to go out and vote NO next year. They will abstain.
“WM has been used at least twice on here. What does it stand for?”
WestMinster.
SNP accused of causing rising unemployment in England
Recently released figures show SNP policies are driving down employment in England, pushing jobs north to Scotland.
And I think the blighters in the Scottish government are doing it deliberately.
Thanks Rev.
“Anybody seen Issy Fraser recently??????”
Landru (aka John Boothman) has absorbed her into ‘The Body’. She can be seen meandering outside Pacific Quay repeating to passers-by ‘Are you of the Body, friend?’
Star Trek buffs will know what I’m talking about 😉
O/T
Is there an Eleanor Bradford alert out today? I’ve heard her voice on every BBC in Scotland broadcast today.
Schadenfreude is an unfortunate trait in the human race which means that doom and gloom and mayhem are paramount drivers of the media’s business model. Happy clappy stuff is of no interest to them except on the feel good, travel and holiday pages.
I think this is the key sentence:
“The problem is that it [independence] begs the question – why bother dismantling the UK if so much of it is going to stay in place?”
That seems to say vote No, you might as well. Or is it vote Yes, you might as well? I’d take a Bayesian view: the a priori probability of the DR supporting independence is very close to zero. One clumsily ambiguous sentence has no power to change that assessment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayesian_probability
@ Luigi
I agree with your take on this.
Given the critical importance of the referendum in Scotland’s history I think there may be an alarming number of people who do not vote. The message of “Yes” means minimal change (and not real independence) at a time when the Labour Party abandon core beliefs must be good for the independence vote.
I have come to the conclusion that Lamont is not in Holyrood to lead Labour or espouse policies or hold the Government to account but rather to each week use FMQ to pitch the latest No Scotland mantra…plus call Eck fat or something. Baillie just brings up the rear each week.
Wullie is…well, Wullie :-/
Ruth, bless her does actually try to discuss the political issues of the day. I’m not a fan of her and even less of her party but she is the only one that actually acts like an opposition leader.
FMQ – Johan Lamont quoting Monty Python … C’Monty Fuck!
Then Austin Powers. This is a woman and a party who expect to be taken seriously!, Seriously?
The Westminster parties are all projecting themselves as advocates of more Devolution whilst at the same time, ruling it out. Not since One Man and his Dog was required viewing in the Ghaf household, have I hear so many dog whistles.
Also…Johann said the Union gave us the Monarchy….hmmm…i dont believe thats the same Union now it it?
Sapheneia says:
@Bill C
Maybe I have more faith in the great Scottish public to abide by the result of a democratic vote. I can’t see any civil unrest after either a slim No or Yes vote. Scots do abide by the law. We are not a nation of violent rioters and looters.”
No offence, but have you ever seen an Orange Order march if full swing? Have you ever been on the receiving end of
Glasgow Labour and Monty Python LOL 🙂
When did Life of Brian first get an airing in a Glasgow movie house? 2008ish?
Bill C
The OO might bump its gums for a bit but I think they would abide by a majority decision. There might be marches and protests for this or that but I think one of things that McWhirter highlighted in his documentary was how orderly the Scottish protests were in the 70s, 80s and 90s compared to elsewhere.
“Ruth, bless her does actually try to discuss the political issues of the day. I’m not a fan of her and even less of her party but she is the only one that actually acts like an opposition lead”
@Hand & Shrimp
Indeed, much like Auntie Bella, whom I liked. They both benefitted from never having to risk being in government, so could be better in opposition. At what point will Labour face how toe cuttingly bad Lamont is?
@ Bill C
Yep seen the full OO show and actually spent some time working in Omagh where they used to take these things to a higher level. I was an atheist from quite a young age – it started when I was about 8 when the little primary school I went to had to walk to a larger primary school to get our lunch (and have all sorts thrown at us). The two schools were differentiated on “religious beliefs”.
I don’t give a flying f$ck what these groups do or say. They are an increasing irrelevance.
DevoMax is not on the table and even if it were none of the LabConLibs would agree what would be in it.
But even the one version that has been going around of all powers except Defence and Foreign Policy seems a bizarre choice.
The effect of these two powers are is something people in Scotland definitely do not want. That is retaining nuclear weapons and become involved in wars such as Iraq and Afghanistan.
In fact the UK’s Foreign policy looks very like that of the US .
I would be grateful if anyone here can give an explanation of why people believe leaving these powers with Westminster would OK.
People marched to stop the Iraq war and this was ignored, so any idea that Scotland could influence Foreign policy is fully delusional. That’s not part of the package.
Some might argue that an Independent Scottish military would not be big enough to defend us, but the most likely reason we would ever be attacked is being part of the UK and its Foreign Policies.
@Sapheneia says:
@Bill C
“Maybe I have more faith in the great Scottish public to abide by the result of a democratic vote. I can’t see any civil unrest after either a slim No or Yes vote. Scots do abide by the law. We are not a nation of violent rioters and looters.”
With all due respect, I wonder have you ever seen an Orange March in full swing? Have you ever experienced their venom towards supporters of independence? I have. I had to intervene when one of their ‘stewards’ raised his baton to hit my mother as she made the mistake of trying to cross their lines. I also made the mistake of taking my two young sons (at the time) out on an SNP cavalcade through Bridgeton, they were terrified as the bottles and bricks rained down on our car. Needless to say, I wasn’t too chuffed myself!
Ulster Unionist politicians with links to paramilitaries have already been in Scotland talking to their brethren about how they can offer ‘support’ in defending their union.
We are not talking about ordinary Scots here, we are talking about bigoted fascists from Northern Ireland (and our own home grown variety) who specialise in terror to ensure they get what they want. Ignore such scum at your peril.
We could see lamont following the theme of this article during todays FMQ’s, she ofcourse made a complete hash of it, and Alex Samond just trashted her. It was very embarrassing to watch as she stupidly followed her script regardless of the replys our First Minster had given her.
If she ever became FM God help us.
Vote No – get nothing.
Vote YES – gain your country.
Hail Alba.
First Minister’s question today isn’t available on BBC i-player.
Anybody have the link for it?
@ SCED300,
It will be up here later today – might not be until this evening however.
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/newsandmediacentre/32362.aspx
It would be interesting I reckon to see market research on who the Scottish newspaper buying public are.
I think editors are currently experimenting with editorial lines to see which boosts sales in these days of decline. It wouldn’t surprise me too much if they discovered that those on the Yes side were more likely to be engaged in politics and as a result more likely to buy newspapers in the run up to the referendum.
Well with the caveat that papers containing stories that are more “pro” indy or softer on the Yes campaign rather than full of the No camps “threats” (what else is it to claim borders will spring up and dual nationality refused? After-all the Yes side don’t want those so presumably they will not be a Scottish Govt negotiating position and rather something demanded by WM?) and “scare stories”.
If Nats bought the papers when there was a positive story about the Yes vote than I suspect it offers the opportunity to send quite a clear message to the folk who write and own those papers. One that through sheer self interest might make them less partisan for the No campaign.
Worth considering that.
@Sapheneia
Sorry my first post was cut short (either my fault or my computer’s?). You obviously have experience of the OO in public and that’s fair enough, however, it’s what they get up to behind the scenes that worries me.
@HandandShrimp – I may be wrong but I think the marches you refer to in Road to Referendum were either CND, trade union, anti-Poll Tax, pro-Devolution etc. etc. Not pro-union, loyalist or OO marches.
This Better Together trick of them paying the ad company that takes them to their site to like – say a penny per clickthrough – is interesting.
Potentially then if I use an ad to get to their site click like – then unlike – then use an ad to get to their site click like – then unlike etc. then Better Together would be a good few pence short just from me doing a few clickthroughs in a minute. And their likes tally would be no better off 🙂
And if everyone done that on the yes side, it would cost the Better Together campaign a fortune and they’d end up ditching the ads and help stop their gerrymandering of their figures.
Is that how it works?
Just to add my twopence worth.
I would like to think that Rev. Stu is correct but until I see a lot more evidence of pro Indy sentiment from the DR I am afraid that I will plant my flag firmly in the “Aye Right!” camp.
“I would like to think that Rev. Stu is correct but until I see a lot more evidence of pro Indy sentiment from the DR”
I didn’t say they were turning pro-indy. I said their loyalty to Labour might be greater than their loyalty to the Union.
@Endless Psych
I agree in part but that doesn’t reflect the fact that a whole lot of pro independence folk have given up on the printed media completely and switched to the Internet for their information. This is would skew the figures for pro Indy sales.
FMQ’s Always come up late if the opposition has had a slap or two
Lamont is now reported as saying Independence isnt Independence so why bother…
Inserted into a piece about how Alex Salmond has promised to ditch the Bedroom Tax if elected in 2016 to an Independent Scotland…
Well Lamont, there is your proof its different!
A BritNat is a Britnat is a BritNat – some will change and go pro-indy if they think it’s in their own best interests; but TC is a raving, supine Westminster-in-awe- worshipping British nationalist and it’s just a vaseline technique before the elephant is called on to stage.
@Rev.Stu
You are as always correct.
I have never quite fully understood the DRs stance on Labour. I sometimes meet a (now retired) former Record columnist while out walking the dog. I haven’t brought up the subject (yet) but years ago when I read his column I sometimes wondered if he was writing under a false flag. I am (very gently) probing him for his view on independence.
The problem with folk involved in the process of winning a ‘Yes’ vote is we tend not to stand back and look at the bigger picture.
The reality is that New ‘Blue’ Labour is in melt down across its UK activist base with high profile ex-members blogging about why they have given up on New ‘Blue’ Labour I wrote about this increasing meltdown in my Tarff Advertiser Blog a few days ago: Summer time, and leaving Labour is easy …
If I am sitting in the Record Editorial office I will be seeing both the posturing press releases from a fracturing Labour Party, I will not be missing more and more Scottish Union Branches tending towards supporting ‘Yes’ nor will I have missed the clear implication from the ‘Better Together’ side that a ‘No’ vote means a reduction of Holyrood to a talking shop.
Labour have now tied themselves up, in their own spin and lies, in the Donside campaign with their ‘ripping Aberdeen off’ approach and car crash over the Haudagain Roundabout. The wheels are coming off Scottish Labour where Matheson in Glasgow is being directly accused of cronyism of the worst kind over the placement of a disgraced councillor as chair of SPT.
The reality is, can the Record, with a declining sales trend, continue to support a Labour party line that sees the Scottish Parliament wrecked for no other reason than spite, by a party which is seen in Scotland as increasingly untrustworthy and daily being exposed as such by disgruntled ex-members?
The Record is now fence sitting, all of a sudden devo-max is the bees knees, from a paper that not long since was supporting the ‘No Devo-max’ option for the referendum and trumpeting it as a disaster for Salmond and the SNP. The Record’s editorial problem is the ‘No’ campaign have no devo-max option available, they painted themselves into that corner early doors.
The Scottish media are seeing the indication of how the Scots electorate is thinking. They run negative ‘No camp’ stories readerships plunges, they run balanced pieces (which tend to hurt the No camp) their circulation picks up. A far better barometer of Scottish opinion than any sample poll from Mori or the rest.
The real message to the media is we, the Scots electorate, are not the too wee, too stupid, too poor numpties being lead by the nose by Salmond, the No campaign wishes to protray. The media is learning this where it best impacts on them, in their pockets.
So to the fearties out there: just where does the Record’s sudden wish for ‘Devo-max’ belong and is your glass really half empty?
MJMM – CyBOS?
@ Mad Jock McMad,
Great comment – love it 😀
O/T or is it?
BBC QT Loses the Plot. Edifying episode now to be English ratings-chasing bunfight between 2 nut-jobs.
Look, the EU are going to insist we drive on the right.
Westminster are going to say we can’t have it both ways…independence AND driving on the left.
It’s not real independence anyway unless we change this anachronism of empire from our transport system
The SNP need to come clean on this…..and what are the DETAILS of the transitional arrangements?
Until I get full disclosure of the details and a full assessment of the implications for the future, I’m voting for the normalcy of the least change option….it’s a “yes” for me.
I didn’t say they were turning pro-indy. I said their loyalty to Labour might be greater than their loyalty to the Union.
Their unctitical support of Gray followed by Lamont makes that an absolute racing certainty. They would back Assad for Hillhead if he wore a red rosette.
Roddy Macdonald That link in your blog goes to a New Statesman story, not the Speccie. Fine succinct piece though. 😉
Bill C says:
Great letter to BBC Bill, always sending similar complaints but not half as eloquent or articulate.
Thanks, Lurker – corrected.
@Mad Jock McMad
Excellent comment and really enjoyed your Tarff Advertiser article.
@Mad Jock McMad
Cracking post Mad Jock. Couldn’t agree more.
@AHamilton
Thanks for the kind words.
Isn’t the Daily Record’s complaint just more evidence of the standard unionist retreat into shameless self-contradiction?
They tell us we’ll be kicked out of the EU and isolated, but nonetheless our EU payments will rise, and we’ll be forced to adopt the Euro and join Schengen and be ruled from Brussels even though we won’t be EU members.
They say we are all equals and the best of friends and allies, but if we dare to not be governed by Westminster anymore then they will boycott our trade, refuse to let us use our own currency, steal our pandas, bomb our airports, and (most insultingly of all) deliberately withhold intelligence on potential terror threats that they would (I hope) share with any other nation.
Now they’re saying: “I don’t want a pepperoni pizza, but if you expect me to eat the pizza you’re making then you better put loads of pepperoni on it. Otherwise, what’s the point?”
I haven’t read the comments, but…
“But perhaps”
Mmmmmneh. This is so implausible an interpretation that I assumed Stu was subtly taking the piss out of Crichton’s editorial.
Shinty says:
13 June, 2013 at 12:10 pm
Les Wilson/Vee Mack
“I would never, after all they have done during this campaign, trust them with anything ever again………… The thought of any of the desk thumpers at Holyrood and ermine chasers at Westminster having any form of responsibility of governance in a newly Independent Scotland would make me very unhappy indeed.”
Hear, Hear Shinty, Les and Vee, the very thought that the Westminster troughers could come swanning back here and try and take over leaves me cold. In my book they’d have to appear before a truth and reconciliation committee, to explore their past roles and performance, before they ever got a sniff at a public office again. As for letting them interface with Westminster on Scotland’s behalf ……ye gads.
I would ask any unionist politician or person saying we should vote no in 2014, (and give no reason for us to do so that I have ever seen or heard articulated and I read a lot!), I would ask why not just vote YES, why oppose a vote and cause “uncertainty’ (ha ha) if it doesn’t matter and what being offered ‘isn’t Independence’?
The article has reached the correct conclusion in my opinion because it points out very clearly that the daily record is itself looking for a middle ground to go for because of all the reasons related to labour in Holyrood and especially at westminster, and it is the daily record itself that has the problem, it can hardly expect the SNP or Independence supporters to go for an option of dev max that isn’t on the table.
There is a warning here for the no campaign, the amount of stupid baseless allegations and innuendo over the EU or the pound (remember the boasts about the AAA rating by the uk?) makes big headlines and slowly sees the claims undone by time and admittedly less bombastic headlines rather than a shy article tucked away in a corner online or in print.