Wings Over Scotland

There’s some very strange counting going on in the Times today. Firstly the paper carries a story about a survey of potential shale gas deposits in the central belt, and arrives at a very gloomy conclusion (“Modest deposits shake hope of shale bonanza”):

“Scotland has a modest amount of shale gas and oil reserves but far less than are believed to be in the north of England, a new report has revealed.

The official British Geological Survey (BGS) analysis estimates that there are six billion barrels of oil and 80 trillion cubic feet (tcf) of shale gas across the central belt of Scotland which includes Glasgow and Edinburgh.

The potential shale gas reserves are a fraction of what scientists have said are in the Bowland area of northern England where it is estimated that 1,300tcf of gas exists beneath the ground. The UK already uses 3 tcf of gas every year.”

Hold on a minute. We’re not fans of fracking, but 80 trillion cubic feet? If the UK uses 3 tcf of gas a year, presumably Scotland, with 8.4% of the population, uses roughly 0.25 tcf a year. 80 tcf into 0.25 tcf suggests that the shale gas thought to be in the central belt would cover Scotland’s use for 320 years, which seems quite a lot.

Read the rest of this entry →

One of the features of the independence debate as covered by the Scottish and UK media has been the casual lie. We’re not talking about screaming banner front-page headlines here, but the passing, offhand untruths slipped into articles that are primarily about something else, or tiny little corner-of-a-page pieces so trivial that readers absorb the falsehood in seconds and move on.

We covered a good example of the latter last week, and it’s repeated in this morning’s Times, in a piece which makes the flatly and diametrically untrue assertion that “experts” have “produced figures suggesting that the final cost [of setting up an independent Scotland] could be £1.5 billion”, when the reality is that the only expert who has produced figures has explicitly rubbished that number.

But it’s another article in the same paper that made us smile wryly.

Read the rest of this entry →

It seems somehow fitting that there was a political battle in Stirling yesterday. The city was host to two sets of military-themed festivities, with the UK government having decided to hold Armed Forces Day there in a move transparently aimed at wrecking the commemorations of the 700th anniversary of the Battle Of Bannockburn.

The anniversary was obviously on an immovable date and location, but the Labour-Tory coalition that runs Stirling Council, and which last year attempted to replace a Saltire which flies over the statues of William Wallace and Robert the Bruce with a Union Jack – a plan it abandoned after it was highlighted by this site – agreed to host the competing festival on the same weekend.

Armed Forces Day had free admission to undermine the relatively pricey Bannockburn event. Labour even went so far as to actively try to put people off attending the latter, with Glasgow MP Ian Davidson suggesting that the commemoration was nothing more than a glorification of “the murder of hundreds of thousands of English people”. (These particular “people” being an invading army, actual English casualties around 10,000.)

The press covered the subsequent downsizing of the historical recreation with glee, with numerous articles reporting low ticket sales and other problems right up to the eve of the show, which appeared about to be a major flop.

But then something odd happened.

Read the rest of this entry →

You might be able to find fault with the Scottish tabloid media’s honesty, readers, but you can’t criticise its brevity. Take this page 2 piece from this morning’s Daily Record.

Just a few dozen words squeezed into five short sentences. Let’s see how many lies the Record’s unnamed reporter manages to get across in them.

Read the rest of this entry →

Sorry, readers, we’re getting addicted to these.

“Better Together” spokesman, 27 September 2013:

“David Cameron does not have a vote in this referendum. Alistair Darling does. He is ready to debate Alex Salmond any time and any place.”

Letter from Danny Alexander MP to Alex Salmond, 30 Jan 2014:

“Alistair Darling, leader of the Better Together campaign, has said he is willing to debate with you, as leader of the pro-independence campaign, anytime, anywhere.”

The Herald, 25 June 2014:

“Better Together, the pro-UK campaign led by Mr Darling, reacted angrily after STV indicated it was willing to change the date at the request of the First Minister. A senior Better Together source said Mr Darling would take part on July 16, as agreed, but not at a later time to suit Mr Salmond.”

(Our emphases in all cases.)

Read the rest of this entry →

Here’s “Better Together” communications director Rob Shorthouse this morning:

And here’s the Telegraph this evening (our emphasis):

“Plans for the first proposed Scottish independence TV debate between Alex Salmond and Alistair Darling have collapsed in acrimony following a row over the date.

The pro-UK Better Together campaign withdrew from the contest, complaining that STV was allowing the First Minister to dictate when the show would be broadcast.”

We’re always willing to believe that “Better Together” are lying, because they usually are. We’re always willing to believe the Telegraph is lying, because it usually is. But on this occasion, ONE of them must be telling the truth. Frankly, readers, we have no idea what to think.

Read the rest of this entry →

Last week the Press & Journal carried a story about a debate held at the Aberdeen Exhibition & Conference Centre, attended by just over 150 company directors, senior managers and other “business leaders”. The debate was between John Swinney and Danny Alexander (with contributions from Professor David Bell and businesswoman Christine O’Neill), followed by a poll carried out among the audience.

The No-friendly headline figures – which will come of no surprise to anyone who has ever read the Press & Journal – said 68% of the audience would be voting No at the end of the debate, with 16% Yes and 15% still unsure (1 person said they wouldn’t be voting. Maybe they walked into the wrong room at the start or something.)

That sounds like a pretty comprehensive win for No, so we should probably all just pack up our stuff and concede defeat.

Read the rest of this entry →

And welcome. If you’ve come to our humble little site to see the nasty man at the head of the “highly controversial cyber organisation” described in this hilarious article, there’s a couple of things you should probably know. Because – and we apologise if this comes as a shock to you – the Daily Mail doesn’t always tell the truth.

Read the rest of this entry →

The other day we highlighted a really good piece in the Scottish Sun, which while not perfect was a pretty decent stab at the sort of evidence-based journalism Scotland’s media should have been doing throughout the referendum campaign.

Today, not so much.

Read the rest of this entry →

Kerry Gill in the Scottish Daily Express, 19 June 2014:

“Think back to the Second World War, as we have all been doing this month in commemoration of the D–Day landings. The BBC was foremost in selling the rightness of Britain’s eventual victory to the rest of the world.

It was most certainly not unbiased or objective. If it had been, the German Gestapo and their Axis colleagues would not have spent all their days and nights trying to stop anyone from listening to BBC broadcasts.

Of course, you will say, the independence referendum is entirely different. We are not at war with each other. We are discussing the merits or otherwise of separation in a, mostly, sensible and grown–up manner.

It is the BBC’s duty to report all that is said and done without bias, and without favour to either side whether Unionists or Nationalists. But, for the reasons above, I don’t believe this should be so.”

Yes, you really did read that in a “Scottish” national newspaper, folks: the BBC should be biased against independence because it was biased against the Nazis. You can go ahead and follow that wee gem through to its logical conclusion yourself.

A number of papers today report a manufactured furore concerning some comments we made on Twitter a couple of days ago about Tory MSP Alex Johnstone while watching Scotland Tonight. The Herald, astonishingly, makes it the second-lead story on its website, with political editor Magnus Gardham gleefully seizing the opportunity to stick the boot in after being the subject of much criticism on this site.

The Times also has a large piece about the tweet and it gets a quarter page in the Daily Mail, while the Scotsman’s coverage is more muted – which is perhaps out of embarrassment at coming on the same day the paper had to grudgingly publish a belated correction and “apology” for two grotesque and utterly false smears about us last week. Even Holyrood Magazine gets in on the act, as does the Courier.

That’s all fine and good. Getting monstered by Unionist newspapers isn’t exactly a new experience for us, after all. But there’s something odd about all of the stories.

Read the rest of this entry →

The big story in most of today’s papers is the British Social Attitudes survey, which has discovered a whole bunch of things of absolutely no importance whatsoever.

The Scotsman, for example, highlights the fact that while Scottish people don’t want the UK to have nuclear weapons, if they’re going to exist then a sizeable number of Scots want them – and the hundreds of jobs dependent on them – to stay on the Clyde. (Though just as many want them to leave.)

None of which, of course, will have the slightest effect on anything.

Read the rest of this entry →