Quoted for truth #41 47
This wasn’t online when we wrote this morning’s piece, but it is now:
These are organisations Labour should surely be on the right side of.”
(“Record View”, the Daily Record, 8 Jan 2014.)
This wasn’t online when we wrote this morning’s piece, but it is now:
These are organisations Labour should surely be on the right side of.”
(“Record View”, the Daily Record, 8 Jan 2014.)
Yesterday the Labour Party’s representatives in the Scottish Parliament voted against a motion to provide free school meals to all Scottish children in Primary 1 to Primary 3, and to increase childcare funding for two-year-olds. They did so barely 48 hours after angrily demanding that the Scottish Government provide better childcare – an issue which Labour had explicitly tied into the independence debate by using an opinion poll commissioned by the “Better Together” campaign.
Fortunately for Scots, Labour is a totally impotent force in the Scottish Parliament, and its opinions and actions there ultimately count for nothing. Thanks to the SNP’s majority, the motion passed and hungry children living in poverty will get at least one hot, nutritious meal a day, without the stigma of being marked out as poor.
But after the blanket media coverage of Labour’s calls over child welfare, you’d expect that the arithmetic of the vote would merit at least a passing mention when Scotland’s press reported the story. Wouldn’t you?
What a week it’s been for respect. Here’s today’s Telegraph:
Maybe when you’re on holiday it doesn’t count or something.
Looks like the dastardly SNP have succeeded in digging that giant trench from the Solway to the Tweed and sailing Scotland off towards its Nordic neighbours. Poor England, according to tomorrow’s Mail, is now an island.
We have a feeling, readers, that the Scottish edition won’t be carrying that headline.
Since we’re talking about The Independent today, we thought those of you who don’t follow us on Twitter or Facebook might like to see their latest editorial cartoon.
No, we’re not making that up.
The Independent is the most English newspaper in Britain. Alone among the nationals, it has neither a Scottish edition nor even a Scottish news section. And for the vast majority of the time, it acts as though Scotland simply doesn’t exist at all. (Or, perhaps, as if Scotland was already independent and therefore none of its business.)
So it’s perhaps not altogether surprising that on the rare occasions it dares venture north of Luton, it invariably makes a gigantic ham-fisted hash of it.
We weren’t going to post today, but we couldn’t let this one just sneak past under the cover of Christmas, because the way the story has evolved this week says so much about how the pro-Union media operates and what we’re up against.
That’s the delightful Fraser Nelson, unfathomably-accented editor of right-wing commentary magazine The Spectator and the living embodiment of our own Sir Jock Finlay-Urquhart-Duncan in his youth. A couple of days ago Mr Nelson wrote the most extraordinary leader column for the magazine, and then things unfolded.
…and you haven’t got time to think of a misleading headline or laboriously rewrite a “Better Together” press release into something that might just about pass for actual news reporting if viewed fleetingly in poor lighting conditions, you can do nearly as good a job of distorting the truth with just a quick C-switched-for-W keypress.
It’s a real Scottish-media time-saver!
Ask anyone who knows about such things and they’ll tell you that not only is the headline the most important aspect of an article, but often it’s the only part of it that people read at all. It’s a fact worth bearing in mind when you scan the media coverage of the main Scottish politics story of today.
Today’s special referendum supplement in the Herald gives another run-out to the well-worn “women don’t like Alex Salmond” line much beloved of the Scottish press. It’s rare indeed that a month goes by without some mention somewhere of the fairer sex’s supposed dislike for the First Minister’s occasionally somewhat gallus nature, and today’s example is very much of its type.
“Yes campaign struggling to attract women voters” runs Magnus Gardham’s headline, and curiously notes of the paper’s poll findings that “the Scottish Labour leader Johann Lamont emerges as a potential asset in appealing to women”.
Why “curiously”? Well, let’s actually have a closer look at those stats.
We bought the digital edition of the Herald today on the promise of a 20-page “Scotland Decides” pullout, and were most disgruntled to find out we’d been swindled – you get the Sport supplement with the electronic version of the paper, answering every question you could imagine about the Rangers AGM, but not the referendum one.
That meant all the content we’d paid good money for was locked behind the Herald’s online paywall, where it’s a complete chore to access from mobile devices like the iPad we’d downloaded the digital edition to, because evidently the paper holds its techno-customers in lower esteem than news-stand purchasers.
So to save anyone else the same irritation, we’ve dug out all the articles we can find from the pullout and archived them for easy access. We don’t like doing this sort of thing wholesale, but if you’re going to steal our cash on false pretences then sod you.
Someone asked us yesterday for some facts and figures to help them with a debate, and it got us remembering one that we never see being brought up, perhaps because it’s buried in the archives of the Herald under Sport > SPL > Aberdeen (no, really).
It’s a piece that pre-dates the Scottish Parliament (and is written in a style that makes it seem older still), but it’s a complete mess of broken formatting, clearly the victim of numerous website redesigns, and painfully hard to read even when rescued from behind the paper’s paywall.
So we’re going to preserve it for posterity here in a cleaned-up, more user-friendly presentation, because it’s pretty much dynamite.
Wings Over Scotland is a thing that exists.