Today’s edition of The Times contains a textbook example of a phenomenon that we highlight regularly: how newspapers gradually unpick their own dishonest headlines to grudgingly admit a truth which is often the polar opposite of the initial claim.
Or as we more punchily tend to put it, “The Headline Is Always A Lie”.
This won’t take long.
The BBC’s Reporting Scotland is, in our view, directly responsible for at least 80% of Yes supporters’ belief that the UK’s state broadcaster is biased against independence. Almost all of the worst examples of unbalanced or downright dishonest coverage over the last five years come from the flagship teatime bulletin.
But last night’s edition made even the most wearily cynical jaws drop.
Let’s just take that in for a moment.
A series inspired by a Unionist blog insisting that “On a practical level, I do not believe for one moment that Scotland could thrive alone”, and which led to our thinking about some of the world’s other independent nations.
NO. 3 – LUXEMBOURG
Just a quick one-week-on update: thanks to your incredible support, our fundraiser for legal action now stands at a phenomenal £14,683 including all sources. We’re well beyond the initial target of £5000, but since even a modestly-eminent QC costs slightly over £8 a minute, every extra penny helps.
.
A series inspired by a Unionist blog insisting that “On a practical level, I do not believe for one moment that Scotland could thrive alone”, and which led to our thinking about some of the world’s other independent nations.
NO. 2 – ICELAND
The Yes movement, like almost all movements, is plagued with a small but incredibly loud faction of intolerant, destructive extremists. Alert readers will have noticed that this site has again been the victim of them this week, but we’re not alone. They’ve also gone after two print publications – The National and iScot – over their “transgressions” against the beliefs of these self-appointed arbiters of what people are allowed to think.
What those two outlets and Wings have in common is achievement.
Last month saw the first meeting between the UK Brexit delegation and the EU’s, and by many accounts it fell far short of the UK’s expectations. David Davis spent months drumming up the “strong and stable” approach which would see both the divorce deal and the subsequent post-Brexit trade deal negotiated simultaneously. He was told by everyone that this wouldn’t happen, but simply brushed off the warnings. When push came to shove, he finally accepted that he’d have to negotiate the divorce deal first.
This is just the latest in a long string of failures and ineptitudes over the course of the UK’s handling of the whole farcical process and it got me thinking. If Scotland had voted Yes in 2014, what would it have looked like if the Scottish Government had handled that vote the way the UK has managed Brexit?
Millionaire-funded diehard loyalist forelock-tugging faction Scotland In Union published an extraordinary blog post yesterday.
Its 606 words comprised a sort of Caledonian Cringe Greatest Hits, allegedly penned by someone called Fiona Annesley (of whom we’re told nothing else, and who has no detectable online presence), but the line that particularly caught people’s eye was this:
“On a practical level, I do not believe for one moment that Scotland could thrive alone.”
And that got us thinking about some of the world’s other independent nations.
The complete series so far. If you’ve got a story like this to tell, or you know anyone who does, Phantom Power want to hear from you – drop them a line.
I went to “Dunkirk” at the cinema today. If you want to know what it’s like, just watch this trailer 40 times in a row and save yourself the £12.
It’s a poor movie, disjointed and aimless and curiously lacking in tension or narrative given the real-life subject matter. (It’s remarkably short on dialogue, which is lucky because you can barely make out any of what little script or story there is from behind the endlessly howling one-note airhorn of the soundtrack. It’s a bit like someone filmed an IKEA assembly manual in live action during a Formula 1 race.)
But I couldn’t help thinking that part of the reason it was so unengaging was because it felt akin to watching a boxing match between two fighters you don’t like. If Mike Tyson took on Tyson Fury, would you cheer for the rapist or the anti-Semitic homophobe?
Wings Over Scotland is a thing that exists.
