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.
It’s becoming ever harder to keep track of the twists and turns of the No campaign on the thorny subject of immigration.
First we have astroturfing groups urging us from London to “Vote no borders”, and the Better Together narrative of “border posts at Berwick”. But then we’re offered the rather desperate spectacle of the fear of immigration being used as a weapon against Scotland being able to control immigration with the powers of independence.
We’ve already written about the ludicrous way in which the figures for net immigration were distorted by the media and the differing needs here. But there’s even more irony and hypocrisy in the No camp using immigration as a stick to beat Yes with.
Sorry, readers, we’re getting addicted to these.
“Better Together” spokesman, 27 September 2013:
Letter from Danny Alexander MP to Alex Salmond, 30 Jan 2014:
The Herald, 25 June 2014:
(Our emphases in all cases.)
In 2009, nearing the end of my Masters degree in Scotland and with the UK recession in full swing, I decided to leave for New Zealand. I’ll admit that the decision was somewhat influenced by a breathtaking TV ad. Sweeping helicopter shots of stunning mountain ranges, photogenic youngsters frolicking on sunny beaches, and a thumping soundtrack. I still can’t listen to “Forever Young” without goosebumps.
New Zealand is a country slightly larger than Great Britain with a population smaller than Scotland. Famed for its beautiful scenery, laid-back lifestyle and sporting achievements, this small and successful country where I still live, tucked away in the southwestern Pacific Ocean, provides an ideal argument for an independent Scotland.
Why? I’ll explain.
“Better Together” spokesman, 27 September 2013:
Letter from Danny Alexander MP to Alex Salmond, 30 Jan 2014:
The Telegraph, 23 June 2014:
So, just “anywhere”, then.
Here’s “Better Together” communications director Rob Shorthouse this morning:
And here’s the Telegraph this evening (our emphasis):
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.
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.
There’s an interesting article on the Guardian today from the invariably-excellent former music journalist John Harris entitled “The crisis in the Labour party goes much deeper than Ed Miliband”, which looks at how a 280-page policy document published this month by the Labour-leaning IPPR thinktank was boiled down by the party for public and media consumption to “cutting benefits for young people”.
That got us to thinking about something, but luckily before we’d wasted too much time on thinking we discovered that Labour Uncut had helpfully already done the research we were about to embark on for us.
And this time we’re not being sarcastic. We were bemused yesterday when a number of people on Twitter started swapping referendum-based jokes about Stanley Baxter, who for younger readers used to be some sort of pantomime star and vaudeville performer. The jokes were explained today when it was revealed, to our considerable surprise, that Mr Baxter was in fact still alive and urging a No vote in the referendum.
Baxter, who left Scotland 55 years ago and told the Times that he now returns only for “the odd funeral”, nevertheless felt able to assert from these occasional visits that support for a Yes vote was founded in hatred for the English from simple-witted Scots who “don’t know any better” caused by “Braveheart” and hey, stay awake at the back there because we’re coming to the important bit.
And that’s that the comedian, who made a career out of telling TV viewers that the people of Glasgow had hilarious incomprehensible accents in need of translating into proper English, also went on to (no doubt impeccably) articulate the real reason, never previously spoken aloud, that the No campaign wants Scotland to stay part of the UK.
Earlier today we reported the Edinburgh Evening News’ coverage of a study by Sheffield Hallam University which found that households across Edinburgh would lose an average of £780 each thanks to the coalition’s welfare cuts, with the worst-affected area – Craigmillar – likely to take an annual hit of £1,240 per household.
Today’s edition of the Daily Record has a prominent feature on the same survey, but chooses to focus on Glasgow rather than Edinburgh, and finds that things are even worse. Households in the poorest part of Glasgow – Calton, infamous for its low male life expectancies – stand to see a shocking £1,760 a year ripped out of their budget.
The Record being the Record, of course, it characterises the cuts – quite correctly – as being the responsibility of the Conservative/Lib Dem coalition. But then, weirdly, it asks a Labour MSP to comment on them.
As a French Quebecer belonging to a generation that was deeply influenced by Harry Potter, it was with great interest and concern that I read JK Rowling’s recent letter on why she opposes Scotland’s independence.
Of herself and her fellow Scots, she justly writes that “whatever Scotland decides, we will probably find ourselves justifying our choice to our grandchildren.”
Well, I’m one of those grandchildren previous generations now find themselves having to justify their decisions to, and I can tell you how it went for us.
Wings Over Scotland is a thing that exists.
