Actually, now that we come to examine it in detail, this one’s quite special. We think EVERY single sentence in the official No campaign’s latest mailshot might be a lie.
Let’s step through it and see if they’ve really pulled off a hundred-percenter.
We’re always amused when we get our weekly email from “Better Together”, begging for money. Because that’s invariably what they are – the standard template is a short preamble about whatever the issue of the day is, followed by “which means you need to SEND US CASH NOW”. (We might be a crowd-funded website, but hey, at least we only ask readers to cough up a couple of times a year, not every few days.)
Sometimes we’re so busy chuckling at the convoluted panhandling of an organisation more used to six-figure cheques from Tory businessmen than soliciting the odd tenner from members of the public (and at the obvious lies like the second paragraph) that we miss a more interesting line. But we were on top of things this week.
Anas Sarwar in the Sunday Post, 9 February 2014:
“Labour won’t look to switch powers over inheritance or corporation tax.
Oh, Anas. Cutting corporation tax isn’t Labour politics? Are you sure about that?
The Mail is incredibly still banging away at its “evil cybernats” campaign today – we make that 19 days now – with another front page lead (this time, impressively somehow managing to turn SNP MSP Joan McAlpine being the victim of acts of online sabotage into an attack on the SNP) and another “Cybernat Watch” article inside.
One passage in an editorial, however, caught our eye. (Our emphasis.)
“It is not acceptable to make personal threats and insults under the guise of exercising the right to speak openly. It is an inescapable fact that while there are trolls on both sides, the so-called cybernats are more numerous, more vocal, more vituperative and act in consort.”
An “inescapable fact”? The Mail seems to have unaccountably failed to identify its material source. Who measured these things? Can we have a link to the study data? Is there an internationally-recognised scale of vituperativeness? Is there a shred of evidence to back up the assertion that these alleged abusers “act in consort”?
Because if the Daily Mail doesn’t come forward with the proof of these allegations, and instead just continues making insulting comments and doorstepping, frightening and vilifying innocent members of the public for posting perfectly legal comments on the internet under their own names, it’ll be hard for the people of Scotland to arrive at any other conclusion than that the paper’s reporters are a bunch of bare-faced liars as well as bullies trying to selectively intimidate and silence one side of the debate.
We’re not sure which of The Scotsman and Murdo Fraser of the Scottish Conservatives was most confused this morning. Reporting on the second half of its intriguing ICM poll (which put the gap between Yes and No votes as low as six points), the paper publishes some data about the attitude of Scots to the EU.
Excluding don’t knows, the results provide a clear 16-point margin for Scotland remaining in Europe, at 58% to 42%. (The raw numbers put it only slightly lower, at 46 to 33.) But for some odd reason the newspaper chooses to reveal this vote of confidence under the bafflingly negative headline “A third of Scots would back exit from EU”, without even an “only” in there to reflect the implication of the stats.
Weirder still is Murdo Fraser’s reaction, though.
So, last night we mooted the idea of running a book on which “Better Together” scare story would crumble to dust next. We didn’t even have time to come up with odds for “the Clyde shipyards will close because the UK doesn’t build warships abroad”, and now it’s too late. We really need to move quicker.
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.
So, this again:
But it’s hard to avoid in the circumstances.
The picture above is of Cumbernauld solicitor Ian Smart appearing on last night’s Newsnight Scotland, representing the Labour viewpoint. And we’re using that phrase in both its narrower and broader senses.
The Scottish media often complains that the supporters of independence attack it as biased merely for reporting news that they don’t like. It’s sometimes justified in doing so – it’s foolish to indulge the delusion that amid the constant avalanche of “Major blow to SNP/Yes campaign” headlines, there aren’t some actual blows now and again.
Of course, the media has only itself to blame that nobody listens when it cries “Wolf!” for the 20th time that month. There are times when a “story” is so nakedly a piece of agenda-driven propaganda rather than journalism that in publishing it the press abandons all right to expect to ever be treated as an impartial chronicler of events.
Today is one of those times.
We saw this graphic on the “Better Together” website yesterday, but we dismissed it as uninteresting even by their playground-propaganda standards, amounting as it does to nothing more than some startlingly feeble carping along the lines of “These are their forecasts, but we’ve made different forecasts so theirs must be wrong!”
But an alert reader observed that it was MUCH stupider than that. Can you spot why?
We apologise both for the slightly uncouth language in that headline and the mangling of an infamous phrase from the 1995 OJ Simpson murder trial.
But it’s hard to reasonably appraise the conduct of Scotland’s two supposed “quality” newspapers this weekend with regard to the Yes Scotland email hacking incident without using expletives, and that’s just about the mildest level of comment we could muster about the naked lies both have told the Scottish public.
It’s always nice when the Scottish media takes the time to illustrate one of our points for us. Earlier this week we attempted to distil this site’s core work of the last two years into two simple rules, elegantly pictured below.
Imagine our unrestricted delight, then, when this weekend’s Scotland On Sunday chose to generously provide us with some prima facie evidence of the phenomenon.
Wings Over Scotland is a thing that exists.
