The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


The muted witness

Posted on August 18, 2013 by

While the Scottish print media continues to almost totally blank our Panelbase opinion poll, it’s nice to know that they’re nevertheless paying close attention to its findings.

In the Herald, Ian Bell highlights the Scottish public’s scepticism about more powers, and the difference between the media narrative that they’re inevitable and the reality.

(Our survey found that 67% of Scots don’t believe any new powers will be devolved to Holyrood in the event of a No vote, and almost 20% believe powers will be repatriated to Westminster. When a reader commented on the 67% figure and another demanded to know where it came from, the Herald actually censored the reply we posted saying, in its entirety, “From a Panelbase poll last week.”)

The Sunday Mail’s editorial leader today complains about the debate being dominated by point-scoring politicians and says that “we badly need to hear some distinctive new voices and fresh informed analysis”.

(Our survey found that just 6% of Scots agreed with the proposition that “a wide range of voices are heard” in the Scottish media’s coverage of the independence debate. Sadly for fans of “fresh informed analysis”, the Mail also shamefully misrepresents our poll’s findings in a tiny uncredited passing mention, claiming that “46% of Scots believe Alex Salmond and Better Together chief Alistair Darling rarely or never tell the truth about independence”. In fact, Salmond was vastly more trusted that Darling, with a net truth rating of -3 compared to -27 for the former Chancellor.)

In the Sunday Herald this morning, Iain Macwhirter notes, still hoping against hope for an option that isn’t coming, that ‘What we know is that some 50-60% of Scots favour ‘devolution max’ or a Parliament with enhanced economic powers.”

(Did we know that? Where did those figures come from, given that most relevant polls in fact show a very close three-way split between independence, devo max and the status quo? We’re sure it’s coincidence that our survey recorded between 52% and 60% backing for the devolution of taxation, oil revenues and welfare.)

We could list more examples, but we’re sure you get the point. Thanks to the generous funding of the poll by this site’s readers, the Scottish media’s reporting on independence is being subtly but visibly shaped. Untruths are being challenged, and it’s no longer possible for newspapers to make glib claims about “more powers” following a No vote without readers being able to point to documentary evidence that most of the people of Scotland don’t believe a word of it.

It’s only a start. But with politicians and the press alike so widely disbelieved and distrusted by the Scottish public, it’s a significant first step towards ordinary Scots taking charge of the independence debate for themselves. The message is getting out, and as long as that happens it doesn’t much matter whether the messenger is credited or not.

(Although the last two weeks have seen Wings Over Scotland shatter every previous readership-statistic record by some pretty enormous margins, which is nice.)

We’re going to stop banging on about the poll and the media’s frantic attempts to suppress it after today. The point is made. But even with the odd minor flaw in execution, we doubt there’s been a penny better spent on either side of the campaign.

Print Friendly

    64 to “The muted witness”

    1. Seasick Dave says:

      Keep it up, Rev, slowly but surely the wheels are falling off the No bandwagon. Witness the hapless Willie Rennie and his NATO contortions.
       
      In unrelated news, in unconfirmed reports, Archie Graham, husband of missing ‘Scottish Labour’ leader, Johan Lamont, was spotted in a southside Oxfam shop negotiating the return of his wife’s clothes after Police advised him to ‘expect the worst’.

    2. Bubbles says:

      Is this why they campaigned so vehemently against a Devo Max option in the question as if that had been an option then presumably they’d have been legally obliged to follow through with it? Whereas this way they can ‘offer’ it, ably supported by the Unionist press, in the certain knowledge that there’s no legal obligation to fulfill that promise?

    3.  “we doubt there’s been a penny better spent on either side of the campaign.” Agreed, Rev, but not only that, we are now in better shape to ensure the next poll is so much better that they will be unable to ignore it.  
       

    4. rabb says:

      Rev,
      This IS the way forward. I’m primed and ready to help fund another.

      The media have had their go at providing the facts but couldn’t see past their unionist agenda.
       
      It’s time for the people of this country to take a stand and take control of the debate. The MSM have failed.

    5. Boorach says:

      Thanks Dave, a real laugh out loud moment! 😉

    6. scottish_skier says:

      As I’ve said before, what the results of the poll said was in a way more important than having them widely reported.

      Polls reflect opinion; they don’t change it. Certainly not directly in the sense that people go ‘Oh, I saw a poll which said lots of people support X, therefore I now support it’. However, changes in narrative/the direction of campaigns resulting from polls can lead to changes in opinion (or at least firm up opinions already there) although this is not a direct result of the poll itself. 

      Seems we are beginning to see this change in narrative.

    7. Bugger (the Panda) says:

      The Poll that didn’t bark

    8. Alba4Eva says:

      Minor flaw?
      I don’t give Curtis any credit at all.   What makes him an expert anyway?   He has got it wrong so many times before and only changed his opinion as reactions to the bleedin’ obvious when everyone else already knew what the situation was.    The BBC and unionists might adore him, but my own politial predictions have always been better than his.  
      Where are all the other experts anyway?   Are we seriously being told that Scotland only has one’expert’?

    9. Keyser Soze says:

      Rev,Reading between the lines yesterday ,Re-bbc scotland interview , The BBC and others have realised just how empowering the Crowd-funding has been . Let’s get another one going , let’s do it ! Let’s do it today !….I want to give more cash , come-on Rev , what are we waiting for ?

    10. Heiskir says:

      Money very well spent and results well spread oot.

    11. The Man in the Jar says:

      I thought that being Sunday and all there might, just might be something in the papers today. Some chance! Well we now know for sure that they are all supressing information for their own agenda. I don’t give a toss about their jobs I just hope that these newspapers all go down the pan. It is all that they deserve. 

    12. scottish_skier says:

      The 67% who don’t think more powers will be coming (or powers will be removed) in the event of a No vote is crucial and reflects what I said above about polls.

      There haven’t been lots of articles in papers over many months talking about how a No will probably result in no more powers which is backed up by polls showing people think this. Nope, instead the electorate was being told largely the opposite yet came to the ‘no more powers’ conclusion all by itself. And boy that must put the wind up the pro-union campaign. Very few believe BTs biggest, most important (to them) lie.

    13. Alasdair says:

      [deafening applause]

    14. mogatrons says:

      Like I said yesterday ….
       
      mogatrons says:
      17 August, 2013 at 2:21 pm

      “Firstly well done Stu and WoS readers for what will in time prove to be a seismic shift in the referendum debate… **virtual round of applause**
       
      Secondly, taking a lead from Eck himself, I humbly suggest keeping the powder dry until publication of the white paper has passed ……
       
      …. then hit the media with a single comprehensive, professional poll commissioned from ALL MAINSTREAM POLLING COMPANIES SIMULTANEOUSLY.
       
      Not only would this afford no sanctuary to the MSM whatsoever, but it would also expose those pollsters with ‘dubious’ methods to irrefutable criticism.
       
      In short, save your ammo for a singular ‘shock and awe’ strike that guarantees national headlines.”
       
       
      ………….. It appears the first tremors of the seismic shift are being felt already.

    15. HandandShrimp says:

      It is going to be a long haul to Sept 18th but each little step takes us closer. There was an air of total madness about Willie’s reluctance to admit that a Parliament he is part of would be a democratic body. The urge to suggest that an independent Scotland would be like North Korea was palpable, with eyes shifting like some sort of political Father Dougall, he was desperate to push the button that said Do Not Push.
       
      Such blatant dishonesty turns my stomach, the man has not a shred of integrity. When did the Liberals become such fillets?  

    16. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      There haven’t been lots of articles in papers over many months talking about how a No will probably result in no more powers which is backed up by polls showing people think this. Nope, instead the electorate was being told largely the opposite yet came to the ‘no more powers’ conclusion all by itself. And boy that must put the wind up the pro-union campaign.”

      We got a bit of snark from the Scotsman’s Kenny Farquharson on Twitter yesterday over the more powers thing. He highlighted the low backing for devolved defence, whereupon we pointed out what we’d said when analysing the results, namely that devolved (rather than independent) defence made very little sense.

      Kenny leapt on that as an excuse to sneer that it was therefore a “nonsensical question”. But I see it differently. We included defence alongside other groups of powers, because it’s often discussed in that context. We didn’t lead respondents by suggesting or hinting that it didn’t belong. We left them alone to arrive at a conclusion, and they arrived at a sensible, rational, intelligent one which is never raised in the media.

      In other words, we gave the Scottish public the chance to show how smart it is, and it didn’t fail us. I absolutely believe the Scottish media thinks people are basically thick, which is why they keep treating them with such contempt. I disagree, and that’s why I think we’ll win. When it comes to the crunch, the people of Scotland will make the smart, rational choice, and vote Yes.

    17. Alba4Eva says:

      Haha… after waking up this morning and making that last post,  I just read this and it cheered me up no ends  🙂    
       
      http://www.bbc.scotlandshire.co.uk/index.php/city-news/504-crowd-funded-poll-a-front-for-alien-invasion-says-prof-poultice.html

    18. Macart says:

      Money well spent and then some. Y’know prof. Curtice never really covered one thing more fully IMO. The press figures question.
       
      According to him journalists were supposedly wary of posting the results because of the supposedly leading nature of one or two questions, the wording of another all fairly ephemeral stuff. Especially since leading questions have been the nature of many polls results which have been published in a heartbeat so long as they followed a narrative. The scathing nature of the results of the media question, again IMO may have had more than a little to do with their reluctance to publish. But one way or another those results will get spread. Hopefully with more to come in the next year.

    19. Steve McKay says:

      Every comment I have posted, bar one that was missed by the mods, has been deleted when I mention the Panelbase survey.   The only reason given is breaking of house rules but when I ask which ones I get no response.   The comments were relevant, polite and not referenced to another media source only Panelbase.   My status has now been changed from pre-approved to moderated.
      i did get this comment through on a recent Bell article though;
      ‘If the pollsters are right, the neighbourhoods long taken for granted by the People’s Party are preparing a surprise. ‘
      I think you are spot on Mr Bell; 67% of Scots do not believe the Scottish Parliament will be granted any additional new powers if there is a No vote in the referendum with 25% of them concerned that Holyrood’s powers will actually be reduced.
      Given that a clear majority think Scotland must have control over welfare, oil revenues and tax etc this leads to a very uncomfortable conclusion for the No campaign.
      Most people understand that if they vote no Scotlands parliament will be seriously weakened and its ability to counter regressive Westminster policies all but destroyed. 
       
      Here is the one that slipped past;
       
      Interesting article.
      I hope Mr Bell can look into and report on the results of the most recent Panelbase survey on independence. Type ‘panelbase poll august 2013’ into google and check it out – lots of fascinating statistics that should be aired and discussed by good journalists.
       
      An identical one on a more popular Macwhirter thread the same day was deleted.

    20. Dave says:

      Just listened to your GMS interview on YouTube – you done good. One suggestion for the next interview would be to keep naming the website to get the WOS brand rolling.
      For the next poll, why not ask Curtis to review the questions beforehand? As an objective academic he couldn’t refuse. Then he can’t be wheeled in by WBC Scotland to diss the methodology, only the results.

    21. roboscot says:

      What the print and broadcast media aren’t covering is the rise of web based journalism in Scotland. Both Wings and Newsnet Scotland now have a substantial readership, both have also ‘professionalised’ in terms of funding editorial work and journalism, and we now have Wings commissioning an industry standard opinion poll. This has become a real and credible challenge to the existing media. Long may it continue.

    22. AlexMci says:

      On the subject of polls, I was asking the question the other evening, of where the people who are polled are found. Do they have to be registered as potential candidates. Are polling companies allowed to cold call people, is it just everyone on the electoral roll who get picked at random.

      the reason I ask is that, if its only people who have registered an intent to be polled, I would think then, that you are going to be asking a very narrow section of the electorate. I just wonder whether it would be a better sample of people asked if we were able to get volunteers from here to maybe ask 10 workmates face to face to complete a poll, or maybe try and get someone to do some when they are at the football meeting their mates, or the golf, rugby wherever. We have done the crowd funding, is there perhaps a way that we could do a crowd poll. 

      I may be way of the mark with this but in my opinion if we got 100 people who would ask 10 people each to give their opinions on a set set of Questions, you will then reach people who are never going to be polled by the big polling companies. It probably has numerous flaws that I am unable to see of the top of my head, but that’s why I’m putting it out here for others more clued up on the workings of polls.

    23. ayemachrihanish says:

      Rev, don’t know if this thought has been posted or crossed your mind but could Prof Curtice assist in setting next polls questions?? 
       
      He’s a Scottish public funded employee – and so far he’s commenting on a public funded poll – why not ask him to assist with the technicalities of the next poll?

    24. ayemachrihanish says:

      And perhaps fewer complaints then!

    25. gavin lessells says:

      O/T
       
      Ken MacDonald on BBC Scotlands “Headlines” this morning stated, as a qualification, that “most of Scotlands Newspapers were supporting the Union” He did not express an opinion on broadcasters.
      By and large his programme was fair with interesting points made re the SNP membership and NATO. Well worth a listen.

    26. frankieboy says:

      I listened to GMS and the Prof Curtice analysis. Like auditors, his life is spent looking for non-conformance to a perceived standard. He would have found fault no matter what. I agree with other comments asking where all the other ‘experts’ are. I don’t think anybody at WoS declared themselves expert but at least from what I can see had a pretty good attempt at producing an honest and fair snapshot of current opinion surrounding the referendum debate. MSM and academia would like to keep information and sharing thereof as tight and sanitised as possible. It seems that all the ‘experts’ want to stifle and limit the debate within their own little bubble. Hardly the condition in which enlightenment can develop and must really beg the question of the credibility of any academic or investigative journalist that only wants to hear what they agreed with?

    27. Jimbo says:

      “Kenny leapt on that as an excuse to sneer…”

       
      Sneers and lies are all that they have left in their armoury.

    28. Murray McCallum says:

      Ian Bell article in link: “… the neighbourhoods long taken for granted by the People’s Party are preparing a surprise. Mr Diffley [Ipsos Mori] suggested, politely, that people in the schemes have nothing left to lose.
       
      Given the Panelbase findings that 67% believe new powers will not be devolved, the lack of trust for the “No” camp leading figures, and then consider the ConLab core value judgement on the elimination of the “something for nothing culture” (which actually seems to target low paid workers and disabled people) and the re-appearance of what looks like the Labour Party (LFI) there is a potentially wide, multi-sided front growing against the No to Scotland campaign.
      This is before even considering the anti-WMD policy and focus on renewable energy.  Other than cultivating a climate of fear it will be interesting to see what the “No” people have to offer.

    29. Thepnr says:

      HandandShrimp says:
      18 August, 2013 at 10:05 am

      “with eyes shifting like some sort of political Father Dougall, he was desperate to push the button that said Do Not Push.”

      Please stop doing that, it’s just too good lol

    30. jahoca says:

      I absolutely believe the Scottish media thinks people are basically thick, which is why they keep treating them with such contempt. I disagree, and that’s why I think we’ll win.”
       
      Hear, hear. I feel the same can be said for many politicians. The difference with pro-indy personalities seems to be that they credit their listeners with a bit of sense. This can only be a good thing.

    31. Albalha says:

      @Dave
      Re the BBC GMS interviews on the poll and the naming of the website, of the three people involved Bill Whiteford was the only one to mention the site , he did it three times. Beginning, middle and end.
      In radio the maxim is ‘ tell the audience once, tell them again and again and …..’
      I just listened to it again, and I know there’s been criticism of Curtice only talking about the YES campaign and its private polling, but it seems to me he was making a direct comparison between two on the same side as it were.
      So W over S used a BPC organisation, published the results and ‘allowed people like him to criticise’, compared with the YES campaign and its selected release of information.
       
       

    32. Jiggsbro says:

      For the next poll, why not ask Curtis to review the questions beforehand? As an objective academic he couldn’t refuse.
       
      I can assure you – as an objective academic – he most certainly could.

    33. Albalha says:

      O/T
      John McAllion on Labour, from SSV and now on Newsnet
      With every passing month, that card will become less and less playable and more and more Labour supporters will realise that the only certain security against more of the same is to vote Yes to independence.
      The recent manufactured attacks on ‘Labour For Independence’ signal Labour’s growing fear that as the prospect of a UK Labour victory in 2015 retreats, the likelihood of a Yes vote in 2014 will increase.
      http://newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-opinion/7873-labours-uk-crisis-will-boost-yes-vote

    34. Murray McCallum says:

      I also think Prof Curtice is neutral as he simply sees words and numbers and does not appear to attach any emotional feeling to the combination of either.  That is his comfort zone.  His career would end if he crept outside it – I remember falling asleep in his politics lectures in 1982.

    35. Colin Duffy says:

      When`s the next poll then? I wanna give my money to the next one cos I missed the last.

    36. Alan Gerrish says:

      “For the next poll, why not ask Curtis to review the questions beforehand?”
       
      Dave: might be a difficult one, this.  I agree it’s a very attractive idea, but what happens when the esteemed prof finds spurious reasons for omitting several questions such as his devious logic on space aliens and press reluctance to publish results?  We might of course try another expert (prof Mitchell?), or both, such that the questions are peer reviewed (sort of) but that might prove difficult and expensive to arrange.  Notwithstanding, I do agree an objective external expert should be asked to review the questions before going live with the next survey.
       

    37. James Kay says:

       
       
      AlexMci asks
      ... where the people who are polled are found.
       
      Some polls are to a random selection of landlines and/or mobiles. There may even still be some ‘stop in the street’ polling. But a lot of what goes on takes place online.
       
      I have registered with YouGov, and have on a couple of occasions, been polled for my politics. Many of the surveys, however, are purely consumer oriented.
       
      Through another company, whose name I think was ‘Valued Opinions’, I was invited just yesterday to respond to a Populus poll specifically about the Referendum. I spent 20 minutes wading through a whole raft of complicated questions which needed careful interpretation. They were full of  ‘ifs’ and ‘nots’. You had to be very careful to think about the question to see on which side your answer lay, and I am not sure if my responses were an accurate picture of what I feel.
       
      But it was all for nothing. The last couple of questions were ‘housekeeping’ ones, to try and fit you into categories. I was told that my answers relating to numbers of people living in my house did not add up, that somehow they contradicted themselves. Since I could not go back and check, I don’t know what, if anything, I did wrong. I wonder if this company got any coherent answers?

    38. ianbrotherhood says:

      For sheer childishness, this is hard to beat – Cochers, on Friday, from the ‘Zany Comedy Relief’ section above.
      (Is it just me, or does Cochrane look like a werewolf peeking over a wheelie-bin?)
       
      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/10246325/Its-going-wrong-for-Salmond-and-its-all-his-fault.html#disqus_thread

    39. Archie [not Erchie] says:

      @ Colin Duffy – Check out Alba4Eva’s link [10:06 am] to BBC Scotlandshire for a good laugh.
      So the Rev set about gathering more money from his disciples, exhorting them to sell their organs and raise cash for the poll, and this they did with joy.” [BBC Scotlandshire]
      Do you realise what you are committing to Colin? 🙂 It will be the biggest Organ Fund ever.

    40. HandandShrimp says:

      I just can’t get worked up about Cochrane. He is no longer a journalist, just a sad person with a column which he uses to vent his spleen on his abnormal and obsessive hatred of one politician over and over again. If it was a personal blog you would file under S for stalker.

    41. Albalha says:

      O/T
      Labour will introduce legislation to lower vote to 16, reportedly, what is this party good for, really, making it up as they go along, spineless self interested spinners.
      http://www.itv.com/news/update/2013-08-18/report-labour-plotting-to-lower-voting-age-to-16/
       

    42. AlexMci says:

      @ James Kay, thanks for that, as I said it seems to me that a lot of polls seem to be aimed at people who want to be polled. I can honestly say that no one I know family or friends workmates etc, have ever been asked to participate in polls about the independence question. Unless you take into account the Facebook things. I just think it would be interesting if a way could be found to ask the questions to people who have as much chance of responding to polls as they would winning the lottery.
      i appreciate it would be difficult to co ordinate something, where lots of people had to try and get 10 people each to answer some questions. But I feel it could be worthwhile doing this then have everyone send in the responses to someone to analyse. Obviously it would have drawbacks and would be rubbished by some as not being good because it was t carried out by the professionals. Could be a worthwhile exercise, nothing ventured and all that.

    43. Brian milligan says:

      The No campaign is showing up to have no Substance. the 63% who do not believe there will be further devolution, must comprise of the no votes, dont know, and non voters. Some endorsment for the No campaign.

    44. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      jahoca
      You are very correct. The Better Together campaign is aimed unerringly at the half-wit vote. As this becomes generally recognised (as is steadily happening at the moment) sensible voters who until now have been broadly in an unthinking “No” position will abandon it. 
      Nothing annoys a Scot more than to find out that patronising political figures believe he or she is a eejit that can be easily deceived.
      Nice piece from Frankie YES Boyle today
      “This is the secod time Ed’s been hit by an egg and he’s not allowing it to stop him – which means that people really need to start finding heavier objects to throw.”

    45. Jiggsbro says:

      the 63% who do not believe there will be further devolution, must comprise of the no votes, dont know, and non voters.
       
      I’m a Yes voter and I don’t believe we’ll get more devolution.

    46. Iain says:

      In the next poll, why not have a question about the relative trustworthyness of various newspapers and broadcasting organisations? Might as well go for broke – on the evidence so far, they wouldn’t publish results they don’t like anyway, but stuff on WOS and other websites is getting through to the public. 

    47. Indion says:

      mmmm,
       
      it’s 1201 and a’ready gone a bonny morn woken to from asleep o’ercome.
      The light’s so beautiful, i want to kiss the source, shining – anew – again
      as sun, if it too is having – wrong – being for the fun of doing no harm as
      wrong y’all here will if not already well doing, as done the well too
      for not only you’se you’ll here hear ?
       
      ‘Kos if so, so will a’body and a’one you’ve
      so said on ’bout “what’s up?” or “new?”
       
      The wee arra pple are nae frae Brazil or ‘Esia ken
      that gi’en nae mair than chance we’d be on the
      beach or in the bushes o’ there be’in not Baxter Park’s sand pit,
      but hot hot hot e’in if not rising, shaped as grace gave their form
      to bury the ba’ in another shot o’ gatling gunned hyperventilated
      thro’ and thro’,
      the killers kiltered ,
      filling in their entrenched,
      ’til aw that’s now left are hieds, like rieds stuck
      out, about to shout to the last end of blown over,
      blown away, gone forever up their own arse holes
      that sought the shite they have to write
      ‘cos no longer printed on saved time’s
      day auld no longer news fit only for loo paper
      before afore printed on e-lectroncallinginatricity
      at a pound saving pound a day for .. what was it
      but 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 or 6 or 7 days a’weak in week 
      pushed as pulled on rolled out day as night for bum wipes
      by Cobley t’ gether and ilka same as the ready to be
      committed Uncle & Auntie Toms who prostitute lies
      none can buy what they sell in the ken ye ken o’truth
      not plumbed but also plumped-up, prim, prissy,
      prolapsed by the clouds and cochs o’ hewl & crowing
      beneath dirty auld mac men pumping out
      their pimped for buttons zipped up agin
      trouserings hot flushing of own undoing
      in feverish fingered to bate their mastur.
       
      Fcuk ’em – fcuk ’em a’ o’ their nae tell’t lie
      abed, asleep, at home they think their own –
      scratching their heid as groin itchin’ for more
      than mouth washed after billious thrown up
      still around them on the rising floor o’ shite.
       
      “Oh shit”, but nowt but more back filling 
      where once gone, now rushing back to bite
      the bums on seats of “we’re a’right ….
      …. it wiz the donkey’s got us a’ wrong!”
       
      ….as the blue then red rosettes once up
      get used up instead o’ flowers on graves
      o’ the never lived to see reborn for
      what they gave, before it too scorned
      in oe’r an’ oe’r repitition agin an’ agro
      in de ja vu for only them,
      but not we wha’s like to be
      nae less nor more than lesser he
      or she a multi-taxed women for a’ that
      not as you will,
      but as you will
      – as you will
      – yes you will
      – aye, as you will
      – and you too will
      – you will too ?
      – grand!
      – all will be well
        as you will
        as you were
        as you are
        as you will be
        all, well
       
      ……… in
      a’ yours, at last
      alive to being in
      worth living life.
       
      “Hey,” i hear some say,
      “it isn’tae that bad pal”
      as coughed, spat, spluttered
      at their feet o’ unco steady
      pissing a’ o’er in rage
      o’ let loose into their
      revengeful winded wound
      o’ retaliated self harm
      getting nowhere but
      only owned own back,
      these guardians
      o’ the guardians
      let loose, to be
      booing, booing
      bonkin, bonkin
      a’ a sundry wi’
      boozin, boozin
      too much more
      than was ever
      worth for them
      they did down
      from on high
      elevated up
      each others
      backsides
      until Pan
      got up
      outside …….
      and bent not
      only their own as
      bums o’er besides.
       
      So, round them a’ up
      into their retreated to,
      cornered above the
      splattered privy hole they
      communideficate through –
      the floor they stand on for,
      ’til lookin’ up to pull too late
      the trapped on trap door
      that cannae bear the weight
      o’ their fears and doubts
      splat an’ shat on
      from not see coming
      in the round too back
      their undoing in
      not thunk thro’,
      by dunces dunked
      on drunk off their
      from our o’erheids,
      hand on heart,
      so it is, as was will be.
       
      Fcuking tragic yUK,
      as mad, bad & sad
      in banal for real,
      Yes not real….ly
       
      Wrote in hope
      still enough about
      to recognise a No
      brainer when X
      marks the spot
      come to nought
      but no sense
      if not [sigh,
      shake heid,
      go to pub,
      pay for what
      but tide over
      and out to damn
      next time wi’ the
      dug up & tiered
      on high to preside
      o’er the wake they
      always wanted to attend]

      but not there signed in our
      time turned to YES ?
       
      130818 1245F WoS to Witness

    48. Davy says:

      Stu,
          Your poll has certainly put the cat among the pigeons, and with the BBC and MSM doing everything they can to offically ignore it I can see that coming back to bit them on the arse bigtime.

      The short, medim and long term effects of this poll are probley going to be a game changer in this battle for the undecided votes in our referendum. It has taken a new direction in such way as it was the people of Scotland who financed the poll and for once it was not a political or media organisation trying to set a poll to suit their own means, and guess what? the people liked the idea (70 mins to raise the cash) come on.

      The media can try and hide the results of the poll from the public as much as they want, but it is already out there in internet world and internet world is more in our lives everyday and the end result for the media is they are going to have to defend their reasons for not publishing the poll, and their really is no defense for it.

      Scotlands referendum war has now entered a new era, and I believe to show and promote a positive future for Scotland and its people is the next battle to be won.
       
      Alba Gu snooker loopy!

    49. handclapping says:

      Just to pick up on MacWhirter’s point about a referendum that they didn’t want; in 2011 50+% voted for parties wanting a referendum and previously there had been polls shewing up to 72% wanting a referendum. You can also use these figures against those that bang on about “Salmond’s referendum”.
       
      That’s another great thing about polls, once there out there they can come back and bite revisionism in the bum.

    50. Midgehunter says:

      “Dave: might be a difficult one, this.  I agree it’s a very attractive idea, but what happens when the esteemed prof finds spurious reasons for omitting several questions such as his devious logic on space aliens and press reluctance to publish results?  We might of course try another expert (prof Mitchell?), or both, such that the questions are peer reviewed (sort of) but that might prove difficult and expensive to arrange.”
       
      Consulting  Prof. C or any other “polling expert” doesn’t mean they get to design the questions that the Rev’s team want to ask. Their advice is the POV as to how to “harden” the formulation of the questions and thus widen (force?) the potential for publication in a very hostile media.
       
      What about setting up a “Fighting Fund” for quick reaction polling or polls for certain topics / information gathering (homework?)?
      We need to take the lead and set the agenda, not simply reacting to what the bitters / msm dictate.

    51. CameronB says:

      I suppose this exercise has gone some way towards clarifying whether a tree makes a noise when it topples, if there is no one in the woods to witness it.
       
      Think of the Union as a tree which grew to tower over the rest of the forest, by overshadowing competing saplings and dominating the nutrients available. This vigorous growth was achieved when the British Empire dominated the imperial world, during the height of monopoly capitalism.

      For centuries, the tree withstood numerous storms and constant parasitic attack (think world wars and the struggle for workers’ rights, for example). As with all living things though, the tree became less vigorous over time. No longer able to shape its environment, the tree became less resistant to the forces of nature (think Scottish independence movement, for example). As with many of our elderly, the tree became malnourished and more susceptible to disease. If the tree was capable of thought, it would understand the harsh reality of life, is that it comes to an abrupt end with death. No living thing can escape that fact?
       
      Judging by the MSM’s woeful coverage of the most recent Panelbase poll, none of our journalists appear to have achieved their ‘woodcraft badge’. Thankfully, the Scottish public do mot appear to rely on the MSM’s attempt to manufacture consent, for a political union that is clearly past its ‘natural’ lifespan.
       
       

    52. Derick Tulloch says:

      I also informed the person who asked the source who asked on the Ian Bell thread that this was the Panelbase poll for Wings. just a 2 sentence post, also deleted.
      Finished with the Herald

    53. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “I also informed the person who asked the source who asked on the Ian Bell thread that this was the Panelbase poll for Wings. just a 2 sentence post, also deleted.”

      Wow. I actually saw (and screenshotted) your one. They deleted that? Jesus.

    54. G H Graham says:

      The Herald’s deletion of entries on line that make mention of the Panelbase results is hard evidence of this paper’s attempt to hide the truth from the public. When a newspaper wilfully deletes data from its pages that are already in the public domain and therefore a cold hard fact, it is no longer a newspaper but a propaganda sheet. There should be not a shred of empathy then for anyone who loses their job there if it is declared insolvent.
      Newspapers that deliberately & wilfully lie to its readers because it thinks they are overwhelmingly gullible & stupid will not last another generation. While almost all print sales are falling, you can see that the papers which treat the truth & their readers the worst often suffer the worst reductions in readership. The equally dreadful Scotsman is also heading for liquidation. The Sun experienced this when it published lies about the Hillsboro disaster which were so shocking & later to be proven untrue, some people today still refuse to buy it.
      Now that technology allows us to check their pages without having to visit their websites, we can confront their lies while helping to accelerate their delivery to the financial morgue.

    55. Barontorc says:

      The suggestion of a fighting fund to poll the public almost immediately an iffy issue raises it ugly head appeals to me.
      Take the Japanese reactor emergency that’s most likely never going to be mentioned yet is already the worst kind of nuclear problem and is not just confined to Japan, but is global?
      What the poll should ask is; if Scotland says keep away from nuclear, but the UK government which over-rules us 100% presses ahead with a nuclear program, how does that make you feel? (a) Will this persuade you to vote for independence? (b) Be accepted by you as being a UK issue and you have no power to change it? 

    56. cynicalHighlander says:

      @Barontorc
       
      I agree the virtual media silence of what is going on in those destroyed reactors just confirms that all of our MSM are morally corrupt.
       
      http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-08-17/radioactive-water-leaking-fukushima-what-we-know 

    57. Morag says:

      I’m appalled by the behaviour of the Herald.  I read a couple of comments threads there last night, and they were dominated by petty bickering centred round that idiot OBE Woking and his nasty obsessive posts.  How can any newspaper allow that sort of pointless rubbish but delete the mere mention that Panelbase did the poll that is referred to in the article?
       
      It is a source of great grief to me, but I won’t be going back to the Herald this side of independence, no matter how long it takes.

    58. ScotFree1320 says:

      Albalha says:
       
      18 August, 2013 at 11:46 am
      O/T
      Labour will introduce legislation to lower vote to 16, reportedly, what is this party good for, really, making it up as they go along, spineless self interested spinners.
      http://www.itv.com/news/update/2013-08-18/report-labour-plotting-to-lower-voting-age-to-16/
      ———————— 
      Not only that, NuLab plan to have a starting Income Tax rate of 10p in the pound.  Where have we heard THAT before?  Brown introduced and then abolished it of course!
      http://www.cathyjamieson.com/no-answers-in-queens-speech
       

    59. velofello says:

      Does anyone really believe that Alex Sloan – used to be a dogged blogger on Caledonian Mercury and Newsnet – isn’t aware of the WOS Panelbase poll?
      I would leave Prof Curtice to his BBC appearances. Inviting him to involvement in a future poll would be akin leaving the chicken run gate open.

    60. scottish_skier says:

      In other words, we gave the Scottish public the chance to show how smart it is, and it didn’t fail us.
      I consider the Scottish electorate very smart. I was very pleased that the WoS poll confirmed it once more, particularly on such a crucial issue.
      The pro-union campaign would seem to consider the electorate stupid. As does, e.g. the Herald. After all, it the electorate’s comments it is deleting. It is silencing the undecided and that’s a really idiotic thing to do.

    61. rabb says:

      Morag,
      I posted on OBE Woking’s excessive use of the keyword “Alex Salmond”. I’m sure someone has pointed this out before.
       
      It’s a deliberate ploy to fool the googlebots into driving traffic to these stories whenever someone types “Alex Salmond” into the Google search bar. Do a search for “Alex Salmond” and see what news headlines pop up. Other than his wikipedia entry it makes very grim reading.
       
      Currently google news is dominated by the unionist MSM. It would be worth WoS, NNS, NC etc to register as news sites with Google to begin collaborating and challenging them.
       

    62. Derick Tulloch says:

      velofello says:
       
      18 August, 2013 at 3:37 pm
      Does anyone really believe that Alex Sloan – used to be a dogged blogger on Caledonian Mercury and Newsnet – isn’t aware of the WOS Panelbase poll
      None of us sad politicos would – but a first time user of the Herald forum might. 
      We are all decided, but others (many, as the Panelbase poll demonstrated) are not.

      Phew, managed to edit in that comma after many before the Punctuation Police swooped

    63. Patrick Roden says:

      I’ve stopped commenting on the Herald now, as it’s recent so called balance was clearly a ploy to get us to visit or buy their rag.
      They are struggling big time, but any sympathies I might have had have now vanished and I’d be happy to see the Herald closed down.
      I think that the future of the people of Scotland is far more important than the job prospects of a bunch of cowardly lickspittle ("Quizmaster" - Ed)s working for the Herald.
       
      If you are reading this Herald, you have scunnered me.

    64. Barontorc says:

      What does Ian Bell, Iain McWhirter and Tom Shields among some notable others at the Herald offices think about their company’s political and editorial car crash and ultimately it’s circulation crash dive? Are they just going to continue deleting comments?  There’s absolutely no point in trying to ask this question in their own paper! Lordy, Lordy!



    Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.




    ↑ Top