I generally avoid the Tabloid Press like the plague. They are purveyors of lies and propaganda of the worst type. But last week I was in the supermarket and I was given a free copy of the SUN. I accepted and took it home to have a look at what it was about.
As I remember the front cover was about the traitor Corbyn who had betrayed the country and met with Czechoslovakian spies to pass on information about a MI5 crackdown to the soviets. The truth of the matter was that Jeremy had, in the course of his duties as an MP, met up with a Czech Diplomat on two occasions in the normal course of his work and they had some brief words. That diplomat later turned out to be a spy.
Inside the paper were numerous jibes about extreme socialism and similar pernicious references. The articles were banal, sensationalised and all written in the style that a twelve year old would find accessible.
It was appalling.
The Sun, Express and Mail are all aiming at the same less educated market. Their constant drip drip drip of propaganda and spin is intended to sow the seeds of doubt into the ignorant minds of the populace.
Seemingly Jeremy Corbyn is anti-Semitic and a friend to terrorists because he has shared platforms with Palestinians. He is a friend of IRA terrorists too because he has shared a platform with IRA representatives, deplores the army’s brutality and is in favour of a united Ireland. The fact that he has won two UN Peace awards for his efforts to try to find solutions to these intractable problems is never reported. They put the spin on it to undermine him.
The Telegraph and Times not much better, though at least the language is a bit less sensation and has more substance.
It is cynical.
These papers are despicable purveyors of establishment propaganda. The spin they put on things is to undermine the Labour Party, paint them as crazy extremists and support the Tory Party and the establishment they represent. The constant stream of lies, innuendo and spin is a poison that filters into the psyche of the population. They spread hysteria about terrorism, immigration and scare stories about scroungers and criminal gangs and exaggerate things into sensationalised emotional images.
How can any democracy work while these scandal sheets spread their lies?
The Press is owned by the wealthy elite and exists to maintain that privilege. The Labour Party are a threat to that establishment and the newspapers and media generally are using every tactic they can to undermine him.
Not only that, but have you noticed these “so-called” journalist can’t spell worth a hoot and their grammar totally sucks? My brother has a degree in journalist, and he says there is no such thing as journalism these days…
They disgust me Cheryl – a bunch of young silly kids playing with fire.
Labour are run by establishment figures. Momentum run Corbyn’s Labour and employ bullying tactics to achieve their aims in removing any MP or NEC member they consider do not fit within their model of an “appropriate” elected representative. Momentum was founded by Jon Lansman (Independent Highgate School (fees about £20k per annum) & Cambridge) & James Schneider (Winchester (fees about £30k per annum) & Oxford). Jezza’s policy adviser is Seumas Milne, son of the former BBC Director-General. He attended Winchester & Oxford. Don’t try to make out this Labour represents the working class or the underclass, whatever you wish to call them. They are targeting decent working-class MPs and Councillors with deselection so they can insert their own chosen few. At least 3 members (probably more but not Jezza to his credit) of the shadow cabinet chose to send their children to fee-paying establishment schools.
Jezza has questions to answer over the meetings with the Czech diplomat. There is no evidence that Jezza had any State secrets to sell or that he agreed to pass information to a communist country during the cold war but the question remains why did he meet this “diplomat” from a communist country during the cold war when he was a backbencer. To me the fact that he did illustrates what I consider to be his greatest weakness ie. he is naïve. How else can you explain why he would choose Diane Abbott to be the next Home Secretary when she is clearly incompetent or Thornberry as the next Foreign Sectretary when she was unable to identify the French Foreign Secretary by name (one of our closest allies) and stated on Question Time that Germany was a socialist model for Corbyn’s Labour. Germany has been run by a centre-right administration, the CDU, for years under Merkel.
Hi Bede – I don’t think you can claim that Momentum runs Labour. It is a movement within a movement that reflects a certain set of values that one can refer to as ‘old Labour values’. There are many such movements within the political parties reflecting particular ideologies. A Tory example is the 1922 Committee. These pressure groups try to influence the mainstream party. Momentum supports the values Jezza stands for. I am not sure how much of the unpleasant threats made by Momentum are real or have been imagined and exaggerated by the Tory media. There is certain a battle going on in the Labour party as the watered-down Tories of Blair are ousted and replaced by more radical Corbynites. I would expect those Blairites to bleat and I would expect the Tory media to attempt to exploit it. Personally I do not think it is as bad as the in-fighting in the Tory Party – though that does not get the coverage in the media that it deserves. Politics is nasty.
No I do not think Corbyn has anything to explain. As a very active backbencher he was active meeting all manner of people from Russia, Palestine and IRA. That’s how he got his peace prizes. He worked to find solutions. I don’t think there is any problem with that or that it is naïve.
As for some of his team – well there are a few I don’t like – but compared to the Tory team – well enough said.
Labour MPs and Labour Councillors have logged complaints of intimidation from Momentum supporters. Don’t attribute it all to a Tory press. You whitewash events just like Chakrabarti’s report. I note you make no comment on the public school/Oxbridge darlings behind Momentum & Corbyn. How do they differ from the Cameron/Osborne types you so often berated on the basis of their background?
Yes they have Bede – but they have vested interests don’t they?
I do note the privileged background of those people but at least they have adopted a more egalitarian policy. That sets them apart.
In theory they have but I doubt they would in practice. It’s easy to make promises when you are not in a position to effect them. My cynical side makes me think those kind of people are simply seeking power and the easiest way to achieve it is by backing Corbyn’s Labour. We’ll see if Corbyn’s Labour ever achieve power. His support for a Customs Union is going to alienate many Labour supporters who voted for leave the EU.
I think you are right. There are a bunch of people who would sell their mothers if they thought they could get power. No party is immune to that.
Having worked under both regimes I can tell you that Labour always funds public services better.
My Labour Council pays some of its officers more than a Government Cabinet Minister and two department heads, more than the Prime Minister. Not a bad salary for a relatively small authority for officers with little accountability. Is that what you mean by Labour funding public services better? I’ve just watched a Channel 4 Despatches documentary on the excessive pay and expenses claimed by some university Vice Chancellors, all subsidised by the taxpayer. The BBC pays excessive salaries to hundreds of its employees be they on the books or freelance. The BBC has little accountability for the taxpayers’ money they dispense. Now the BBC intends to raise the licence fee at the expense of the public. The licence fee needs to be abolished and the BBC should be self-financing like every other tv channel. A publicly subsidised communication channel is an anachronism in the age of the internet. Why should I be compelled by law to pay towards one favoured channel. The abuse of taxpayers money by some public services is a blight on our country.
Bede – you rightly point out that there is a madness at work here and no political party is beyond reproach. The elites are appointing themselves huge salaries and bonuses. It needs knocking on the head.
I am not opposed to the BBC being subsidized. I do think we need a quality service. If it was privatized like the rest of the shyte we’d have the same substandard garbage. The BBC represents something better. I am, however, just as incensed by the huge salaries being paid. It is ridiculous. The sums being paid to entertainers and sportspeople is obscene. That all comes out of our pockets one way or another and none of them are worth it.
I don’t agree that the BBC provides the best quality service. Of course, it’s largely a case of personal preference. I find Channel 4 News, al-Jazeera & Sky News better than the BBC. I find Channel 4 documentaries and news reporting, especially on the middle eastern conflicts, superior to the BBC. Tonight there’s a documentary by Channel 4’s Cathy Freeman on FGM for example. Maybe you spend all your time on your blog and don’t sample the numerous channels available other than the BBC. For me it’s a question of choice. Why should consumers be compelled by law to subsidise the BBC even if they never watch it?
I don’t know Bede. The BBC is a British institution. At its best it is an unbiased beacon of sensible reporting that the rest of the world acknowledges as fair. Sadly it doesn’t always live up to that.
Slavery was once an institution. Being an institution is no reason to keep it feeding it large amounts of taxpayers’ money. I don’t think any channel is impartial. Look how the BBC tried to cover up the Jimmy Savile story. Are Chris Evans, Graham Norton & Gary Linneka worth £2m a year? I don’t think so. Clare Balding could easily present Match of the Day and she’s on £150k per annum.
No those bozos aren’t worth their salt. But the Beeb does have some good stuff too.
My main point is that I and millions of others are compelled by law to subsidise those outrageous salaries & fees.
Yes – I can see that would be annoying.