blandy Posted July 17, 2016 Moderator Share Posted July 17, 2016 3 minutes ago, chrisp65 said: Yes I'd have to agree there's a definite chicken and egg element to the media problem. Newspapers lie and apparently there is nothing we can do about it. ... Corbyn should have been able to man up and improve his media technique and be seen to be magnanimous. But no, he still can't do media. It's an absolute shame as it's a critical part of the job. I've suggested it before, but it's almost like he has to split the job with someone that can do media. I'd rather him have interesting ideas and struggle at media but have a 'spokesperson' than the alternative route of Owen Smith who appears to believe in whatever is up in the polling today, but comes over well in front of a camera. Indeed. the media "problem" is only a problem for Corbyn. He's the one who stands to benefit from potentially better coverage. He should be making the effort.Not just for coverage of him, but for coverage of his party. It's why he's a poor leader reason number 33. For someone who professes to want to discuss and consider and debate, ignoring the press for the most part is daft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted July 17, 2016 Share Posted July 17, 2016 9 minutes ago, blandy said: The study doesn't show where the Guardian is on the political spectrum. it only looks at coverage of Corbyn as an individual. What might be interesting is to see where coverage of say Tom Watson stands. Or of say Natalie Bennet compared to Caroline Lucas. I would suggest that coverage of Bennett is/was much more critical than coverage of Lucas. And that coverage of Lucas is much more positive than of Corbyn, despite their pretty similar views on many things. My perception of the truth is that Lucas is much better at "the media" than Bennett or Corbyn and consequently gets better coverage. If you know where Corbyn stands (old Left) then you can see where the Guardian stands in relation to that. They look to be exactly where you would expect to find them, roughly where New Labour were: SJWs with sympathy and not much else for the poor and better pay for elite public sector employees (their readership). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a m ole Posted July 17, 2016 Share Posted July 17, 2016 (edited) 23 minutes ago, Davkaus said: I just saw Angela Eagle on the BBC this morning. Her platform for her leadership bid seems to just be "I'm a woman"? What I have gathered from the recent leadership contests is that being a female, working class mother is far more important than policy or principle. 49 minutes ago, blandy said: However it's his job to try and get as many people as possible to vote labour. That includes readers of papers which are hostile to Labour, or to him personally (as well as ones which are more neutral or supportive, with which he also doesn't engage. It's a mistake, and it's not doing his job properly. He is engaging and persuading quite a few people I know, in the 20-30 age group, through a combination of his principles as well as rejecting the idea that politicians have to be media savvy PR machines. I do appreciate that is only a narrow demographic though. Edited July 17, 2016 by a m ole Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted July 17, 2016 Share Posted July 17, 2016 9 minutes ago, a m ole said: What I have gathered from the recent leadership contests is that being a female, working class mother is far more important than policy or principle. also, it's statistically possible that all male candidates could be paedophiles I'm not saying they all are, but you know, it's common sense not to bother with the risk child bearing heterosexual females for me, everytime 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted July 17, 2016 Share Posted July 17, 2016 37 minutes ago, blandy said: Most papers will give space to major political figures if they want it, of whatever hue. You're being pragmatic Pete, stop it now tbh I didn't know if he wrote a regular column? I understand your point. I also understand why he might think "feck the lot of them". Corbyn's not your standard 'ready for camera' politician certainly. That last guy in power was, he's just bailed out of the home he broke. I'd be amazed if Corbyn succeeded with social media groundswell, but it's going to take a feat of perhaps that magnitude to get real change. He's making a fight of it - Good on him, if not the goons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 17, 2016 Moderator Share Posted July 17, 2016 36 minutes ago, Xann said: You're being pragmatic Pete, stop it now tbh I didn't know if he wrote a regular column? I understand your point. I also understand why he might think "feck the lot of them". Corbyn's not your standard 'ready for camera' politician certainly. That last guy in power was, he's just bailed out of the home he broke. I'd be amazed if Corbyn succeeded with social media groundswell, but it's going to take a feat of perhaps that magnitude to get real change. He's making a fight of it - Good on him, if not the goons. That photo of the headlines and quotes says 2 things. Firstly some headline writers are like the Viz thing where they'll write a headline such as "Rampant Hottie" above paragraph that says something like "The telephone wasn't working so he decided to use a flag to attract attention" - completely unrelated to the text. But it also says that to be against the media to the extent he is, he must assume no-one reads the words under the headlines - because to be fair to the papers, the actual content of what he said is reported accurately. Also a few of the headlines aren't too bad, and aren't misrepresentative of the story below (given the way headlines are intended to capture the gist of what the txt below is about). He has a media bod, who should and does know this. I agree with the other points, I would really like him to be better at putting across his agenda, to be better at being leader of the opposition and to be better at giving a left party more of a chance of getting elected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 17, 2016 Moderator Share Posted July 17, 2016 2 hours ago, MakemineVanilla said: If you know where Corbyn stands (old Left) then you can see where the Guardian stands in relation to that. They look to be exactly where you would expect to find them, roughly where New Labour were: SJWs with sympathy and not much else for the poor and better pay for elite public sector employees (their readership). Though I wouldn't disagree with your overall summary of the Grauniad, your skills are obviously better than mine MMV, because I can't get that from reading the study, or from any of the graphs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 17, 2016 Moderator Share Posted July 17, 2016 4 hours ago, MakemineVanilla said: I am not sure why people are so hostile towards the LSE report, which seems to have used recognised methodology in its analysis. Oh and re the above - I'm not hostile to it, it just looks like some people at LSE have thought Corbyn is harshly treated (I do too) and decided to demonstrate the extent of the harshness. All so good so far, but as it doesn't compare with any other politician, current or past, it's not really telling anyone anything they don't already know. It jus says right wing papers and their proprietors don't like left wing islington socialists and that left-ish papers are more fair in their coverage. Like I said bears, toilets, woods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 17, 2016 Moderator Share Posted July 17, 2016 2 hours ago, a m ole said: He is engaging and persuading quite a few people I know, in the 20-30 age group, through a combination of his principles as well as rejecting the idea that politicians have to be media savvy PR machines. I do appreciate that is only a narrow demographic though. Yeah, that's clearly true. Credit to him for that. If only he could also attract or engage the other 80% or whatever it is, of society. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted July 17, 2016 Share Posted July 17, 2016 4 hours ago, MakemineVanilla said: SJWs Not this again. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted July 17, 2016 Share Posted July 17, 2016 2 hours ago, HanoiVillan said: Not this again. Apologies. I should have described the Guardian as promoting false consciousness (see Marx). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 17 hours ago, blandy said: ...He has a media bod, who should and does know this... He's trying not to be Tony Blair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 18, 2016 Moderator Share Posted July 18, 2016 30 minutes ago, Xann said: He's trying not to be Tony Blair. Yeah, that was Cameron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hippo Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 1 hour ago, Xann said: He's trying not to be Tony Blair. Yeah - don't copy someone who 3 elections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 another straw for the camel... Tax Research UK Quote I had the opportunity to see what was happening inside the PLP. The leadership wasn’t confusing as much as just silent. There was no policy direction, no messaging, no direction, no co-ordination, no nothing. Shadow ministers appeared to have been left with no direction as to what to do. It was shambolic. The leadership usually couldn’t even get a press release out on time to meet print media deadlines and then complained they got no coverage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 18, 2016 Moderator Share Posted July 18, 2016 32 minutes ago, chrisp65 said: another straw for the camel... Tax Research UK Good article that. Here's another line Quote it seems like Corbynism is an empty shell that opposes capitalism for the sake of the oppressed but has no clue as to what to yet in its place. And that’s not responsible, it’s not electable and it’s not going to work. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaglint Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 (edited) Yes it was interesting thanks for posting. I thought the Owen Smith speech about rewriting clause 4 around inequality was interesting. That more than anything is an issue that speaks to me. I get that he's been a bit wishy washy in the past but I'm encouraged by what I've heard from him so far. Edited July 18, 2016 by villaglint 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 10 minutes ago, hippo said: Yeah - don't copy someone who won 3 elections... ... Believed his own hype, had a major part in destabilising a whole region that has left hundreds of thousands dead. 'Spin' was another word associated with Blair. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hippo Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 8 minutes ago, Xann said: ... Believed his own hype, had a major part in destabilising a whole region that has left hundreds of thousands dead. 'Spin' was another word associated with Blair. All true - but it doesn't alter the fact he won 3 elections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hippo Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 43 minutes ago, villaglint said: Yes it was interesting thanks for posting. I thought the Owen Smith speech about rewriting clause 4 around inequality was interesting. That more than anything is an issue that speaks to me. I get that he's been a bit wishy washy in the past but I'm encouraged by what I've heard from him so far. At the moment smith looks the viable leader. He will get my vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts