Political Ramifications of Covid-19 Pandemic

[mjmooney]

51 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

I haven't seen any evidence of this at all on the part of 'the Murdoch media', and don't expect to either. What have you seen?

Don't have examples to hand, but the Telegraph has been pretty critical of Johnson, and quoting Starmer without any overt hostility. It's subtle, but it's there. 

[HanoiVillan]

7 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

Don't have examples to hand, but the Telegraph has been pretty critical of Johnson, and quoting Starmer without any overt hostility. It's subtle, but it's there. 

I think the Telegraph has mostly been its normal very right-wing self, even if there have been one or two critical stories, but more to the point it isn't a Murdoch paper.

I guess the Sunday Times had that big story a couple of weeks ago about how disorganised the government were at the start of the pandemic. Mostly though I just think the media have given the government an incredibly easy ride considering the scale of how bad the response has been.

[HanoiVillan]

Big opportunity this, though also with dangers:

Needs to spell out the inadequacies of the government's response clearly IMO. The time for 'thanks for their hard work, here are one or two other things they might consider' is over. We have either the worst death toll in Europe or close to it, and the government are coming off the utter shambles of last night.

[Wainy316]

1 hour ago, HanoiVillan said:

I think the Telegraph has mostly been its normal very right-wing self, even if there have been one or two critical stories, but more to the point it isn't a Murdoch paper.

I guess the Sunday Times had that big story a couple of weeks ago about how disorganised the government were at the start of the pandemic. Mostly though I just think the media have given the government an incredibly easy ride considering the scale of how bad the response has been.

Starmer has had columns in both the Heil and the Torygraph I believe.

[blandy]

2 hours ago, chrisp65 said:

I think there was far more of a problem with Corbyn than with the 2019 manifesto.

So do I. No one's going to agree with every part of a manifesto and I've said many times Labour's contained a lot more good than bad. The few (IMO) key bad things being canned is what I was trying to get at. I'm not at all convinced by the broadband thing myself, but others have a different view - that's fine. For me they need to focus on what they can do when they get in, to have the most immediate beneficial impact, the lower level stuff will flow naturally if they are practical rather than wholly ideological and rather than thinking up a raft of stuff that sounds nice, but is just fluff and could be achieved more simply by other means.

[blandy]

1 hour ago, HanoiVillan said:

I think the Telegraph has mostly been its normal very right-wing self, even if there have been one or two critical stories, but more to the point it isn't a Murdoch paper.

I guess the Sunday Times had that big story a couple of weeks ago about how disorganised the government were at the start of the pandemic. Mostly though I just think the media have given the government an incredibly easy ride considering the scale of how bad the response has been.

The Murdoch Press have in the past said "It was the Sun wot won it", they were much less hostile to Blair, when/because he was popular. The Sunday Times has been really interesting. Ultra Brexity paper, pretty much an in-house Tory paper, but they're changing. They've done plenty about Gov't errors and incompetence (I'm not a regular reader!) and the Tories have pretty much banned any co-operation and briefing with them, I read (elsewhere) that they're seen as the number one media enemy by Johnson and Cummins. I think they're changing editor, too, to a more central-ish bod. And Murdoch's setting up some Radio 4 equivalent radio station, isn't he? Times radio or something? If Starmer carries on looking competent (and he'll always look more competent than Johnson or Corbyn, then he'll get a reasonable hearing, I'd think.

[HanoiVillan]

17 minutes ago, blandy said:

The Murdoch Press have in the past said "It was the Sun wot won it", they were much less hostile to Blair, when/because he was popular. The Sunday Times has been really interesting. Ultra Brexity paper, pretty much an in-house Tory paper, but they're changing. They've done plenty about Gov't errors and incompetence (I'm not a regular reader!) and the Tories have pretty much banned any co-operation and briefing with them, I read (elsewhere) that they're seen as the number one media enemy by Johnson and Cummins. I think they're changing editor, too, to a more central-ish bod. And Murdoch's setting up some Radio 4 equivalent radio station, isn't he? Times radio or something? If Starmer carries on looking competent (and he'll always look more competent than Johnson or Corbyn, then he'll get a reasonable hearing, I'd think.

I can't predict the future, but it would be fairly astonishing if Murdoch had his media properties hold anything other than a hostile view towards the Labour party. We'll see, but I won't be going broke betting on this sort of shift, that's for sure.

[blandy]

13 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

it would be fairly astonishing if Murdoch had his media properties hold anything other than a hostile view towards the Labour party.

It's happened before

 

and this 

'This is the election for the millennium. In six weeks' time, Britain will vote for a government to take it into the 21st century...The people need a leader with vision, purpose and courage who can inspire them and fire their imaginations. The Sun believes that man is Tony Blair.'

[HanoiVillan]

The world is very different now, and so are both the Labour party and Rupert Murdoch.

[blandy]

11 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

The world is very different now, and so are both the Labour party and Rupert Murdoch.

Yes, that's true. The Tories are different too. Murdoch liked Thatcher, he didn't like Major. I'm not convinced he likes Johnson. I think it's also a thing with his papers where he basically tells the Sun what to write from an "angle" point of view. Much much less so the Times and the Sunday Times. It was noticeable that the Sunday Times was very Pro Brexit and the Daily Times was anti-Brexit. I suspect the two papers will be combined due to falling circulation, increasing digital and the need to reduce costs. I'd wager the Times (daily) will be the bigger "lead" editorially (on the basis that it's not stark raving mad like the Sunday Times can be).

Maybe it's wishful thinking on my part, and while I don't think Murdoch's every gonna become a lefty, I do think if Starmer contrasts favourably with Johnson and gains popularity for Labour, then as I said above, he'll get much more of a hearing from serious papers. Tabloids always gonna tabloid.

[Chindie]

Johnson and the Sun's editor are so close it's like **** Ouroboros

[blandy]

8 minutes ago, Chindie said:

Johnson and the Sun's editor are so close it's like **** Ouroboros

They changed editor.

[HanoiVillan]

39 minutes ago, blandy said:

Yes, that's true. The Tories are different too. Murdoch liked Thatcher, he didn't like Major. I'm not convinced he likes Johnson.

I'm not an expert on the court politics of the Murdoch empire, but from what I understand, he's not massively keen on Johnson, and prefers Gove (who after all, used to be a senior employee). There were certainly a lot of people who thought that Sunday Times article was part of some backroom Gove-positioning, though I have no way of knowing how true that is. I say this to point out that if Johnson proves a busted flush, there is always the option of 'A N Other Tory' rather than backing Labour.

39 minutes ago, blandy said:

I think it's also a thing with his papers where he basically tells the Sun what to write from an "angle" point of view. Much much less so the Times and the Sunday Times. It was noticeable that the Sunday Times was very Pro Brexit and the Daily Times was anti-Brexit.

Brexit was an issue that split the Conservative party though. The actual content of the Times is standard right-wing establishment fare for the most part, worsened by occasional Spiked-style contrarianism on the one hand, and occasional outright bigotry (especially to Muslims and trans people) on the other. Plenty of very right-wing people nevertheless voted remain; I note  in passing that describes both of my parents, who are Times subscribers (and who have both become notably right-wing since subscribing). This ship is travelling in one direction, and it's not towards the Labour party. I don't see that changing, but I guess you never know.

Anyway, we should take this to the Murdoch thread I guess.

Edited May 11, 2020 by HanoiVillan

[Chindie]

32 minutes ago, blandy said:

They changed editor.

Less than 3 months ago. 3 months dominated by a single story. And the old editor went to the Times.

Anywho, Starmer's face fits. But it won't make any difference. We've got an elected dictatorship for the next 4 years. When the time comes, it'll be Tories again.

[blandy]

2 hours ago, Chindie said:

When the time comes, it'll be Tories again.

I bet it won't. Too much will change. Brexit, Virus (to get back on topic) Murdoch will be brown bread and someone else will be in charge (maybe another Murdoch, true, but still...) Papers will have even less influence, Trump will be gone, Europe will be different. Climate change will be ever more of a visible tangible issue, The world will be really different. The tories will still be words removed. Their time will be past.

No, no isolation isn't making me go slowly mad... 

[terrytini]

3 hours ago, welnik said:

By which time I will have had back all the tax I paid last year and more! 

How the actual, are we supposed to pay for it all? 

Because money is all pretend !

I pay you, you pay me, we pay him. Round and round it goes.

Largely a convenient illusion.

But notwithstanding that it can be afforded with relatively modest taxation ( especially if we finally embrace the idea that there’s a lot of money in the hands of relatively few) over a long period. Then the only issue is whether the Markets will be happy with it and, by and large, they will be.

Remember it’s only a couple of years back we were told there was no money for the very modest proposals in the Labour Manifesto versus Theresa May. 
 

Yet there was. And there is.

 

 

[Xela]

5 hours ago, welnik said:

By which time I will have had back all the tax I paid last year and more! 

How the actual, are we supposed to pay for it all? 

Magic money trees innit. 

Or the tax payer will be **** over for years to come. Maybe a further increase in the pensionable age?

[DCJonah]

9 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

I like Sunak so far, but it's very easy to appear likeable and competent when your only task is to come out and say you're giving people lots of money. No criticism of what he's done, but he's had no real opposition from the press or from Labour, because it was clearly the right thing to do.

We'll see how well he comes across over the next year as he's tasked with trying to claw some of that money back.

The Telegraph reports today that the Treasury's plans involve scrapping the triple lock (bold move, but I approve), a tax increase, which I think is fair enough, but then on top of that, a public sector pay freeze. again, for 2 years, which I think is a disgrace and ought to lead to a general strike if it becomes official policy. If their response to this crisis after putting NHS staff in harm's way through piss-poor preparation and insufficient supplies is to clap on their doorstep for heroes one moment, then freeze their pay for years in the next, well, it'll really show them for what they are.

I said it a couple of months ago, that the thing that was really pissing me off was knowing that nothing will change in regards to the people we are asking to get us through this. 

Public workers were shit on before and it will happen again. But don't forget to clap on Thursday. 

[chrisp65]

I’d hope that this rumour being floated around that there will be a 2 year public pay freeze, is simply a tactic.

A tactic to have it amended to you can all pay more tax if you want careers and essential services rewarded beyond banging some pots.

Unfortunately, the way a lot of people think in this country, once it’s ‘over’, then it’s over and there’s no need to pay a hospital cleaner any more money with 3,000,000 on unemployment.

 

[mrbojangles]

Personally I cannot see the pay freeze happening unless there is a drastic increase in salary and then frozen for 2 years. I think the government realise that the public appreciate the NHS and there would be a National outcry if this was to happen. I don't think they can risk the backlash before another election. 

I agree with most about Rishi however like some have pointed out the hard part comes when he wants to take money off people and businesses rather than handing it out.

On another note i now refuse to watch any briefing led by Hancock, an absolute word removed