Well done Ed Miliband for speaking out about the Daily Mail's article on his father

(487 Posts)
claig Tue 01-Oct-13 15:05:00

The Daily Mail used a low tactic of accusing Ed miliband's father of hating Britain.

I think it was a nasty thing to do. Just because someone is a Marxist and may criticise some aspects of the country or its instiutions does not mean that they hate Britain.

KayHarker Tue 01-Oct-13 16:11:48

I was pleased with the Mail headline 'An evil legacy and we're not apologizing'. At last they finally admit it...

2cats2many Tue 01-Oct-13 16:13:29


MrJudgeyPants Tue 01-Oct-13 16:35:32

Blimey claig that's a bit of a volte face for you to disagree with the Mail isn't it?

For the record, I agree with Ed on this one (and it's not often I'll say that). A hatchet job on his old man is beyond the pale.

claig Tue 01-Oct-13 16:47:26

Yes, MrJudgeyPants, I am usually one of the Mail's staunchest fans, but you are right, on this occasion, they have gone too far.

We are a great country because we allow free speech and thought and diverse political opinions and do not denigrate people because of their views or beliefs.

Also, I think they were trying to smear Ed as well by attacking his father, by subtly implying that Ed was influenced by his father.

Low tactic that cheapens political debate.

MissM Tue 01-Oct-13 17:18:37

Hear hear. Disgusting tactics, and their 'standing by' the story is shameful. How dare they behave this way. I think Ed is behaving with incredible dignity over this - bet he really wants to punch someone.

claig Tue 01-Oct-13 17:21:23

Yes, I am surprised they are so unrepentant and are trying to justify it.

Yes, Ed has great dignity over this and many other things too. Can't see how this will benefit the Daily Mail's image.

marssparklesdownonme Tue 01-Oct-13 17:22:29

Disgusting behaviour from the DM. Are they going to apologise for being Nazi sympathisers and Supporters of Oswald Mosleys Black shirts? No doubt they consider that's not relevant, whilst its ok to rake up the past about others . Cheap and tacky, just what you'd expect from Dacre and co.

limitedperiodonly Tue 01-Oct-13 17:26:31

I'm listening to a R4 PM report on it now.

I'm shocked. The Mail can print what they like within the law but they are insane.

Insane to attack in the first place. Madder to give him a right of reply and then attack him again.

Look at Ralph Miliband's record in the '30s and '40s and look at the Mail's.

What Miliband has done in taking to fight to them is not only morally right, but tactically so.

I think what David Cameron said this morning in mild support of Miliband was right. I think he should have gone further, but I think he was probably afraid of riling them.

I think that's a tactical mistake at this moment. But I do believe Cameron thinks it's a low blow.

And how is this supposed to help the Conservative Party or press freedom?

It's the Conservative Party conference and we're talking about Labour and most people probably aren't well-disposed to newspapers now.

MissM Tue 01-Oct-13 17:28:27

Just been listening to that report as well. Gobsmacking to defend the Mail in the way that man was doing (who was he anyway?)

Think Cameron and Clegg should be much more vocal in their disgust at the Mail's behaviour. Bet they're scared in case they get picked on. Like saying nothing when a child's being bullied.

claig Tue 01-Oct-13 17:29:43

'And how is this supposed to help the Conservative Party or press freedom?'

Good point. The Mail are trying to get sympathy over press regulation by politicians and are accusing Ed of trying to regulate them and then they go and use a low tactic to attack his dead father. They won't win much sympathy with those tactics.

claig Tue 01-Oct-13 17:30:43

Yes, I got the impression that Cameron was possibly a bit scared of going too far against the Mail too.

limitedperiodonly Tue 01-Oct-13 17:31:25

I guess that the Mail didn't think Miliband would take them on.

I'm glad he did, and that's not just because I'm a Labour voter.

I support Andrew Mitchell. I suspect I wouldn't like him if I met him, but I think he was lied about by the Met, which is another big organisation that's used to getting its own way.

marssparklesdownonme Tue 01-Oct-13 17:34:45

This is the newspaper , I use that term lightly, hmm that claims to support war veterans. Oh wasn't Ralph Miliband ex Royal Navy? How strange that he's a suitable target for their Pro Nazi anti jewish vitriol.

MissM Tue 01-Oct-13 17:36:36

My grandfather was also a Jewish refugee, also a Socialist and also fought in WW2. He often told us that this country was wonderful as it had saved his life. He was eternally grateful to Britain. So I almost feel as though this attack on Miliband's father is an attack on all the fathers and grandfathers who were like him. I hope this backfires on them hugely. Lots of non-Labour supporters will find this a low blow as well.

limitedperiodonly Tue 01-Oct-13 17:43:32

I know that the Major government was held in contempt at the Mail and Paul Dacre described his paper as the unofficial opposition. I think he truly believed it and thought it was his duty.

I had my problems with it then. But 20 years on I think he's gone completely fucking mad. And this is someone I freely admit knows more about journalism than I ever will.

I guess he might feel the same way about Cameron and I guess that people around don't dare say anything.

I'm not joking when I say I think he ought to be given a liquid cosh and taken away for his own good.

claig Tue 01-Oct-13 17:47:59

I have read that Dacre was good friends with Gordon Brown.

Ed had a very good conference speech. it seems that the Mail wants to paint him as Red Ed, some kind of Marxist 1970s throwback who will bring back socialism etc, when as Ed says all he really wants to do is make capitalism work better and fairer for ordinary people.

Maybe they are worried about Ed's appeal.

MissM Tue 01-Oct-13 17:50:03

I think he must be worrying them for them to stoop to this kind of behaviour. Funny really, because, as a Labour voter, he doesn't appeal to me at all. Until now. He's gone up hugely in my estimation.

limitedperiodonly Tue 01-Oct-13 17:50:17

missM I think the person was from The Spectactor. Granted, I don't agree with their politics, but I find that magazine juvenile and their representative entirely representative.

I guess PM asked other right wing commentators to defend this and drew a blank.

I'm not that enamoured by the Mirror but Kevin Maguire (who was on in opposition) is a decent and very intelligent person and I was struck by the level of quite restrained outrage in his voice.

PetiteRaleuse Tue 01-Oct-13 17:53:12

I completely agree with you op for once grin

It was shocking even by the Mail's standards and that is saying something. I hope it backfires and bites Paul Dacre on the arse. It is a disgrace, the origial article was bad enough but what they have printed today is appaling.

Fwiw I don't think Brown and Dacre were actually friends, but they had a relationship of mutual professional respect until, well, until they didn't.

MissM Tue 01-Oct-13 17:54:08

Great post limited period - makes sense that it was the Spectator.

claig Tue 01-Oct-13 17:54:51

I am usually a Tory, but thinking of going UKIP, but Ed is great. I like him a lot. It is the rest of them behind him that I don't like. It is right when they say that he showed courage and principle to come out first against Murdoch and when he showed principle on Syria. He has shown principle and dignity throughout his entire leadership.

He made a good speech at the conference, much better than Boris Johnson's jokey one today.

claig Tue 01-Oct-13 17:58:45

I also like Kevin McGuire. I watch him on Sky News Press Review and he has a great sense of hunour and talks a lot of sense.

bemybebe Tue 01-Oct-13 17:59:45

I absolutely abhor DM for this article and generally this paper churning out very low quality product.

Attacking someone's relative for "loving" or "not loving" the country is just laughable.

But I have very little sympathy for Ed Milliband's dad - marxists in the UK were and are allowed to exist, whilst all the regimes around the world that preached marxist ideology were fundamentally inhumane, forget about the freedom of speech - they physically exterminated their opponents.

Still sympathise with EM - he is certainly not responsible...

limitedperiodonly Tue 01-Oct-13 18:04:08

Maybe they are worried about Ed's appeal.

I agree.

I know we have different politics claig but both of us respect the Mail, from different ends.

But though I said Dacre will forget more about journalism than I will ever know, I do think he's gone mad.

With respect to Dacre, I'd have ignored Miliband's assault on the energy companies and his rant about land speculators 'using it or losing it'.

There were plenty of other splashes - the Nairobi massacre for one.

I saw loads of commentators to Mail Online calling theMail on their hypocrisy over criticism of energy companies' profits.

It might not be a workable strategy but it's bloody popular and guess the conservatives kicked themselves for not thinking of it first.

I'm baffled. The only explanation I can think of is that Dacre clearly despises Cameron and thinks he is the unofficial opposition.

<they're coming to take me away, ha ha>

limitedperiodonly Tue 01-Oct-13 18:05:51

I love the Maguire and Andrew Pierce double act on Sky News.

claig Tue 01-Oct-13 18:07:01

What next? If someone wants to nationalise the means of production, is anti-monarchy and doesn't bow to the Bulllingdon Club, will the Mail say that they hate the country?

claig Tue 01-Oct-13 18:08:49

'I love the Maguire and Andrew Pierce double act on Sky News.'#

Yes, that is fantastic TV. I also like the Observer's Elizabeth Day as well as, of course, the Mail's Kelvin Mackenzie, but he is not on so much anymore unfortunately.

PetiteRaleuse Tue 01-Oct-13 18:10:19

Fixing energy prices would go completely against the Tory philosophy and their donors

I respect the Mail for how they have coped in the 'digital age' but I loathe what they write and the hypocrisy wrt the values they claim to uphold.

BasilBabyEater Tue 01-Oct-13 18:12:05

Even if his father did hate Britain (unlikely since he served in the Royal Navy), can someone explain to me why Ed Milliband would be responsible for that?

When did children become responsible for their parents' political views?

claig Tue 01-Oct-13 18:15:21

Basil, I think it is also a subtle smear of Ed, implying that he learned his socialist views from his father and in some way trying to equate partially with his father, whose legacy the Mail has gone over the top in today describing as "evil".

They are trying to divide and rule and turn the public against this Marxist bogeyman that they are trying to build up.

claig Tue 01-Oct-13 18:16:26

But it seems desperate because it doesn't look like Labour has much chance of getting in at the election, unless the Mail knows more and sees Ed as a serious threat.

claig Tue 01-Oct-13 18:17:49

Maybe the UKIP split of the Tory vote really is a threat to the Tories and might let Labour in and maybe that is why they want to paint Ed as a 1970s socialist in the public's eyes.

limitedperiodonly Tue 01-Oct-13 18:22:36

I'm sure Ed Miliband is angry and smart. But Labour's Director of Communications, Bob Roberts, is no slouch either. He presents the image that he's a nice guy. And mostly he is.

But I think the constant digging at the word 'evil' is a great idea and possibly his.

Stupid overkill from the Mail.

Maybe they should finally pension the pernicious author Geoffrey Levy off. I don't expect they will.

They can be very loyal to people.

Cunts, granted. But they can show a twisted loyalty.

Catmint Tue 01-Oct-13 18:23:47

I agree, I think Ed Miliband has shown great dignity and courage to call the Mail to account for their article. It is a sign of the Mail's moral degradation and self interested world view that they have refused to apologise for their vile actions.

Awful. I didn't think I could dislike the Mail more...I have found I can. And I have renewed respect for Ed Miliband.

VerySmallSqueak Tue 01-Oct-13 18:27:37

Ed Miliband is to be admired for how he has dealt with this.

Lilithmoon Tue 01-Oct-13 18:28:37

Incredible own goal from the Daily Mail. They really are a nasty mess.

PetiteRaleuse Tue 01-Oct-13 18:36:41

claig it isn't a subtle smear of Ed Miliband it is blatant. They are running scared. They used to be like this about Kinnock, but I think Ed has more chance of getting in than Kinnock ever did, as the voters are very very fed up of being treated like rubbish by the boys at the top.

Tbf the paper doesn't like the Tories either; naturally they would be UKIP but with the Mail's murky fascist supporting past and UKIP's dirty little racist secrets coming out by the bucketload I don't think they dare switch allegiance openly. They might before the next election.

claig Tue 01-Oct-13 18:40:07

Has anyone noticed that Cameron seems much more stressed, speaking quickly and angrily, in interviews etc?

Ed is a brilliant performer, calm, jokey and self-deprecating even under pressure and personal attacks. If it goes on like this, then come the TV debates, I expect Ed to run rings around an increasingly tense, angry, shirty, stressed Cameron. And the big difference this time is that Ed is in my opinion much more appealing than Gordon Brown.

claig Tue 01-Oct-13 18:44:56

PetiteRaleuse, I think you are right, it is a blatant smear. But I don't think the paper is a UKIP supporter, it still supports the Tories, possibly due to the big money etc that still backs the Tories.

Increasingly, the Mail's readers are turning to UKIP as can be seen in their comments section, but the Mail in my opinion still tries to steer them towards the Tories, but I think it is a losing battle because as you say the peope are so fed up of being treated like rubbish that they are increasingly turning to UKIP in protest. The mail won't be able to turn the tide for the Tories, so maybe that is why they are using ridiculous tactics against Ed now.

BasilBabyEater Tue 01-Oct-13 18:47:24

I found that bloke on PM really revolting.

He was absolutely adamant that the only reason Milliband is complaining is because he's opportunistic and it's something for him to get on his high horse about.

I wonder if these people realise how they come across. He sounded as if he either never had a father, or had an extremely dysfunctional relationship with his. Nothing wrong with that (I'm no stranger to dysfunctional parental relationships) but he came across as not being aware that people who grow up in functional, loving families might actually be outraged and hurt by an attack on their dead father. Like he couldn't believe that there might be some real feeling behind Milliband's fightback, because he's not on nodding terms with proper feelings.

Cameron on the other hand was quite moving and human on the subject on Today. I can't stand the bloke but I was quite touched by what he said.

PatioDweller Tue 01-Oct-13 18:53:45

As I said on the other thread, I think Ed Milliband has handled this beautifully. He could have given a response full of political rhetoric but by simply saying, 'it's a lie' he simply nailed it. I'm not a lover of his politics but he definitely came out better over this. I also think DC would do himself a huge favour by coming out more strongly against this. If what you read is to be believed, ie he has smart people analysing forums such as this to get a grasp on popular opinion then he'll know voters of all persuasions are disgusted by this and he'll come out against it.

MissM Tue 01-Oct-13 19:09:25

Agree BasilBabyEater - that bloke was clutching at straws. There's nothing in the way that EM has handled this that suggests he is looking for political gain. He sounded genuinely choked in his interview about it and completely human, untouched by spin doctors.

claig Tue 01-Oct-13 19:10:23

Ed has handled this brilliantly because he has come out alone, on his own, versus the Daily Mail. It is classic David and Goliath and the people have sympathy with David.

Usually, labour get cabinet ministers etc to say this is outrageous, but on this occasion, Ed has stepped into the lion's den against the Mail on his own, and that is why he will win against the bully.

MiniTheMinx Tue 01-Oct-13 19:12:27

ah that's nice claig <gives claig big hug> grin I am going to have to read the Mail now aren't I. Kevin McGuire is fab, he talks to the people in lingo they can fathom.

PatioDweller Tue 01-Oct-13 19:14:45

Disappointed by David Cameron's response. I think he sounded bumbly and insincere. Are we really to believe he hadn't read any of it and didn't really know what the article said?

Show some balls, Mr Cameron! Come out and condemn it. It won't lose you any votes and may well win you some.

claig Tue 01-Oct-13 19:21:26

Mini, I alwatys love your posts and I learn things about politics, the economy and Marxism from them and agree with quite a lot of them too. This Daily Mail attack is a nasty attack on politics, on socialists, on immigrants, on refugees and on Marxists and it is beneath free and civilised political debate, which the Mail should be upholding.

Yes, Maguire is brilliant. If he was in the Labour shadow cabinet instead of some of the others in there, Labour's votes would go up undoubtedly.

MissM Tue 01-Oct-13 19:23:45

Cameron hasn't ever been short of comments on about articles he hasn't read in the past.

'This Daily Mail attack is a nasty attack on politics, on socialists, on immigrants, on refugees and on Marxists and it is beneath free and civilised political debate, which the Mail should be upholding.'

Spot on.

PatioDweller Tue 01-Oct-13 19:29:22

I'm also not sure how they have that audacity considering their pro-fascist stance during the 30s as compared to Ralph Milliband's anti-fascist stance as evidenced by both his writings and his membership of the British armed forces during the war.

claig Tue 01-Oct-13 19:29:29

MissM, your post about your grandfather was spot on. This Daily Mail insult is not just an insult to Ed and his dead father, but to many other people in this country too, and I am flabbergasted that they haven't had the good grace to apologise for it, but have intensified it even further.

MiniTheMinx Tue 01-Oct-13 19:30:14

claig, its nice to see you around again. I have just had a quick read of the mail, I am skipping round the kitchen because this is the bestest thing that could possibly happen.

SanityClause Tue 01-Oct-13 19:30:44

When the proposed cap on fuel was announced at the Labour conference, the fuel company shares went right down. It seems the City wouldn't rule out a Labour victory.

claig Tue 01-Oct-13 19:37:50

Good point, Sanity. The markets don't think a Labour victory is impossible and they aren't taking any chances.

If Labour could steal some of UKIP's policies,they could outflank the Tories and win a landslide. If they offered a referendum, went for lower taxes for working people, more freedom and libertarianism and less political correctness, then they could win lots of UKIP voters, who are mainly working and middle class people. The Tories would be left as the big business party without many voters.

limitedperiodonly Tue 01-Oct-13 19:41:07

Maguire is brilliant. If he was in the Labour shadow cabinet instead of some of the others in there, Labour's votes would go up undoubtedly.

It's not for want of trying but I don't blame him.

I think he's too outspoken

limitedperiodonly Tue 01-Oct-13 19:43:00

I really don't think Labour should go for UKIP voter

<and there we drift away claig>

But respect

claig Tue 01-Oct-13 19:43:30

It is outspoken honest people that the public are crying out for, not 'cabs for hire' who do whatever they are told.

To some extent, it is Boris's outspokenness and seeming honesty that make him popular.

claig Tue 01-Oct-13 19:44:44

'I really don't think Labour should go for UKIP voter'

Maybe not, but if they did, they'd win.

limitedperiodonly Tue 01-Oct-13 19:47:25

I think Kevin is a million miles the better man than Boris is

claig Tue 01-Oct-13 19:49:25

I agree. I heard the beginning of Boris's speech today and I thought it was a flop. He criticised young British working people and had some sympathy for that idiot Jamie Oliver's view of them.

MiniTheMinx Tue 01-Oct-13 20:26:04

I have just read the original, Eds response and the Daily mail comment "An evil legacy and why we won't apologise"

I don't think this will have done Miliband any harm but the daily mail have disgraced themselves.

I won't take the comment to pieces here because I could write an essay. Not only is it full of right wing spiel and propaganda its so badly written that even an imbecile could see through it. The arguments they put forward to support their thesis that Ralph hated Britain is lame. Had they have simply stated is disliked nationalism then people would have accepted this without question as fact.

Ralph Miliband like most Marxists would be in favour of open boarders, boarders that are open not as they are now to the free flow of capital which actually creates a situation where states are undermined economically but forced to act in national interest. But in favour of no states. What we have now is nationalism for the numpties open boarders for the flow of capital and cheap labour, it doesn't benefit us, only the capitalist class. Disliking nationalism and war is not the same as disliking Britain.

As for the argument about Marxists waging class war, I'm falling off my chair, its a fantastic read. Working class people do not wage class war, that is for the elite. How typical of the mouth piece of this elite to claim they are victims of class antagonism, hilarious. Say that to a working person now £1300 a year worse off since the Tories took office, the 73 people who die everyweek waiting for an appeal after Atos have atomised them, or the 50,000 people facing eviction now, the 500,000 using foodbanks, the thousands of young people paying 27,000 for a degree, the 3.5 million children living in poverty in the uk and the child going to school with an empty belly. Who is waging a class war?

They don't have the money their pockets, so who has, would that be the people winning the class war?

MiniTheMinx Tue 01-Oct-13 20:27:09

Had they have simply stated *he disliked nationalism

claig Tue 01-Oct-13 20:37:37

Comments of Daily Mail readers to Miliband's reply and the Daily Mail editorial are against the Daily Mail.

BasilBabyEater Tue 01-Oct-13 20:43:15

All the Tories they approached on the Ch4 news were clearly embarrassed by it.

Wannabestepfordwife Tue 01-Oct-13 21:33:59

I wasn't a Milliband fan but I have really warmed to him after reading his reply it was a thoughtful and touching piece.

I am normally a mail fan but I'm disgusted that they ran this piece and even more disgusted over their comment on the article.

I have to say the mail calling Milliband's reply menacing genuinely made me laugh in disbelief

ttosca Tue 01-Oct-13 21:34:22

The Daily Mail is a fascist newspaper. It has always supported fascism.

It supported the Blackshirts in the 1930s, and it supported the National Front only very recently:

Despite her flaws, the only responsible vote in France next Sunday is one for Marine Le Pen


It has always hated women, hated coloured people, hated immigrants.

It has always been a nasty, reactionary piece of shit excuse for a newspaper.

Chipstick10 Tue 01-Oct-13 22:46:54

I agree with stig Abel, that ed milliband is now turning it into political capital. A crass article was written about his father and now he claims he is doing something very courageous by standing up to the daily mail. What rot. The mail was never going to support ed so he's not doing anything courageous. Bore off milliband. You have used your family as props when it's suited you.

edam Tue 01-Oct-13 23:12:41

political capital? Nonsense. He's responding to an attack. He's defending his late father and standing up to bullying by the Mail. Disingenuous bullying because their real problem with Miliband is his stance on press regulation.

The Mail should be honest with their readers about what their issue is, not try to cloak it in some faux indignation about a 17 year old's diary entry. Especially a 17yo who fought for this country against the fascists that the Mail had supported.

Not the first time the Mail has tried to get their readers foaming at the mouth about an issue when the real agenda is their owner's commercial interests, of course. Every attack on the Beeb is basically motivated by jealousy of its website v. the Mails (which may well be bigger by now, I haven't checked, but only because the online Mail uses tactics that the printed Mail shrieks against).

PetiteRaleuse Tue 01-Oct-13 23:41:27

Yes, they DID support the national front in France, albeit via their columnists. I had forgotten that. I think if UKIP or bnp would get more voters they would switch. But fortunately the UK is a little more humane than that.

(The National Front in France is rpresented as being similar to UKIP in the UK press but they are just a step away from Nazi thugs, think EDL in real life)

DioneTheDiabolist Tue 01-Oct-13 23:52:54

OMG Claig!

I actually agree with your OP.shock.
I keep trying to say something meaningful, but I just can't get over the shock of me agreeing with your OP.

tethersend Tue 01-Oct-13 23:53:12

Am v impressed, claig.

The Mail have made a terrible error in turning you against them smile

DioneTheDiabolist Tue 01-Oct-13 23:56:57

And I don't like (don't really know why) Ed Milliband. So it's not because of him that I agree with you.confused

And still shocked.confusedconfusedconfused

claig Wed 02-Oct-13 01:25:21

"OMG Claig!

I actually agree with your OP"

It's good to see that for once you are right wink

'The Mail have made a terrible error in turning you against them'

I'm not sure I can actually turn against the Mail longterm. I may have to treat this as an unusual aberration on their part. When I saw Alastair Campbell laying in to them on Newsnight tonight, even though they deserved it, I started to feel a little bit sorry for the Mail. sad

NicholasTeakozy Wed 02-Oct-13 07:15:03

As for the argument about Marxists waging class war, I'm falling off my chair, its a fantastic read. Working class people do not wage class war, that is for the elite. How typical of the mouth piece of this elite to claim they are victims of class antagonism, hilarious. Say that to a working person now £1300 a year worse off since the Tories took office, the 73 people who die everyweek waiting for an appeal after Atos have atomised them, or the 50,000 people facing eviction now, the 500,000 using foodbanks, the thousands of young people paying 27,000 for a degree, the 3.5 million children living in poverty in the uk and the child going to school with an empty belly. Who is waging a class war?

Blimey Mini, nail on head. Us working poor are told it's the fault of the scroungers, the feckless, indeed anybody but the real culprits, the kleptocracy at the heart of our financial institutions and by extension our government. I found their assertion that Ralph Miliband was 'against the free market' hilarious, seeing as we don't have a free market.

The Heil are liars, and they're upset, not that they got caught, but that they're being called on it.

MissM Wed 02-Oct-13 08:05:32

What no-one's mentioned (I think) is that the Mail based its article on comments that Ralph Miliband made as a teenager when he'd first arrived in Britain. Yes, he went on to be a Marxist, but his 'hatred of Britain' wasn't based on anything he wrote as an adult, but as a child. And anyway, having a Marxist ideology doesn't mean you 'hate Britian', but that you are against aspects of its political system. Which in a democracy is entirely permissible.

Just heard William Hague responding on R4. The Tories have obviously been told to use the 'anyone would defend their parents' line as he was very careful in choosing his words. Shame on them I think, for not coming out in full support. This isn't a matter of just defending a parent, but of a scurrilous attack.

I don't think Ed Miliband - or David CAmeron come to that - uses their family for political purposes. There is quite a lot of interest in who Ed's brother is and I'm sure they'd both rather avoid that. Then there was a lot of finger pointing about the children's birth certificates which certainly wasn't of Ed's making. All the leaders are photographed wth their spouses and children sometimes. They'd have to never go out in public if they were going to avoid that.

Btw I hunted out the bit in Tony Benn's diaries which describes Ralph Milband's death and funeral. It was Ed who rang Tony to tell him his father had died. The diary describes the funeral with both brothers speaking very movingly and sensitively about their father. It's 19 years ago.

claig Wed 02-Oct-13 08:29:06

I have just started reading today's Mail reply. I don't really understand the Mail's game and what they have planned and are up to, but it is starting to look like they are playing a chess game and printed a provocative story which reeled Ed in.

The Mail then "allowed" him a right of reply, but instead of apologising, the Mail then even escalated their stance. The Mail is saying that this shows why the press should not be regulated by politicians i.e. that politicians should not be allowed to influence what they choose to write.

At the moment, Ed has the public's sympathy, but I wonder what the Mail's next move in their apparent chess game is. I can't see them coming out on top out of this, but then I don't really understand what their aim and game is.

It is also probably significant that they launched the attack in the week of the Conservative conference.

NicholasTeakozy Wed 02-Oct-13 08:45:27
hackmum Wed 02-Oct-13 09:31:53

Interesting to see the unanimity of views on this - the DM's cunning plan seems to have backfired splendidly. I think Dacre is getting to be like Thatcher in her poll tax days. He imagines he's invincible and can do anything he likes.

MissM Wed 02-Oct-13 09:31:55

Interesting Claig. I feel quite sick reading what you say as that must be what it is. What a nasty piece of manipulative 'journalism'.

(Sorry, also realise Edam did mention the age of Ralph Miliband - I blame the time delay when posting!)

donnie Wed 02-Oct-13 09:40:52

Perhaps we ought to identify exactly who and what the DM hates?
social workers
forriners - especially East Europeans
women - and they do a great job of promoting self loathing in women too
people who can't work
people who need benefits
people who are gay
Post Office workers
Actually ALL public sector workers

so WTF are they on about re Miliband? the DM hates absolutely fucking everybody. Ghastly racist misogynistic homophobic spiteful xenophobes. Suck on that Paul Dacre.

claig Wed 02-Oct-13 09:51:26

Yes, it is very manipulative and it is looking like the Mail must have thought about it before they launched it.

They have a very powerful article on Stalin's gulags in today's paper and they mention some senior Labour and socialist/Marxist figures who to differing extents were sympathetic to Stalin.

They are implying that some of these thinkers have influenced current Labour people and they are saying that some of these people are pushing for regulation of a free press.

The Tories, while not condoning the Mail's article, all appear not to have read it, unlike probably most people in the country who have read it to find out what it is all about. It appears to be nothing to do with the Tories, they have clean hands in all of this, they just want to get back to making speeches at the conference detailing the dangers of socialism among other things.

claig Wed 02-Oct-13 09:56:07

And the initial story appeared over the weekend in the Mail, so some of the Tories' advisers and spin doctors etc must surely have alerted them to the Mail article several days ago.

Catkinsthecatinthehat Wed 02-Oct-13 10:06:16

The article on Stalin's gulags is another attempted smear. Ralph Miliband was an awoved anti-Stalinist.
A lot of people have said that Ed can't be held responsible for his father's views, which is true. But a lot of the view ascribed to Miliband Snr by the Mail aren't his. They can drag out an 80 year old diary entry written at the age of 16 to justify their position, but fail to mention he fought on the front line in a Navy destroyer. He didn't have to join up, but did, knowing that he could be killed in action, and if captured, would have be murdered as he was a Belgian Jew.

SinisterBuggyMonth Wed 02-Oct-13 10:09:23

It would be quicker to list who the DM doesn't hate. They are like playground bullies, drawing in the "right" readers and isolating the rest.

Somehow they have got away speaking ill of the dead, something most decent people would consider unacceptable.

Its so transparently about Levison, they dont even hide it.

tobiasfunke Wed 02-Oct-13 10:11:53

I think it was in appallingly bad taste and judgement even for the DM. I genuinely think they are just starting a little campaign trying to raise the 'scary' spectre of socialism like in the 70s and 80's. Thing is I'm not sure any of the voters under 70 really give a stuff about Stalin and reds under the beds anymore even Daily Mail readers. Polish immigrants - yes. Women getting above themselves- yes. But nasty Trotskyites -probably not.
I spent last night sniggering at #mydadhatedbritain on Twitter - 'twas very funny.
I am really really disappointed that the Tories don't have enough principles to denounce this for what it is. They are all running scared of Dacre.

PetiteRaleuse Wed 02-Oct-13 10:29:41

Hmm. Thought they'd use the reaction to bang on about freedom of the press. This has nothing to do with freedom of the press, and Ed's reaction is nothing to do with wanting to shackle the press. It's irrelevant. The problem withthe article is that it was shoddy journalism, full of lies. Even if all Leveson's recommendations were implemented, which they won't be, there would still be nothing to stop them printing that article. I hope people see through it. They are making it about something it is not. Perhaps the plan.

breadandbutterfly Wed 02-Oct-13 10:33:50

No idea what the Mail's agenda in continuing this battle is, either, given that their own readers are quite spectacularly on the side of Ed Miliband - including large numbers who preface their support by saying "I don't usually vote Labour but" or "I don't like Ed Miliband's policies but" - they have actually succeeded in increasing support for Labour and Ed specifically, hugely - all in the week of the Conservative Conference. hmm

Apparently, Cameron is v narked at all the attention diverted away from the Tory Conference and sympathy flowing Ed's way...

V funny on Radio 4 this morning - clip of female presenter talking to Mail spokesman and asking if the current owner of the Mail are responsible for his great grandfather's fascist views prior to the second world war! (The DM spokesman sounded rather flummoxed and declined grin .)

I know the DM has misjudged public opinion when even my mum - who is about as Conservative with both a capital and small c as they come - tells me how horrified she is by this and stands up for Miliband!!

CogitoErgoSometimes Wed 02-Oct-13 10:35:11

It's in poor taste but Miliband has made a big mistake here. Understandable but still a mistake. When a paper prints shit, the correct response as every politician knows (unless it's actually libellous) is to dismiss it as shit and move right along. The few people who read the article forget it ever existed. Fight a newspaper, demand apologies etc, you become the story, it moves to the front pages and it keeps going for weeks on end. All the stuff he said last week at the conference is now completely forgotten and overshadowed.

drag out an 80 year old diary entry

written by a teenager!!!

but, according to Jon Steafel (deputy editor) on Newsnight

'"it was not fair to ask whether the current Viscount Rothermere, whose family own the Daily Mail, was tainted by an article written by his grandfather titled "Hurrah for the Blackshirts" in praise of British fascists.
He said: "I don't think so, and most importantly I don't think it's relevant to bring up a piece from 80 years ago that was written by a member of the Rothermere family."'

an adult member of the Rothermere family

oh, the irony

(Huffington Post)

niceguy2 Wed 02-Oct-13 10:44:00

Freedom of the press is one thing. That freedom comes at a price. They need to show that they are responsible enough to enjoy that freedom.

For me they've stepped way over the line attacking his dad like that. I'm no fan of Ed but this is really out of order.

Catkinsthecatinthehat Wed 02-Oct-13 10:48:02

When a paper prints shit, the correct response as every politician knows (unless it's actually libellous) is to dismiss it as shit and move right along.

Well I think the Mail story was libellous and they only ran it as Ralph Miliband was dead and couldn't sue.

Interestingly Ed is now apparently threatening to take the Mail (editor, Paul Dacre) to the Press Complaints Commission (Chair of the Editors' Code of Practice Committee, Paul Dacre)

Bramshott Wed 02-Oct-13 10:49:31

The Mail response as read out on yesterday's World at 1 was all about press freedom and the Labour party trying to muzzle the press, so I'm guessing you're right claig and that's the line they'll take now.

Interesting to consider whether that's what they'd planned all along sad.

niceguy2 Wed 02-Oct-13 11:04:09

I think Cogito sometimes you have to fight. Sure Ed could have ignored it, dismissed it. But this attack was totally uncalled for and unjustifiable.

Like in usual DM style they've twisted everything and implied that somehow someone having Marxist views is inherently evil. That's just stupid. I thought in this country people could have different opinions and we all accepted this. Regardless just because his father holds a particular view does not mean he is.

My father was a womanising gambler. Doesn't mean that I am. Which is what DM are insinuating.

Regardless I think Ed should fight it. DM stepped way over the line.

What they've done is utterly pathetic and they should apologise.

I couldn't bear to watch the whole of the Newsnight clip - Steafel has one of those voices that just begs to be muted - but I did notice the bit where he mentioned

"the back story of his refugee, of his immigrant parents"

it wasn't necessary to say "immigrant", was it? hmm

claig Wed 02-Oct-13 11:11:57

Yes, Ed had to challenge it because otherwise it would almost appear as if he accepted that it was true. He couldn't let it stand that his father "hated Britain".

The thing is that the Mail have set the agenda, they have drawn him into their web. At the moment, the Mail have come out losers, but this may be temporary. They are setting the agenda and I presume they have some sort of plan which at the moment is difficult to fathom.

PetiteRaleuse Wed 02-Oct-13 11:26:02

But setting the agenda and having a plan is not the role of newspapers. It's a massive abuse of power.

claig Wed 02-Oct-13 11:28:39

But that is reality. That is what spin and media are all about - setting agendas, changing minds and influencing votes.

CogitoErgoSometimes Wed 02-Oct-13 11:37:41

Dismiss it as a load of rubbish, yes. If it's libellous then get a lawyer onto it, certainly. But what he's doing now is simply creating an even bigger story and, even though I can understand why he would want to defend his late father, I think he's going to regret this.

NicholasTeakozy Wed 02-Oct-13 11:37:52

setting agendas, changing minds and influencing votes

Yep, they've changed many many minds on Ed Miliband, now most are listening to him, all as a direct result of the original article and his reaction to it.

PetiteRaleuse Wed 02-Oct-13 11:40:59

Yes it is reality, I know sad

Anyone watching Cameron's speech? He's awful. It's so School Debating Society point scoring. Ed's was a masterpiece in comparison.

Breadandwine Wed 02-Oct-13 11:41:07

TheOneWithTheNicestSmile Many thanks for that link - hilarious!

And true! grin

niceguy2 Wed 02-Oct-13 11:42:18

But the key issue is that the article is about Ed's father and since he's dead, he can't sue.

I think Ed would have looked weak and unable/unwilling to fight back against the DM. I'm glad he has. I hope at the end of this the DM are taken to task and sanctioned in some way.

We simply can't allow freedom of the press as an excuse to do whatever they like.

claig Wed 02-Oct-13 11:44:14

Yes, that is true. But I wonder how long that effect will last. It seems that they are trying to create a link between Marxism, regulation of a free press and Miliband. I don't know if they will be successful in making it stick, but at the momemnt they are losing the battle.

Ed's speech was very good. Am listening to Cameron's speech. I think it is flat. Lame gags poorly delivered and running through the same old lines with no real passion or conviction, unlike Ed's delivery.

On this performance, it won't be Caneron who can defeat Ed, and maybe that is why the Mail has entered the fray in a dirty way.

claig Wed 02-Oct-13 11:48:06

'Anyone watching Cameron's speech? He's awful. It's so School Debating Society point scoring. Ed's was a masterpiece in comparison.'

Agree entirely. It is appalling. No conviction, no passion. Ed's was far superior. Boris's was a jokey crap speech too. Only Ed and Farage have any conviction and that is why Farage was so welcomed at the Tory Party Conference by many of the attendees who are looking for conviction rather than rehearsed lifeless diction.

HesterShaw Wed 02-Oct-13 12:02:13

Well done DM, you have been the final factor in my decision to vote Labour next time. And I am well aware of their short comings, and their history blah blah blah.

Bit of an own goal there.

Their behaviour has been completely despicable. So Ralph Miliband was a Marxist? And? Plenty of people were in the 30s and 40s. There was also quite a lot of fascism about, as I recall. Does this mean that his sons are without brains and unable to make their own political decisions? One thing that Ed and David have proven is that they are very clever people and are very unlikely to think something just "because my old man said so".

Their attack on Mr Miliband senior comes across as being anti-foreigner, anti-Semitic and anti-pretty much everyone apart from white, British, Christian Conservative voters.

PetiteRaleuse Wed 02-Oct-13 12:02:58

Well I couldn't vote UKIP for EU reasons obviously.

Oh good, it's over. That was awful.

HesterShaw Wed 02-Oct-13 12:04:11

Boris needs to stop with the whole "I'm so hilarious" thing as well even though his "kipping" comment was quite funny. Did you see the audience's indulgent smiles the minute he stepped on stage? Is he a politician or a comedy act?

garlicvampire Wed 02-Oct-13 12:04:27

Just popping in to agree: Well done, Ed! Also good to see him arguing in a strong & measured way; shows DC up for the blustering numpty he is (and the DM!) Like many other Labour supporters, I've been despairing about Miliband's seeming lack of spine. I hope he's about to prove me wrong smile

I probably still won't much like Labour's current version, but I want to be able to have faith in its ability to get the Tories out.

claig Wed 02-Oct-13 12:06:45

Agree, HesterShaw, I think Boris is a comedy act and the fatal flaw with that is that it means that there is a lack of conviction. Without conviction, they are sunk, no matter how many gags they can deliver, because the British public wants a vision, not a joker.

HesterShaw Wed 02-Oct-13 12:10:26

Claig we agree! <falls down in dead faint>

claig Wed 02-Oct-13 12:11:12


HesterShaw Wed 02-Oct-13 12:13:08

And it's ridiculous because he is a very clever politician, and should be their sharpest weapon.

It seems that they think that he can't possibly show that side of him to the idiot public, because otherwise they would lose votes. Boris the Bumbling Buffoon is the vote winner and they need to keep him that way, seems to be the plan.

How incredibly insulting to the electorate.

HesterShaw Wed 02-Oct-13 12:15:15

(I just tied myself up in knots and backed myself into a corner there I think. Boris the Bumbling Buffoon is clearly what people like, hence his being Mayor of London.)

limitedperiodonly Wed 02-Oct-13 12:16:26

I presume they have some sort of plan which at the moment is difficult to fathom

I don't think they do.

PetiteRaleuse Wed 02-Oct-13 12:18:07

Gove is being interviewed defending the Daily Mail and the freedom of press. This is not about influencing the content of newspapers. It's about decency and honesty. Ffs.

PetiteRaleuse Wed 02-Oct-13 12:19:06

The subject is being twisted towards press liberty and the Tories are backing up the press. What a surprise.

claig Wed 02-Oct-13 12:19:10

Yes, it is patronising to the electorate.

But being clever is nowhere near enough. They are all clever. They all went to Oxbridge and public schools, they all studied PPE, but that is not what the public wants.

The public wants someone who can articulate and realise a vision that the public's collective unconscious desires, and the public wants someone who has conviction in it and will turn over every stone to deliver it for the sake of the public. There aren't many of those people available - selfless people who believe in serving the public, not jokers who patronise and even insult the public's intelligence and use divide and rule to stigmatise sections of the population.

HesterShaw Wed 02-Oct-13 12:22:53

Proper politicians in the way you describe seem to be in very short supply in recent years, at least in the Cabinet. It's all career men (very few women). I think Kinnock was one, though I know you won't agree with that grin.

Two of the saddest things about politics in the last 20 years in my opinion was a) the death of John Smith and b) Charles Kennedy hitting the bottle.

claig Wed 02-Oct-13 12:25:08

I don't like Kinnock, but I liked John Smith.
John Smith was a very decent man who could unite the entire country. I like Ed too, he is a very decent man, but I am not too keen on some of those behind him.

limitedperiodonly Wed 02-Oct-13 12:39:34

They are all clever

I'd dispute that, and I'm not the only one. According to Matthew D'Ancona, Gideon thinks Iain Duncan Smith is thick.

I think he's right but imagine that? Having your intellect questioned by someone I suspect needs all his fingers and toes to count up to 20.

MmeLindor Wed 02-Oct-13 12:49:52

I agree with you.

I feel like I should write that a few times, cause it is so unusual. smile

It is a mark of how far off the mark the DM is, that we are almost all in agreement that it was a mistake. How often do we have any kind of consensus on Mumsnet?

MissM Wed 02-Oct-13 12:51:01

Apparently Thatcher wasn't seen as very bright either, but I think that was more because she was a woman than down to actual intelligence hmm

TheHammaconda Wed 02-Oct-13 12:58:02

Having your intellect questioned by someone I suspect needs all his fingers and toes to count up to 20.


claig Wed 02-Oct-13 13:00:31

MmeLindor, it is unusual that we are all in agreement grin

But it's probably just a phase, come tomorrow we'll all be back to normal again grin

TheHammaconda Wed 02-Oct-13 13:05:26

I am proud to be hated by The Daily Mail


TheHammaconda Wed 02-Oct-13 13:05:44

or link

AmandaPandtheNightmareMonsters Wed 02-Oct-13 13:08:47

I am hated too. I think it was question one that got me...

I agree. Ed has gone massively up in my estimation for dealing with this the way he has. I really hope he starts to find his feet a bit more. My instincts are Labour, but I have worried that they seemed very lost and underpowered recently.

tombliboouun Wed 02-Oct-13 13:14:11

Go Ed! I for one will be voting for you to be the next PM!

tombliboouun Wed 02-Oct-13 13:17:20

Ha! I'm hated by the Daily Mail! No surprise there then

marssparklesdownonme Wed 02-Oct-13 13:24:40

But IDS claims Gideon and Dave behave like Ant and Dec, so not much to chose from there.No surprise that Gove is backing the press whilst tugging his forelock in direction of Murdoch etc
As for Boris, perhaps he's trying to keep his options open- if it all goes wrong in politics, he can always go for a permanent spot on HIGNFY.

ProfondoRosso Wed 02-Oct-13 13:25:46

There's a rather amusing trend on Twitter right now in support of Miliband - #mydadhatedbritain. People are giving humorous examples of why the Mail might think their dad hated Britain. I added my own: my dad hated Britain because he said he wouldn't go watch the Olympics even if it was in our local swingpark. grin

Obviously my dad doesn't hate Britain. He's just a gruff (and lovely) Scottish man. But on a serious note, Miliband has reacted admirably to this. I don't know how the Mail dare bring up the writings of his father at age seventeen, written 72 years ago and can justify their support of dubious organisations during the 20th century as irrelevant 'history,' because it happened so long ago.

Go on yourself, Ed.

marssparklesdownonme Wed 02-Oct-13 13:26:48

* Amanda* and HammacondaYes , I'm proud to be hated by the Mail too.

BangOn Wed 02-Oct-13 13:28:22

bloody hell, I agree with Claig! That's never happened before!

PetiteRaleuse Wed 02-Oct-13 13:31:02

I'm hated by them too according to that quiz. I think they hate me anyway <proud>

niceguy2 Wed 02-Oct-13 13:33:03

I'm detested....is that worse or better than hated?

claig Wed 02-Oct-13 13:33:30

BangOn, I've never had so many people agree with me. I'm usually the lone voice of reason wink

TheHammaconda Wed 02-Oct-13 13:36:27

Ed speaks to the Standard and gets a sympathetic interview. Isn't that part of the Daily Mail group?

claig Wed 02-Oct-13 13:39:08

Yes, I think it is part of the same group

niceguy2 Wed 02-Oct-13 13:40:35

Has anyone seen this interview on the BBC News website here

One of the few times I actually think Alistair Campbell is right!

MissM Wed 02-Oct-13 13:48:13

Hahaha! My favourite question was 'Michael Gove?' Although I accidentally pressed that I thought things were better in the old days so that may have gained me some points. Still came out hated though.

Claig, are you sure it's not that you've never agreed with so many people before...? wink

tethersend Wed 02-Oct-13 14:02:55

Ok, claig's slagging off the DM and niceguy2 agrees with Alistair Campbell.

What's happening?

I'm scared.

NicholasTeakozy Wed 02-Oct-13 14:52:51

Earlier, the Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt shrugged off the Mail attack on Ralph Miliband by pointing out that “he was no friend of the free market and neither is Ed.”

This is Jeremy Rhyming-Slang who is so fond of the free market he wanted to hand a massive broadcaster over to Rupert. And who undoubtedly agrees with bailouts for the banks. Heaven forfend them having to suffer the vagaries of the market. He's certainly not a capitalist. Well, other than a disaster capitalist.

tethers, it's like we've fallen down the rabbit hole isn't it? grin

niceguy2 Wed 02-Oct-13 15:00:53

grin @Tethers.

I know! All we need now is for Ttosca to come along and also agree and you know how wrong the DM have been if we both agree.

On virtually every topic we disagree. If I said the sky was blue I'm sure Ttosca would cut & paste an article proving it's not and if it is then it'sthe nasty Tories fault.

So the yardstick I use to prove that someone is utterly UTTERLY wrong is if we both agree.

handcream Wed 02-Oct-13 15:11:12

I think if Ed uses an opportunity to quote his father he shouldnt really be surprised that his opposition looks at some of the other things his father has said.

Labour seem to have no issues bringing up the Conservatives background at every opportunity.

tethersend Wed 02-Oct-13 15:18:40


I wonder what longfingernails thinks about it all?

HesterShaw Wed 02-Oct-13 15:23:53

I have been squabbling debating with someone on FB about that very point today, handcream.

I think the issue is that it's not ok when anyone does it, and this was a particularly vicious example, from a paper who are for some reason rattled about Labour becoming too popular for their liking. They have stepped outside their remit. They are there to report news, not control public opinion.

This person I was arguing with said something along the lines of "I bet you thought it was ok when the Socialist Worker trashed Margaret Thatcher on her deathbed". Er, no I didn't actually.

niceguy2 Wed 02-Oct-13 15:33:06

Exactly. I was equally appalled when there was all the 'news' trashing Maggie after her death.

It's just bad bad press. We need the news to report the news. I hate how they are so partisan.

garlicvampire Wed 02-Oct-13 15:54:37

The public wants someone who can articulate and realise a vision that the public's collective unconscious desires, and the public wants someone who has conviction in it and will turn over every stone to deliver it for the sake of the public. There aren't many of those people available - selfless people who believe in serving the public, not jokers who patronise and even insult the public's intelligence and use divide and rule to stigmatise sections of the population.

This is beautiful, claig! <also faints>

I had a go at listening to Cammo's speech today. Turned it off because it was so patronising ... He really does think the electorate has a mental age of 7 and can be won over with 'rousing' clichés, doesn't he?

I, too, suspect IDS is thick. He's evidently a raging narcissist, like the other two (or three, with Gove, whose intellect I'd also query,) but it's not true that all narcissists are smart. Some are devious but thick.

garlicvampire Wed 02-Oct-13 15:57:18

What happened to all the experienced & committed politicans? Any chance they'd hook up for a 5-year rescue plan, then we can vote them in to tidy things up, while the main parties get on with finding out how life (as differentiated from high finance) works?

HesterShaw Wed 02-Oct-13 16:18:50

A coalition, you mean?

We don't like coalitions in this country, remember? We were offered the option and voted "no", even though it works in Germany, that well-known unstable and unproductive and poor country hmm.


garlicvampire Wed 02-Oct-13 16:50:17

Hah, yes! A specialist coalition, with all the grown-ups in it grin
I sort of vaguely think we may have done this once before, in a national emergency? My brain's gone on strike and I'm going to take a break, though, so will bow to greater knowledge.

Good point about Germany.

AmandaPandtheNightmareMonsters Wed 02-Oct-13 16:52:02

God, I would vote for a specialist coalition.

Grown ups. No shouting at PMQs and smug in jokes that no one cares about but their mates. No 'everything is the fault of this government/everything is repairing the damage of the last government'. Just grown ups.

niceguy2 Wed 02-Oct-13 16:57:07

Just seen this do the rounds on FB.

Basically it's a photo of Lord Rothermore (founder of Daily Mail) cosying up to Hitler. Not only that, apparently he sent the Fuhrer a telegram saying:

"My Dear Führer, I have watched with understanding and interest the progress of your great and superhuman work in regenerating your country."

"The British people, now like Germany strongly rearmed, regard the German people with admiration as valorous adversaries in the past, but I am sure that there is no problem between our two countries which cannot be settled by consultation and negotiation…I have always thought that you are essentially one who hates war and desires peace."

Well based on the DM's recent reporting of Ed's father I guess we should now infer that the Daily Mail is in fact a mouthpiece for the Nazi's.

Or is that somehow a bit out of order?

flatpackhamster Wed 02-Oct-13 17:10:22

On that basis we could say the same for the Mirror, which supported Mosley and the Blackshirts.


So now that the Mirror and Mail are both mouthpieces for the Nazis and the Guardian and Independent are both mouthpieces for the Communists, is everyone happy?

HesterShaw Wed 02-Oct-13 17:22:29

We had a National Government i.e. a Coalition through much of the 30s I believe. And during WWII of course.

It worked before. It could work again.

Now let's decide who would be in it grin

Chipstick10 Wed 02-Oct-13 18:45:16

I love Ally Ross, he writes this week " of all the many bad tv sights at Labours conference, the weirdest was Ed MIlliband and Ed Balls telling jokes about David Cameron's beachwear to Hacked offs Steve Coogan and his fellow flat earthers.
Weird because these gags were based on paparazzi shots taken and used without the Cameron's permission and exactly the sort of privacy invasion the comrades claim to despise.
Truth is of course, labour have no problem invading people's privacy, if it belongs to their enemies.
It's not a moral crusade they are running its a political one.
Double standards, labour are just so good at it.

Wannabestepfordwife Wed 02-Oct-13 19:04:23

hester you've got me thinking about that now!

So far I vote for Theresa May shes consistent and hardworking, Ken Clarke, Charles Kennedy if he could stay on the wagon and part of me says Nigel Farage just because I love a bit of a loose cannon

Wannabestepfordwife Wed 02-Oct-13 19:04:58

Oh and definitely Ann Cryer if she would come out of retirement

TheHammaconda Wed 02-Oct-13 20:19:03

Paddy Ashdown for Defence
Vince Cable for Chancellor

flatpackhamster Wed 02-Oct-13 21:09:18


Paddy Ashdown for Defence
Vince Cable for Chancellor

You'd like a man who doesn't know the difference between deficit and debt to run the country's economy? Jinkies.

HomeHelpMeGawd Wed 02-Oct-13 21:32:10

"I think if Ed uses an opportunity to quote his father he shouldnt really be surprised that his opposition looks at some of the other things his father has said."
This is the heart of it, for me. Using quote from Ralph is fine. Attacks are fine. But it's just obviously wrong and moronic to use quotes from a 17 year old's private diary, especially when that person became an emonent academic who wrote reams of material later that you could pick through to find your evidence to support your assertions. It is completely absurd and speaks of a mindset utterly twisted by rage against the left.

"Labour seem to have no issues bringing up the Conservatives background at every opportunity." As it goes, there's remarkably little of this, considering the rich pickings. We are talking about a Chancellor whose family fortune is substantially untaxed due to trusts, for example.

GrrArgh Wed 02-Oct-13 22:16:26

I like all the analysis of the DM gameplay. Usually it's just me blush

navada Wed 02-Oct-13 22:24:45

I didn't see Ed speaking out about all the lefties wanting to 'dance on Thatchers grave' - Hmm.

The Daily Mail have reported on a story they believe is in the public interest. That's what newspapers do.

HesterShaw Wed 02-Oct-13 22:36:16

It's not a "story" ffs! It doesn't contain news! It's a vindictive character assassination, which cherry picks the diary writing of a 17 year old kid.

for anybody who thinks the Mail were "reporting a story" & justified in what they said

this piece from one of Thatcher's cabinet members makes interesting reading hmm

also this

navada Wed 02-Oct-13 22:50:08

Well it was news to me.

edam Wed 02-Oct-13 22:53:32

Interesting piece from Thatcher's friend Lord Moore, TheOne, thanks for linking.

encyclogirl Wed 02-Oct-13 23:25:05

Not read the thread yet, but I did see Alistair Cambell rip the deputy editor o f the DM a new one on newsnight. That was good.

TheHammaconda Thu 03-Oct-13 06:14:52

Flatpack you mean like George Osborne?

TheHammaconda Thu 03-Oct-13 06:37:59

Seriously though, where has Cable got that wrong? He's got a PhD in Economics, I've never seen or heard him get it wrong (unlike Cameron and Osborne).

NicholasTeakozy Thu 03-Oct-13 07:14:33

You'd like a man who doesn't know the difference between deficit and debt to run the country's economy?

As opposed to Gidiot, whose only job outside politics was as a towel folder?


For the record flatpack, before you derail by asking whether I've lived under a Stalinist regime, I believe in capitalism, just not the system you defend, which is capitalism for the poor and socialism for the rich. Taking money from the poor to pay for the mistakes of the bankers is not capitalism, it's theft.

I think it was Stanley Druckenmiller who, two weeks ago, said "this is the biggest transfer of wealth from the middle classes and the poor to the rich ever. Am I in favour of it? Of course. I had a very good day yesterday".

That's the type of thief your beloved neoliberal wankers are being bankrolled by flatpack. They're stealing from us all, to benefit themselves. Unless we take control back we are fucked.

GrrArgh Thu 03-Oct-13 07:25:16

I wish Ralph Miliband was still alive, he sounds like a Top Bloke to be honest.

GrrArgh Thu 03-Oct-13 07:26:51

NicholasTeakosy I share your righteous anger sad
I am so so sorry that people cannot see that this is happening. When it is completely fucking obvious and they will be next.

StainlessSteelBegonia Thu 03-Oct-13 07:44:37

The thing that really disturbs me about all this is that is betrays a creeping Americanisation of British politics. Look at all the old Thatcherites coming out to decry the Mail's hatchet job - they don't recognise this "story" or the Ralph Milliband they knew. It's not politics the way they played it.

This is a clear & obvious attempt by the Mail to turn this country into the basket case the US is right now. Remember when John Kerry was attacked as being "un-American" when he was running for president, in spite of being a decorated war veteran? The American political landscape has been distorted to make anyone who doesn't support the neo-liberal agenda into a "communist" and a "traitor." Even moderate Republicans are getting smeared by the more fanatic neo-liberals in their party. That's what we're seeing the start of here, with this attack on Ed Milliband by the Daily Mail.

I mean, can you believe that in a time when Russia has dumped communism for oligarchy (but kept its anti-socialist totalitarian aspects), China is dumping communism for capitalism (but keeping its anti-socialist totalitarian aspects), and American democracy is undermining itself by threatening government shutdowns and debt default to prevent signed healthcare law from being implemented, the Daily Mail wants to start a red scare?

One of the things I love about living in the UK (as a foreigner) is that this country is not the polarised mess that the US is. I really, REALLY don't want to see the UK go the way of the US.

Chipstick10 Thu 03-Oct-13 07:51:28

Oh seriously who cares? Anyone outside the Westminster bubble or a few leftie die hards, that's about it. 50 complaints to the press commission.
In my world, in my circle of friends it couldn't matter less.

GrrArgh Thu 03-Oct-13 07:53:18

Oh well, let's not bother about anything that your friends aren't interested in!

StainlessSteelBegonia Thu 03-Oct-13 08:05:18

Chipstick illustrates exactly what I'm talking about -- Britons who are so wound up in their little right/left bubble they don't notice they're being manipulated, or stop to wonder why. Like the frog in the pot. sad

PetiteRaleuse Thu 03-Oct-13 08:38:32

Yes, it is very worrying when people show absolutely no interest in what is going on at the top. Re the Americanisation of politics by the Mail, you may be on to something. Dacre loves how things are done in America - the Mail is very vocal in its criticism of the Democrats especially Obamacare. Dacre would love for TV to be fully commercialised and the health system to be privatised. It is very worrying that people swallow what they are told on there. And it's not calling people stupid to say that, it is calling them trusting, naive or possibly lazy. I know several people, that I consider intelligent, who talk about things they have read in the Fail as fact. And they really do. It's frightening.

limitedperiodonly Thu 03-Oct-13 08:39:26

It's not new. Look at the way Michael Foot and Neil Kinnock were treated.

Labour's obsession with their media image was a direct result. Alistair Campbell set up a team dedicated to finding and rebutting negative stories within the hour.

I'm interested to know what will happen when MPs discuss press regulation next week.

I wonder what Dave will say? If he doesn't speak out, will it look like he's scared of what the Mail will do?

limitedperiodonly Thu 03-Oct-13 08:42:30

It's not only Lefties that care. One of Margaret Thatcher's closest friends, Lord Moore of Lower Marsh, said:

'The Daily Mail is telling lies about a good man who I knew. The people of this country are good and decent too. They do not want the Daily Mail attacking the dead relatives of politicians to make political points.'

He'd better amend that to 'some people don't want the Daily Mail attacking the dead'.

PetiteRaleuse Thu 03-Oct-13 08:43:19

Oh God they're still banging on about it: www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/columnists/article-2442132/Ed-Milibands-Marxist-father-debate-How-hypocritical-Left-upset.html (Mail link)

V true Limited re Kinnock and they were vile about Foot when he died.

Cameron will probably say something along the lines of Gove and use it as a stick to beat regulation with. I think they all disagree with what the Mail did but they won't stand up to them.

PetiteRaleuse Thu 03-Oct-13 08:44:15

Heseltine spoke very well about it yesterday on the BBC2 politics show. It's just the current government who are being evasive.

GrrArgh Thu 03-Oct-13 09:17:49

'the frog in the pot' is a really evocative phrase.
I am not a frog but I am still in the pot (as we all are) and tortured by the idea that I am powerless to do anything about it. We all are. I can see how this has come about, and I knew it was going to come about, but I have no clue what to do to contribute towards stopping it. sad

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 09:27:29

I don't really understand all this stuff about privy councils and statutory this and that about press regulation, but it seems that Dacre and the Mail may already have guessed that the politicians (including the Tories) are not going to be in favour of a press royal charter, which is what the press wanted, and by doing their attack it looks even less likely that the politicians will accept a press royal charter.

"An executive at another newspaper group took a different view: "It comes to something when you can unite Cameron, Clegg and Miliband in just a matter of hours. Anybody who has a dog in the fight will now be able to say that the press royal charter must now be rejected. This is an example of how out of control they are.

"Before this we were expecting next week to come and go with nothing happening. Now we don't think that's likely. They may well reject our proposals."

Another editor suggested it could all be a move by Mail editor-in-chief Paul Dacre to get his attack in before the press proposals are rejected. "He has form. He did this with his attack on David Bell, one of the advisers to the Leveson inquiry, just days before the report came out."


So the Mail has stated the battle now. It is possible that the Mail will not sign up to the politicians' version of the charter and then in the run up to the election, there could be a battle between some politicians and Middle England's most popular newspaper, beloved by many of the middle classes and squeezed middle voters, over press freedom and independence.

There may be lots of editorials about Marxism, state control and the values of freedom, free speech and press independence. The Daily Mail reader may be drawn away from the sidebar of shame and begin to demand press freedom and an end of attempts to control in any way their beloved newspaper.

It could get nasty. Politicians may be on the backfoot and be constantly asked about freedom of the press by the Middle England Daily Mai reader.
Some politicians may buckle under the Daily Mail barrage.

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 09:31:17

Does anyone know what UKIP's position is on press freedom and regulation etc?

If he backs the Mail, he could be on to a winner with Middle England.

PetiteRaleuse Thu 03-Oct-13 09:33:24
claig Thu 03-Oct-13 09:35:20

Wow, thanks Petite, that means that the Mail will probably give Farage some favourable coverage, especially if Cameron does not approach the Mail's position on it.

PetiteRaleuse Thu 03-Oct-13 09:38:59

And here: www.societyofeditors.co.uk/page-view.php?pagename=PressFreedom&parent_page_id=139&news_id=6037&numbertoprintfrom=11&language=%7Blanguage%7D

I'm against regulation of the press in theory, but the British press has shown itself again and again to be incapable of acting legally and responsibly. They've brought it upon themselves, it is very very sad. I just hope regulation doesn't prevent proper investigations. This article was in the comment section anyway and that wouldn't be covered by regulation other than the libel laws already in place.

PetiteRaleuse Thu 03-Oct-13 09:41:19

They are already giving them favourable coverage. Both Littlejohn and Hitchens have come out in favour of UKIP. I wouldn't be surprised if they switched to ukip before the election. Just for the record I am completely against Ukip, both their founding principles and Farage. I think they are dangerous.

DadOnIce Thu 03-Oct-13 09:44:34

I'm amazed people continue to be surprised about the Daily Mail writing hateful articles about the Left. It's a bit like being astonished that Heat continues to feature celebs in bikinis, or that the Guardian reviews avant-garde plays at the Edinburgh Fringe.

Mail-hate is a kind of comfort for some people - like that "hated by the Daily Mail" link going around at the moment, which may well be true but seems quite smug at the same time: "Phew, let's share with my Facebook friends how tolerant and modern I am! There's no way the Daily Mail could ever like someone like me!" It's the new "some of my best friends are gay".

I remember an event earlier this year which brought home to me that nasty, ad-hominem abuse doesn't always come from the Right...

GrrArgh Thu 03-Oct-13 09:48:30

DadOnIce the difference in this thread is that it's a die-hard Mail supporter who has spoken out. Nobody else is remotely surprised. hmm

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 09:49:47

Are you sure that Hitchens has come out in favour of UKIP? I must have missed that. Hitchens is usually anti-Tory, even advising readers not to vote for them, but I thought he was also not in favour of UKIP.

PetiteRaleuse Thu 03-Oct-13 09:55:26

I agree DadOnIce it is comforting to hate the Mail, and it is also comforting to know that other people hate it. It doesn't make me smug, it just restores a little faith in humanity that there are others out there. I think also that they like being hated so much by so many, but loved as well by others, so in discussing thel we feed them, to an extent.

However they are also extremely powerful and really do have a massive influence on some of their readers. And that in itself is dangerous, but when they attack a dead academic in this way it is just wrong.

If you're talking about the Thatcher death and people's reaction to it then firstly, There is a difference between a PM and a pretty harmless academic. Ralph Miliband was an academic. Relatively private compared to a PM. And his actions did not create the results that thatcher's actions did. You can't compare the two at all.

Secondly there is a difference between some individuals going on about thatcher, we are all entitled to opinions after all, and a national newspaper writing such a horrible article which will influence thousands of people who know nothing else about the bloke than they have been told by that newspaper.

PetiteRaleuse Thu 03-Oct-13 09:58:29

I wasn.t surprised by the original article. I was surprised, in a good way, that they gave him a right of reply. I was then surprised, in a bad way, that they surrounded the right of reply by further bile and have been so openly vile.

claig It was a few months ago that I think he wrote something along the lives of supporting UKIP. I will have a look on his blog and check and link if I find it. I might be wrong.

HomeHelpMeGawd Thu 03-Oct-13 09:59:25

Dad, who is claiming to be surprised? No one is remotely surprised that they have written hateful articles about the left. But people are disgusted at the extent of the vileness of these particular articles, and want to talk about it.

For what it's worth, the deliberately crass choice of phrasing, such as the stuff about Deuteronomy when talking about a dead Jewish WWII veteran, seems to bespeak of a set of prejudices that I thought were pretty much in the Mail's past. Apparently not, and that is surprising to me. As was learning that they published a piece supporting Marine Le Pen two years ago.

PetiteRaleuse Thu 03-Oct-13 10:04:50

claig I was wrong, kind of. Have a look at this: hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2013/06/ukip-is-still-dads-army.html

He seems to tell voters to vote for UKIP as the least worst option. He is definitely to the right, but hates the Tories and thinks ukip can destroy them, but doesn't like them as they are at the moment.

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 10:14:04

Thanks, Petite. You are right. He has changed his view. He has long been very anti-Tory, but he used to also be anti-UKIP. He has now changed his position. He is still anti-UKIP, but advises voting for them in order to destroy the Tories. I haven't kept up with his views so didn't realise that he had sort of changed his position.

It is difficult to understand exactly what his position is. Some people wonder whether he may be a socialist, such is his venom for the Tories.

PetiteRaleuse Thu 03-Oct-13 10:24:09

I think he is right wing and that the Tories don't go far enough for him. I don't read him every week as he makes me angry with his anti-Europe rants smile

Jumingi Thu 03-Oct-13 10:25:18

garlicvampire like a technocracy? Not sure if that's what it's called but I could get behind a grown up government.

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 10:28:27

Petite, yes it appears that he is right wing, but he seems to despise all of the right wing parties. Yes he is anti-EU.

PetiteRaleuse Thu 03-Oct-13 10:28:27

Hmm, actually reading more about him I'm not sure what i think of his views. I think I will have to read some of his books. He might well be in a world of his own (which isn't necessarily a criticism)

limitedperiodonly Thu 03-Oct-13 10:29:48

petite I was surprised too that they gave him a right of reply. Not surprised about what they did with it.

I read your link to the newest bit of bile-flecked hate. It almost made me laugh. None of it's aimed at the readers who must just skip over it.

In Alistair Campbell's tirade on Newsnight he said Dacre can't bring himself to apologise. Seems right. He also twice slipped in that Rothermere thinks Dacre's losing the plot and Jon Steafel is after his job.

Who knows? But it's a good way to notch up the fear and loathing.

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 10:31:41

Spot on. He is in a world of his own, independent and above the fray, looking down on all of teh parties from another planet and anti all of them.

He used to be a Trotskyist in his youth. He is a very clever man, and lots of things that he says are right, but I wonder if he believes them all or if he is toying with us all down here on planet Earth.

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 10:34:01

'He also twice slipped in that Rothermere thinks Dacre's losing the plot and Jon Steafel is after his job.'

Campbell is wrong. Dacre has just been given an extension to his contract. They all fear Dacre.

PetiteRaleuse Thu 03-Oct-13 10:35:17

Rothermere has just extended Dacre's contract sad

PetiteRaleuse Thu 03-Oct-13 10:36:22

Cross post.

I am looking forward to reading Dacre's diaries. He must be writing them. They will be fascinating.

limitedperiodonly Thu 03-Oct-13 10:42:07

Yes, I noticed that yesterday, but forgot. Oh well.

At least Campbell said Steafel thinks Dacre's losing it too so perhaps he won't have too comfortable a time.

Not that I think many people have a comfortable time working for Dacre except for a few pets who write pieces headlined: 'hilarious' or 'excoriating', which is handy shorthand for: 'don't waste precious moments of your life reading this boring shit'.

HesterShaw Thu 03-Oct-13 12:32:09

Hark at all the people commenteding on the DM's message boards about Mr Miliband Snr's writing as though they had read it. In fact almost everyone who knew anything about it all was like me: they knew that the Miliband's dad was a refugee and a Marxist and that's about it. And now suddenly they're all experts and are banging on as though he had as much influence as Thatcher, and therefore this is all justified.

sadsqueaker Thu 03-Oct-13 13:08:28

The Mail sent an uninvited reporter to a family-only memorial service for EM's uncle yesterday.
Looks like they are/were planning a follow-up personal attack for publication this weekend. I believe that Rothermere extended Dacre's contract before this business with Miliband kicked off, somebody needs to take Dacre's shovel off him before he finds himself on a Workfare placement grin

Marisson546 Thu 03-Oct-13 13:21:37

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

garlicvampire Thu 03-Oct-13 13:57:18

before he finds himself on a Workfare placement

Oh, if ONLY!!! grin

PetiteRaleuse Thu 03-Oct-13 14:29:12

Ha ha that would be funny.

shock re the reporter at the memorial service.

And surprising from the MoS as it is usually slightly better than the DM and even seems to criticise it on occasion. I think they are seriously misjudging the public mood. Or deliberately keeping going until the core readership comes round to what they are saying.

Catkinsthecatinthehat Thu 03-Oct-13 14:44:12

The hassling by the Mail of some of Miliband's relatives at a memorial service for his uncle is disgraceful. They are just taking the piss now - and sending a very clear signal that they consider themselves untouchable.

Interestingly the Daily Telegraph has reprinted in full and without comments its original obituary of Ralph Miliband from 1994

Professor Ralph Miliband, who has died aged 70, was an inspiring teacher of politics and an internationally renowned figure of the British Left. Though committed to socialism, he never hesitated to criticise its distortion by Stalin and other dictators. He also inveighed against the timidity and limited horizons of West European social democracy. The ideal he sought was a democratic and open Marxism.

limitedperiodonly Thu 03-Oct-13 15:41:52

They'd have thought sending a reporter to the service was normal. It's not, in the real world, but it's a normal part of harassing someone, or monstering them.

The MoS editor apologised an hour and a half after Rothermere received that letter and two people have been suspended - I guess the reporter and the news editor.

The editor apparently didn't know. It's possible, but I don't see how you'd decide to pick up the sister paper's ball and run with it without consulting the editor.

It's not that I feel sorry for the editor it's just that, as Miliband pointed out to Rothermere, this is the culture. This is what people do and if the owner appears to condone it why should they change?

Presumably the editor thought this was okay, until Rothermere changed his mind.

I wonder what's going to happen at the Daily Mail? I suppose they haven't actually doorstepped Miliband and will stick to the line that the opinion articles were legitimate. And Dacre is more important than Geordie Grief.

limitedperiodonly Thu 03-Oct-13 15:42:56

Grieg FGS! But Grief was a good typo.

He's MoS editor btw.

Moistenedbint1 Thu 03-Oct-13 15:44:18

Alistair campbell has been an obnoxious hypocrite throughout this - as a proponent of the Iraq war and other examples of labour sleaze (think the autographed copy of the Hutton report which was promptly auctioned off by him, with the proceeds going into Labours coffers.. completely insensitive as far as Dr Kelly and his family were concerned)

And to think he now has the audacity to take the moral highground and mobilize a rent-a-mob contingent to seek out Dacre.

And yes, I see the same people demonizating Dacre for his insensitivity despite absentmindedly forgetting their own glee at Thatchers demise.


limitedperiodonly Thu 03-Oct-13 16:13:20

I noticed that catkins. I guessed the Telegraph were distancing themselves from the Daily Mail.

Their former editor, Charles Moore, condemned it in a column for them. BTW he's Lady Thatcher's official biographer and friend and yet he didn't bother diverting his argument with comments about Tramp The Dirt Down parties.

If he or other close friends of Thatcher such as Lord Moore think it's more important to stick to the point than score them, I don't know why people who didn't know her are haring off on a tangent.

Well, I do. But it's pretty desperate.

Chipstick10 Thu 03-Oct-13 17:07:23

Agreed moistened . Double standards make me vom. Campbell was the biggest bully of modern times in Westminster. He cannot take the high ground with anyone and yet he does it in every interview about everything and anything.
Ed would like very much press regulation and is milking this for all it's worth, it's not a morale crusade it's a political one.

God forbid that anyone should be judged by comments their parents made at the age of 17.

I shudder to think of some of the views I held and garbage I spouted at that age!

flippinada Thu 03-Oct-13 17:38:59

I think many people are pleased to see a politician standing up to the gutter press instead of cravenly pandering to them.

Makes a nice change, doesn't it?

limitedperiodonly Thu 03-Oct-13 18:12:21

I don't know what you do for a living chipstick and moistened but I am a journalist, and let me tell you, you two are talking rot.

This is not acceptable and it's not what I went into journalism for. And before you ask, I've never worked for the Guardian and peddle my living in silly showbiz and women's stuff for whoever will buy it.

Many senior Mail journalists think this campaign and their editor has become insane. Just like people at The Sun, where I worked, thought Kelvin McKenzie was insane over Hillsborough and other things but didn't dare say.

With some egregious exceptions, most journalists are liberal, if not left wing. It's the nature of the job.

Do you know what it's like to work somewhere you can't express the mildest bit of political dissent because you will be branded a traitor and you will be shown the door?

Do you know what it's like to work somewhere where the day after a Conservative victory you have to compete with how Tory girl or boy you are to curry favour with the sociopath who is your boss?

My background is tabloids. I have monstered people, because that's what you do if your news editor tells you and you want to pay that month's mortgage rather than walking out the door in a blaze of glory towards the dole office.

You develop that Millwall mentality: everyone hates us but we don't care. It's a great feeling, and sometimes it's justified. But not always.

Do you want me to explain to you what it's like to be monstered? Trust me, you wouldn't want me on your doorstep, and I specialised in being one of the good cops.

I'm not asking for your sympathy. In fact I'd feel insulted if you pitied me.

I'm just pointing out that you two are woefully ignorant while posing as people who know what they're talking about.

You make me laugh and weep.

PetiteRaleuse Thu 03-Oct-13 18:19:37

Very nice change.

And as I said above. There is a big difference between Thatcher and Miliband Senior. Thatcher was a public person whose acts had a direct effect on the people. It is normal that people had strong emotions about her one way or the other, though I don't condone them dancing in the street. Miliband was a teacher, a writer, and although not everyone agreed with him on everything ,(including his sons afaik), his life was led relatively privately and his actions harmed no-one. Most of the people criticising him haveno idea what he actually did write, but one thing is sure, he was not a Comunist and he did not support Communist Russia.

I don't see why people are treating the issue in the same way.

Nancy66 Thu 03-Oct-13 18:26:14

very good post Limited. Well said

PetiteRaleuse Thu 03-Oct-13 18:27:58

Very interesting post, thanks Limited .

PetiteRaleuse Thu 03-Oct-13 18:29:03

I was just thinking about you nancy , what is your view on all this?

flippinada Thu 03-Oct-13 18:45:57

At the risk of sounding like an echo grin , what a thought provoking and interesting post limited. That certainly doesn't sound like a pleasant environment to work in.

garlicvampire Thu 03-Oct-13 18:55:39

Another round of applause for Limited ... from somebody who fell foul of the tabloid think machine. She has understated it.

limitedperiodonly Thu 03-Oct-13 18:57:56

flippinada it pays the bills. Newsdesks are fantastic and terrifying.

There is a great deal of solidarity and fun when you're in pursuit.

On reflection, sometimes that's right and sometimes it's wrong.

It's heady; I admit it.

But I object to people who have no idea saying it's fair. Because it's not. It is what it is and they don't know what they're talking about.

flippinada Thu 03-Oct-13 19:20:38

I can well imagine it being a high stress job with awful lows and amazing highs limited.

I know next to nothing about journalism so I'll shut up about it now!

flippinada Thu 03-Oct-13 19:26:26

Having said that. .in my non journalistic opinion, this has backfired on the DM quite spectacularly.

Whatever people think of Alistair Campbell, folk pay attention when he speaks...and his
petition (just started today) already has over 29,000 signatures.

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 19:36:06

I think it is a mistake for Campbell to get involved. He will swing a lot of people's sympathy back to the Mail and some people will start to think that this is becoming political with attacks on the Mail.

McBride is very smart, and even though he is quite disliked, he has accepted he did bad things and is open and honest about them, and he has advised Ed to do the following

"Damian McBride, the former spin doctor to Gordon Brown who worked with Miliband closely at the Treasury, said it was "certainly brave and not without risk" for him to take on the Mail. "He almost certainly does have significant public support on this, but the danger is in taking social media as a reading on how the public feel generally about newspapers," he said.

"He should take it out of the Mail and make it more of an issue of how we do our politics in Britain and elevate it to that level. The more it becomes a war the more it is corrosive because it is very difficult to restore those relationships."


At the moment Ed has the sympathy of Daily Mail readers, but it won't last long if they keep seeing Campbell on their TV screens.

If it becomes a polarised political battle, then my guess is that the Mail will win it.

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 19:39:13

Ed had the moral highground when he stood alone against the Mail.

But when you see Kinnock, Campbell, Clegg etc laying in to the Mail, then I think the tables may turn.

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 19:40:36

I think Gove will come out a winner on the Tory side, as he has defended the Mail more than some of the other Tories, who seem to think that kicking the Mail is safe for them to do.

PetiteRaleuse Thu 03-Oct-13 19:40:48

I have mixed feelings about Campbell. He was a bastard as a spin doctor but he is very knowledgeable about both politics and the media, so he is worth listening to. He writes and speaks very well.

flippinada Thu 03-Oct-13 19:43:21

Of course Gove is defending the DM...his wife works for them!

flippinada Thu 03-Oct-13 19:45:02

Petite that pretty much sums up my thinking too. Very ingredient and astute but not someone you want to get on the wrong side of.

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 19:45:11

Petite, he is worth listening to, but he does not appeal to non-Labour voters. He is a huge liability to Labour for non-Labour voters.

Frankly, no matter what Campbell says about McBride, McBride has had the guts to accept that he did bad things and therefore in non-Labour voters' views, he has to some extent redeemed himself.

flippinada Thu 03-Oct-13 19:45:35

Ahem. I mean intelligent blush .

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 19:47:40

'Of course Gove is defending the DM...his wife works for them!'

Yes, and rightly so, and his wife is a very good columnist. I like her new column. But, I think Gove is very clever and is playing the long game, just as he did when he was at Leveson. He knows that when the dust settles, the Mail will still be standing and reaching millions of readers every single day and that is real power.

flippinada Thu 03-Oct-13 19:48:43

Unlike Lynton Crosby, who appeals to nobody at all, except perhaps himself (and even that's debatable).

flippinada Thu 03-Oct-13 19:50:59

I wouldn't know about that, claig. I don't read the Daily Mail.

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 19:51:56

Lynton Crosby is very smart, he does not appear on our TV screens. He doesn't write novels and publicise them or appear on our screens to campaign for charitable causes or anything else. He remains in the shadows, just like the very smart McBride also used to do.

Moistenedbint1 Thu 03-Oct-13 19:52:27

Im no expert limited but I've read flat earth news... And from this have derived a wee bit of insight into the world of journalism. How time restricted journalists are, how the whole industry revolves around commercial interests rather than truth telling.. Articles driven by political propaganda/agenda are only one part of it (according to Davies) and I have to say he presents a far more succinct description of the industry than you.. "Tory boys/girls" don't have absolute sway incidentally.. Certainly not at the guardian, independent etc... As a dedicated journalist you must know that.. confused

Ps I didn't say at any point that this was "acceptable" so kindly don't infer otherwise eh?!

flippinada Thu 03-Oct-13 19:59:19

That's you told limited. By someone who has read a book, no less.

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 20:03:12

In fact someone on the news informed Campbell today that Peter Oborne says that he will dig out his own notes on Campbell and publish them next week. Once the story turns to Campbell, all the moral highground has been lost. They say Campbell was a good spin doctor, but putting himself near the centre of this story and calling Dacre a coward, is a huge mistake in my opinion. McBride has far better advice.

"His [Campbell's] personal conduct was far, far worse and more demeaning than any Daily Mail journalist.

It is well known that it was Campbell who started the story that John Major tucked his shirt into his underpants. He set out to humiliate and ridicule Major in an incredibly unpleasant and personal way. He once related in print that Mr Major, when prime minister, had tried to engage him in friendly conversation on the official VC 10 during an overseas trip. Campbell boasted that he cut him dead: "Oh sod off prime minister. I’m trying to do my expenses."

Mr Campbell denied John Major an ounce of the respect to which a prime minister is entitled, even from the most hostile commentator. On one occasion Campbell (writing for Today newspaper) called Major "the piece of lettuce who passes for prime minister." On another occasion he called him "simply a second-rate, shallow, lying little toad of a man".

This kind of conduct and language certainly does not square with Mr Campbell’s statement that "I respected politics and I respected politicians."


Moistenedbint1 Thu 03-Oct-13 20:06:43

Never said I was an expert flipp but I'm entitled to an opinion eh? This being a discursive forum n'all.

Hasn't prevented you from contributing either I notice....

limitedperiodonly Thu 03-Oct-13 20:10:51

Im no expert limited

No, you not.

flippinada Thu 03-Oct-13 20:14:45

Of course you are entitled to your opinion - as you say, it's a platform for discussion.

I think having years of experience in an industry probably trumps reading a book about it though, authoritatively speaking.

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 20:15:48

I think that Moistenbint1 has expressed a view that is shared by many non-Labour voters. Watching Campbell on our screens attacking Dacre will not win any hearts and minds of non-Labour voters and may soon do exactly the opposite. Most voters rightly sympathised with Ed, but I don't think it will last if the likes of Campbell carry on being interviewed.

This is a fight between Ed and the Mail, and if Ed wants to appear strong to the public, he should fight it on his own without the help of people like Campbell, because Campbell is Labour's Achilles Heel.

Moistenedbint1 Thu 03-Oct-13 20:22:50

Alistair campbell Limited, well I have to say your blustering diatribe above certainly doesn't exactly attest to your self-professed journalistic acumen..

garlicvampire Thu 03-Oct-13 20:30:54

Ad hominems all over the place. As on the news, so on Mumsnet, eh wink

limitedperiodonly Thu 03-Oct-13 20:31:30

Okey dokey

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 20:34:00

What makes the next steps fascinating for us the public is that I am sure that people like Oborne and Dacre and the Mail know lots of things that were done by some of these people that they have never bothered to tell us the public. If the battle intensifies, then we may get a glimpse of some of their behaviour and people may begin leaking things that have been kept secret from the public for years.

As McBride so rightly said
"The more it becomes a war the more it is corrosive because it is very difficult to restore those relationships."

and the more we will find out about what really went on.

PetiteRaleuse Thu 03-Oct-13 20:56:00

As I said, I can't wait for the PD diaries...

flippinada Thu 03-Oct-13 20:57:29

I'd imagine there's a hell of a lot we don't know about what goes on. I agree with you there claig.

HesterShaw Thu 03-Oct-13 21:06:24

So in fact someone needs to tell Cambell to shut the fuck up.

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 21:06:42

Yes, McBride was right when he said that he was giving us an honest glimpse into what goes on. Most of us, the normal public, who are not Westminster journalists and don't move in these circles, had no idea. There is much more that we don't have a clue about but can just imagine.

I am sure that lots of it is unedifying, but as McBride rightly said, it is important in an open democracy to know some of it, in the hope that it may not continue to occur. When everything runs smoothly and they are all pals and are all in it together, then the public learns nothing, but when there is a battle, we sometimes catch glimpses of what really goes on behind the curtain.

This is a political storm, but it may clear the air.

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 21:16:29

Campbell seems to think that he can drive a stake through the Mail's heart and force resignations. He seems to be swinging wildly and taking crazy pot shots at the giant known as the Mail. But if he read his Greek mythology, he should take heed that those whom the gods wish to destroy ,they first make mad.

The Mail is like the Loch Ness monster, it may submerge temporarily but it will undoubtedly pop up again, and when it comes back up for air, it may be angrier than it was before and may want to continue the war.

edam Thu 03-Oct-13 21:20:12

Limited knows what she's talking about. From direct experience.

I read a book written by a GP once, but oddly enough, doctors know more than I do about how medicine works.

Limited is right about the hacks at the Mail being not exactly thrilled about Dacre's bizarre 'attack Milliband's dead Dad' stunt. Journalists often do things that maiden aunts would not approve, but this one is weird. And the MoS being slapped down by Rothermere for trying to go one better than the Mail is a twist.

PetiteRaleuse Thu 03-Oct-13 21:23:35

I have never heard anything positive about working for the Mail other than the columnists are well paid, compared to other newspapers. I can imagine that it is a good experience to be in the newsroom for a limited period.

Chipstick10 Thu 03-Oct-13 21:24:08

Alastair Campbell is rotten to the core. Hideous man.

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 21:28:39

Watched Channel4 News tonight and Toby Young said that Melanie Phillips until recently worked for the Mail. I wasn't sure I heard it right, I thought there must be some mistake, so I googled and unfortunately her regular column has ended. Apparently they are changing their lineup or something. Very sad.

PetiteRaleuse Thu 03-Oct-13 21:31:57

Rotten to the core? Bit of an exaggeration. Bastard as a spin doctor yet but have you even glanced at what else he has done? Strong words, rotten to the core.

BoulevardOfBrokenSleep Thu 03-Oct-13 21:37:17

claig, I know I've said this to you before, but someone mentioning it upthread has reminded me - you should really consider reading Flat Earth News. It must be pretty cheap by now, it's been out for ages. And you know how you love a conspiracy..?

Chipstick10 Thu 03-Oct-13 21:43:00

You should look at another thread further down the page if you think rotten to the core are strong words. Posters wishing Tories long slow painful deaths. That's what I call strong words. Pretty vile IMO.

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 21:44:18

Boulevard, you are right. People have told me that before. Several years ago, i dismissed it because it was written by a Guardian journalist and I thought it would therefore be spin. but I was wrong. Nick Davies is an excellent journalist and when the Savile scandal was revealed, many of the bestinvestiagtive journalism about it and similar scandals had been written by Nick Davies many years earlier, so he is very good and courageous.

I will definitely buy it and read it because I like to try and understand what goes on and people like Nick Davies know much more about it than I do.

Thanks for reminding me, I will put an Amazon order in for it.

Before this kicked off, Alastair Campbell was on the radio last week speaking up for those with mental health issues (after the Tesco/Asda Halloween costume debacle).

He has suffered from depression himself in the past.

IMO he is actually a decent bloke away from his spin doctor activities

MiniTheMinx Thu 03-Oct-13 22:11:28

Alastair Campbell is very yummy looking though grin actually I quite like him. He was paid to do a job, he did it.

Just as the journalists are paid to do a job, Limited's post was very interesting.

I don't understand why Ed is writing to Rothermere, waste of paper.

PetiteRaleuse Thu 03-Oct-13 22:11:45

He has done a LOT for MH issues. Doesn't make him decent, but indicates he is not all bad.

PetiteRaleuse Thu 03-Oct-13 22:12:33

And he speaks v good French. Always a good guest on French tv.

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 22:19:17

I would rather see mental health workers on TV speaking up about it than figures like Campbell or other political figures.

Blair does philanthropic work apparently, but Blair and Campbell have unfortunately got a bad reputation with much of the public and therefore there is a danger that the public won't take their causes seriously and even believe that they may possibly be trying to rehabilitate themselves with the public through them. They may write books and campaign and even make some money out of causes and increase their public exposure out of them, and that risks possibly turning the public off.

So many politicians seem to write books about their alcoholism or their depression or their bulimia etc etc. and sicuss how they were victims etc and there is a risk that the public will become cynical about their motives.

I like McBride and I admire his courage in taking all the brickbats and being honest about it. It is fine for him to make money out of his book which is a historical record about what he did in politics, but if he were to campaign on alcoholism and rehabilitate his profile through that then I would be less comfortable with that.

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 22:21:23

"I don't understand why Ed is writing to Rothermere, waste of paper."

Very good PR. He has put the ball in Rothermere's court and if Rothermere does not reply then the public will have more sympathy for Ed. Rothermere is now on the back foot, Ed is on the front foot.

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 22:22:20

Plus, Rothermere may tell the journalists to change their way or working.

PetiteRaleuse Thu 03-Oct-13 22:28:03

Yes but mental health workers don't get prominent tv spots. Famous people do. Better than nothing. I don't think Blair was all bad either. There are very few people I consider as bad people. Dacre is one of them.

MiniTheMinx Thu 03-Oct-13 22:29:43

Do you think so. I don't. The media is the mouthpiece for him and his ilk. The thing he won't approve of is the fact that this attack on Ed has laid bare this fact.

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 22:30:11

'Famous people do'

True, but Saddam Hussein is famous and we wouldn't want to use him to publicise it. Use actors of footballers or decent people, not people who have bad reputations with the public.

PetiteRaleuse Thu 03-Oct-13 22:31:39

But that's a whole other debate? Who's decent? We all have our murky secrets after all.

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 22:33:55

Yes, but some figures are admittedly controversial and they should not be used to promote good causes. Oborne will publish his notes on Campbell next week. Imagine seeing him on TV promoting his novel and talking about alcoholism after that.

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 22:38:33

When Blair launched his book, he needed guards when he went to Ireland as people were protesting against him. It's unfortunate, but he doesn't have a good image with lots of people and therefore it would be crazy to use him to promote certain good causes, because just the sight of him is offensive to some of these protestors.

garlicvampire Thu 03-Oct-13 22:45:05

i dismissed it because it was written by a Guardian journalist grin Oh, bless you, Claig! Glad to hear you had a re-think.

I thought Alastair Campbell was very good on mental health stigma last week. Since MH patients and our HCPs find it so hard to get heard - unless we've gone on a murder spree - it's good to have a PR master on our side.

I wish this Ralph Miliband thing had died down already. It's distracted attention from Ed's remarkably strong speeches. Funny, that: what unlucky timing hmm

edam Thu 03-Oct-13 22:46:54

claig, the think about Campbell and mental health is that it was hugely positive for someone who had been in an incredibly high-pressured job to say, yes, I suffer from depression. Someone who had been extraordinarily powerful. Whether you like what he did or not.

Shame his own mental health issues didn't stop him playing a part in hounding poor David Kelly, though...

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 22:48:39

Yes, that is a good point. I think it also came out on the day that Cameron made a not very good speech, so the contrast between Ed's speech and Caneron's speech was less evident.

PetiteRaleuse Thu 03-Oct-13 22:53:29

True. Not much in the press about how awful Cameron's speech was. (Very awful)

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 22:55:47

edam, I am a Daily Mail reader, so I am a bit of a cynic and don't have full trust in some politicians. I don't like to read about Blair's alcohol problem and how he needed to drink so much per day etc because it can be used by Blair to gain sympathy for his hard job and how the stress of it may have caused him to be more dependent on drink.

I know Blair had a hard job, but I am cynical of some politicians' motives in trying to gain public sympathy by talking about it. I think they should keep it to themselves.

I am sure that Thatcher had lots of stress etc but she didn't tell us about it.

To be honest, I also wonder if some politicians are telling the truth or if they have been advised by a spin doctor to talk about it and write books about it, just like they are when they tell us that their favourite band is the Arctic Monkeys etc.

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 23:06:01

Alos, I happen to like Mcbride unlike most of the Labour establishment it seems.

I bet the BBC would not give McBride publicity to talk about his alcohol problems and his work (if any) for charities or give him airtime to discuss a book about his alcoholism, because my guess is that the Labour establishment do not wish to rehabilitate McBride. Also I believe that McBride does have integrity and he therefore wouldn't do it, but I may be wrong about that.

edam Thu 03-Oct-13 23:10:38

Put it this way Claig, he tried to offer royalties from his book to a well-known national charity, but they've turned him down. Clearly they don't think it would be a good idea to be seen to take his money.

Moistenedbint1 Thu 03-Oct-13 23:13:30

I read a book written by a GP once, but oddly enough, doctors know more than I do about how medicine works

My partners two work colleagues go by the job title of "IT specialist" but they're both infamous for their utter ineptitude. Job title doesn't necessarily = competence... And as we all know, every self-professed woman on mumsnet could be a hairy arsed trucker. You could employed as a cat herder for all I know.

As I said earlier, campbell has a painfully short memory. He endorsed (possibly even "sexed up") the Iraq dossier.. which, as we know, lead to the inevitable deaths of countless civilians and servicemen... Oh and an illegal war. Also he and Cherrie Blair showed gross insensitivity by autographing and auctioning a copy of Hutton's inquiry report into Dr Kelly's death... In essence, profiting from the death of a man. These transgressions are far more deserving of contempt that Dacre's speculative piece.

I will concede that I understand Ed milliband's defensiveness though (it being his fathers reputation at stake) ... But Campbell, the rank hypocrite? No, he has no right to wage any moral crusade.

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 23:17:24

Exactly, they are a good cause and they don't want to touch him with a bargepole because of his reputation and I think that is right.

However, I do believe that McBride is a decent bloke who was hired to do a job to protect Brown and that is what he did, even though he used dirty tactics to do it. McBride was an attack dog but that is what he was hired to do, just as limitedperiodonly says that she has monstered people on their doorsteps because that is what she was in part hired to do.

I am in favour of McBride giving money to charity and I believe the charity should take it, but I would object to hearing about it on the BBC and McBride being asked to tell us all about it. It should be done in secret because then it is real.

Moistenedbint1 Thu 03-Oct-13 23:23:26

To be honest, I also wonder if some politicians are telling the truth or if they have been advised by a spin doctor to talk about it and write books about it, just like they are when they tell us that their favourite band is the Arctic Monkeys etc.

Cynical but I think there is an element of truth there at times.. Campbell's most recent book was released recently so I guess this drums up a good bit of publicity for him.

Moistenedbint1 Thu 03-Oct-13 23:25:08

Sorry badly articulated.. Meant to say - there's an element of truth to what you say..

claig Thu 03-Oct-13 23:28:07

Exactly. Mostenedbint1, and the BBC are giving him lots of publicity and they would not give good publicity for someone like McBride who the entire Labour establishment seem to want to distance themselves from.

PetiteRaleuse Fri 04-Oct-13 07:27:11

Ed is on BBC Breakfast at 8.10

Would disagree. McBride, for someone who most of us had forgotten about until a couple of weeks ago, has had lots of coverage on the Beeb. Not for his charity stuff... Yet... But plenty of coverage and I al sure we haven't heard the last of him. I hope he does some good.

flippinada Fri 04-Oct-13 07:32:19

Yep, McBride's been all over the news recently what with his book being launched.

Thanks for the tip Petite will try to wash today.

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 07:36:08

Agree he has had loads of coverage but so far it has been about his revelations of what went on and that is a legitimate political story that could no longer be covered up from the public.

I have just remembered that he said he has worked or is working for the charity CAFOD. But at least he has had the decency not to go into detail about it on our TV screens. And working for a charity or in a publicly funded role seems to be par for the course for so many of these former Labour people, so it didn't come as a great surprise. What would have been a surprise is if if he had worked in industry.

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 07:49:32

Apparently it seems that he is the "communications director" for CAFOD. You couldn't make this stuff up.


HesterShaw Fri 04-Oct-13 07:58:18

Still sniggering at Gordon claiming he liked the Arctic Monkeys.

Do they think we're stupid or something? Oh, wait....

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 08:00:48

Agree, HesterShaw.

One of my favourite politicians is Jacob Rees-Mogg. He doesn't hide what he is. He is genuine and doesn't stoop to spin to present a false image to the public. The public doesn't care what their background is as long as they are genuine.

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 08:16:52

They should take Ed off our screens now. He is smiling too much while speaking. They should quit while they are ahead.

PetiteRaleuse Fri 04-Oct-13 08:22:32

I think he looks like he has had enough of it himself. Wouldn't blame him.

edam Fri 04-Oct-13 08:23:05

Paul Dacre has been conspicuous by his absence from the airwaves, hasn't he? I wonder why he sends out his lieutenants to defend this bizarre attack on an academic and hasn't said a word himself?

PetiteRaleuse Fri 04-Oct-13 08:24:30

He very rarely speaks to the media. He's not very good at it. Possible that he has had a bollocking of some kind?

edam Fri 04-Oct-13 08:26:33

I do wonder about that, Petite. Esp. given Rothermere's slapping down of Geordie Grieg for the MoS sending a reporter to Miliband's uncle's memorial service.

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 08:29:58

I think Dacre's strategy is smart, because the more we see him in public, the more likely it is that he may say something wrong or make a mistake and the more the public is likely to get sick of him. By keeping out of it, he avoids all that.

But the spin doctor Campbell is on our screens too often and the public will soon tire of him, and even Ed is appearing too often and smiling through every interview instead of appearing serious. It is a bad strategy and the Mail will come out the winner if it continues. They are giving Campbell the rope with which to hang himself.

PetiteRaleuse Fri 04-Oct-13 08:31:00

Rothermere has apologised for that, but not for the article. I don't think he has publicly defended it either.

Am glad Ed said that this was nothing to do with regulation but to do with right and wrong. All those going on about regulation don't seem to realise that even if Leveson recommendations were fully implemented, which is not goifg to happen, they would still be able to publish a comment piece like that. I am sick of people turning it into a regulatory issue. The journalist going to the memorial goes against current PCC guidelines, so there would be no change there either.

PetiteRaleuse Fri 04-Oct-13 08:35:49

The City Editor is on now dodging questions.

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 08:36:55

Credit to the BBC. It was a good interview of Miliband. They didn't give him an easy time or an easy platform. They did ask him some tough questions like "what more do you want?" etc

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 08:44:15

' Possible that he has had a bollocking of some kind?'

I don't think that Dacre has had a bollocking. If he had had a bollocking, then the mail would be apologising for their article, but instead they stepped up their attack. I think Dacre is in full control and has the full confidence of the proprietor.

flippinada Fri 04-Oct-13 08:49:13

Missed it, shame as it sounds interesting.

flippinada Fri 04-Oct-13 08:51:19

Petition now has 43,000 signatures.

PetiteRaleuse Fri 04-Oct-13 09:01:16

The City Editor was saying that they have nothing to apologise for wrt the original articles or their reaction.went on about how the headline needs to be read incconjunction with the article, very much following the party line, so to speak.

I think you're right claig I don.t think Dacre gets bollocked. This is not the first time they have messed up, however, and there is a lot out there about his behaviour and treatment of staff, so I am not sure, other than financial success, what rothermere looks for in his editor.

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 09:14:27

I think the Mail on Sunday editor's position has been weakened because of the mistake and the apology that he has issued. But Dacre is even stronger and has issued no apology.

' I am not sure, other than financial success, what rothermere looks for in his editor'

I think Dacre is a brilliant strategist and leader. The important thing for him is to understand the Daily Mail reader and give them what they want, because the Daily Mail reader can make the difference as to which party wins general elections. The Daily Mail is Middle England's paper, the paper of the middle classes, and anyone who understands the aspirations and convictions of the middle classes can swing elections. Dacre gets it, he knows what we believe, he gives us what we want.

Dacre is for real, he is one of us, even though he is rich, he is one of the people and understands what we feel. He is not interested in publicity or appearing on TV like someone like Campbell. He is dedicated to politics and has respect for the middle classes and their wishes. That is why he has been at the top of probably the most influential paper in the country for so many years.

Very interesting Guardian article about Dacre and the Mail on Sunday editor

"The reason for Paul getting out of bed in the morning is to edit the Daily Mail. He is not the type to glide into retirement, to golf courses and a gentle life. He doesn't cherish high office, being a peer."


PetiteRaleuse Fri 04-Oct-13 09:19:54

Thanks I will read that. Good thing about weeks like this is all the stuff written about it from varying viewpoints.

I am middle class. It is not my paper and doesn't speak for me in the slightest bit. I don't know any middle class people in real life under 50 who read it other than when it is flagged up for some reason or another.

PetiteRaleuse Fri 04-Oct-13 09:28:02

Just read it. I would quite possibly pay to watch PD being dragged kicking and screaming from the DM building grin

As far as the newspaper is concerned he did a good job for them, but the ranting the last year or so makes le think he might become a liability very quickly.

limitedperiodonly Fri 04-Oct-13 09:30:47

Poor old Gordon Brown. That was made up. But once it was out there, how could he rebut it without looking worse?

'No I don't like the Arctic Monkeys. They're derivative and I think their indie image is manufactured. I much prefer Leonard Cohen.'

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 09:31:57

Petite, it is not the paper of every middle class person, but it is the paper of the majority of us.

You live abroad and probably get better healthcare and services than we get. I live in the East of England. We kicked nearly every Labour MP out of our region. The Daily Mail sells out at supermarkets and newsagents, and it is working and middle classes who mainly buy it.

The reason is that it is in accord with many of our views. We can't change the world, we are only the little people, and that is why some of the little things matter to us. We are against bureaucrats levying bin fines for not closing our bin lids, we are against secret courts where daughters are secretly jailed for wanting to remove their father's from care homes, we are against the deterioration in our hospitals and worried about things like the Liverpool Care Pathway and we are for less taxation and more responsible spending of public moeny and we are against climate change scams and against attacks on Syria and against lenient sentencing for violent offenders And the only paper that supports us is the Daily Mail, and that is why it sells out in supermarkets all across our region.

PetiteRaleuse Fri 04-Oct-13 09:44:38

There's another trhead which linked to this video from Question Time last night : m.youtube.com/watch?v=73ZCrDtAC7A&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D73ZCrDtAC7A

Brilliant! I applauded.

claig you are right, I live abroad, and don't have to deal with the issues the middle classes do in the UK. However...

The Mail does not sell out in supermarkets for the reasons you give. It sells out because it plays on your fears, and twists facts, repeatedly , to wind its readers up. Other newspapers also discuss the same issues, albeit slightly less hysterically - I personally like the Indie and despite the Murdoch ownership quite like the Times.

Anyway while it is playing on your fears and creating new ones, it adds in human interest, often anti woman articles by the likes of Jones, Brick and Sibary which are perfect gossip fodder. As far as women are concerned in fact it is positively dangerous. My mother who reads it is always banging on about how often women lie about rape, how Bercow, or Blair, or Clegg's wives are <insert various negative comments here> . In fact, in all the time I have known her as an adult I don't think she has ever said a positive thing about any woman other than certain actresses or commenting on friends' parenting or cooking skills. And this is not the only DM reader I know like this.

It isn't in accord with middle England's views. He looked at what they were, and used his knowledge to shape the views, manipulate them into something which has none of the tolerance and kindness which we are so highly rated for abroad.

As the years go by it becomes more and more a parody of itself and I am delighted that people, real people with power or gravitas, have come out of the woodwork this week and shown it for what it is: baser than most tabloids but pretending to be something better.

HesterShaw Fri 04-Oct-13 09:50:24

I think the "middle class" is so vast and disparate that you can't possibly generalise about it, Claig. Lots of people buy the Daily Mail because of its showbiz gossipy stuff, while still sneering at it. Others regularly click on the stories in order to disagree with them on the message boards. Many middle classed would sooner die than buy it. There will be some who believe all it tells them, but it's certainly not all its readership.

flippinada Fri 04-Oct-13 09:57:21

Another middle class person (sadly not with a middle class salary though grin ) who doesn't read the Mail.

Nobody I know reads it either. I wouldn't deny that it speaks for a certain group of people however.

flippinada Fri 04-Oct-13 10:01:44

That's true Hester. I don't read it at all (online or hard copy) but have heard of the infamous "sidebar of shame".

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 10:01:57

'It sells out because it plays on your fears'

Yes, it does play on our fears. It voices our real fears, and it campaigns for them and demands change which iss what we want. We were against the liverpool Care Pathway and we were shouted down by all of teh stablishment media, but the Mail kept campaigning on it and eventually the millionaires in government had to do something about it because they know that we are the true majority. Brown doesn't have his Big Conversations with us, in fact this out-of-touch elite despises us and the newspaper we read and buy in our millions. it is only through the Mail that we get a chance to voice our concerns and force our concerns onto the political agenda. The Mail spells out our fears to the millionaires in government and because it is so powerful, they eventually have to listen to us.

But we are also for freedom and freedom of speech and no press regulation and for getting bureaucrats and petty Beamters off the back of the people. The eite deride us and say we are "populist". Of course we are populist, because we are the people and not the millionaires.

' In fact, in all the time I have known her as an adult I don't think she has ever said a positive thing about any woman other than certain actresses or commenting on friends' parenting or cooking skills. And this is not the only DM reader I know like this.'

I bet she has had a few positive things to say about Margaret Thatcher.

' I am delighted that people, real people with power or gravitas, have come out of the woodwork this week and shown it for what it is'

The millionaires have come out, the ones with access to chateaux, and on gravy trains and the career politicians and advisers and the Lords have come out against it and have accused it of hating Britain while it it in fact Britain's second highest selling newspaper. The reason that they despise the Mail is because this out-of-touch privileged elite despise teh people and think they are too stupid to know what they really need.

PetiteRaleuse Fri 04-Oct-13 10:10:23

Actually you'd be surprised, she has very little positive to say about thatcher. Loves the Queen however, but then again, so do I.

claig you and I have argued this point many times on these boards the last few years. I am not part of the elite, or wealthy, and am not actually all that well educated. I am about as normal middle class as you can be. And there is nothing wrong with a paper being populist. Au contraire, they should all aim to be populist to a certain extent because the more people learn about the news, the better.

However, I will say again an again that the mail is dangerous, manipulative, dishonest and really dislikes a lot of what it means to be British. Clegg put it perfectly yesterday and I never agree with him.

No-one wants press regulation, we all want a free and responsible press. But responsible they have not been. It is very sad.

flippinada Fri 04-Oct-13 10:15:02

Come off it, the Mail is an establishment paper and always has been.

BoulevardOfBrokenSleep Fri 04-Oct-13 10:16:30

But claig, you weren't actually opposed to the Liverpool Care Pathway; you were opposed to what the Mail told you the Liverpool Care Pathway was. And there is a big difference.

flippinada Fri 04-Oct-13 10:25:13

My last comment was in reference to claig's post.

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 10:25:43

'Actually you'd be surprised, she has very little positive to say about thatcher.'

Yes and that just shows that Mail readers are all different. One of the Mail's leading commentators is Peter Hitchens and he so despises the Tories that he tells us not to vote for them, and we don't mind, because we know that in some ways he is right because they are the millionaires who ignore us when they are in power and only court us when they need us and tell us that if we don't vote for these millionaires then we will get Miliband instead.

"However, I will say again an again that the mail is dangerous, manipulative, dishonest and really dislikes a lot of what it means to be British. Clegg put it perfectly yesterday and I never agree with him."

It is not dangerous. That is an image that is portrayed by people like Clegg who said he was against tuition charges and then was part of a government that tripled them. When it comes to manipulative and deceitful, then Clegg lecturing the Mail and by implcation its millions of readers, really takes the biscuit.

Everybody knows what the Mail stands for and it doesn't bend with the wind. It is often against Cameron and supported Brown in his policy against the proliferation of casinos, because the Mail stands by its principles. While Paddy Ashdown said it was a "bad day for Britain" when the Commons voted over Syria, the Mail's editorials were against attacking Syria. The Mail does not kowtow to the wishes of the political class and even has one of its most popular commentators, Hitchens, lambasting "Slippery Dave" and "Blair of Baghdad" every week.

The Mail stands by its principles and stands by the people and not the political class, and that is why it sells so many copies and is so feared by the career politicians.

Dacre is a kingmaker because he is the voice of the people to the millionaires in the Palce of Westminster.

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 10:30:15

BoulevardOfBrokenSleep, no I was opposed to the Liverpool Care Pathway as are lots of other Mail readers, and the Mail doesn't go anywhere near far enough in spelling out why.

Nearly everybody I know is worried about hospital treatment of their elderly relatives. People say to me, "I never believed all the stories in the press about our hospitals" but now I do, when unfortunately their relatives and loved ones are hospitalized.

No one will talk about the real unarticulated fears of the public over this, not even the great Daily Mail, although it is the paper that gets the nearest to articulating it.

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 10:33:09

'Come off it, the Mail is an establishment paper and always has been.'

It is not. If it was then I and millions of others wouldn't be reading it. The BBC is the establishment, not the Mail. The establishment, Clegg and all the rest of them dislike the Daily Mail. All the right-on comedians hate it and mock it, but us the people buy it in our millions and by denigrating the Mail, they denigrate us.

PetiteRaleuse Fri 04-Oct-13 10:39:06

Oh well we couldn't stay in agreement for three days in a row. Nevermind, we managed for a good while :-)

HesterShaw Fri 04-Oct-13 10:41:12

Exactly. It doesn't voice people's fears so much as tell people what they should be fearing. Generally that is. Granted there have been times when I've applauded it, e.g the Lawrence case. Ok, one time.

BoulevardOfBrokenSleep Fri 04-Oct-13 10:41:12

You don't think it's a little bit dangerous that one organ can print whatever it wants, and 2 million people will believe it without question?

That's a lot of power to hand to one organisation. What if it fell into the hands of someone less principled than Dacre? <the mind boggles>

flippinada Fri 04-Oct-13 10:42:45

Hester even a stopped clock is right twice a day...

HesterShaw Fri 04-Oct-13 10:43:52

I still think "us" is far too generalised.

I hate the way it portrays women. I hate the way it represents foreigners. I hate the way it fails to differentiate between illegal immigrants and political asylum seekers. I hate the way it portays everyone on benefits.

HesterShaw Fri 04-Oct-13 10:45:41

And I HATE the way it categorises everyone who doesn't vote Tory as "the Left".

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 10:53:07

'You don't think it's a little bit dangerous that one organ can print whatever it wants, and 2 million people will believe it without question?'

They don't believe it without question. They were against its article about Ed's father, they thought that the Mail had gone too far. Hitchens tells us not to vote for the Tories but we ignore him and often still have to vote Tory, just to stop an even worse alternative.

The Mail sells because it is in tune with us on many issues. It does not lead us, it follow us. That is why it is so successful, it has its finger on the pulse because it actually listens to us unlike the out-of-touch elite with their phoney Big Conversations, where the outcomes have already been decided before they even asked us.

We are against spin and the spinners, which is why we don't like to see them getting publicity on our BBC in order to enhance their image and sell us their books.

We like Hitchens because he doesn't try to spin us by telling us to vote Tory, because we know that they are only the best of bad bunch.

The Mail tells it like it is and we like that and we agree or disagree with it, and Petite's mother who is a proud reader chooses not to have much of a good word to say about Thatcher even if the Mail does.

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 10:54:22

'I still think "us" is far too generalised.'

When I say 'us', I am referring to the millions of Daily Mail readers only, not Campbell and McBride and many other people.

Quangle Fri 04-Oct-13 10:55:03

I think that's precisely what I hate about the Mail. Taking a complicated issue and reducing it to a nonsense. For example, conflating the issues with treating elderly people in hospital and the terrible treatment that we've heard about - with the Liverpool Care Pathway.

Likewise, a scholar, writer, political thinker, who writes books about political theory and comes from a Marxist perspective "hates Britain". Because writing and reading books about how things could or should be different means you hate Britain. Just ignorant.

If people don't want to spend time thinking or understanding these complicated issues, then fine. But please don't expect me to stand up and applaud the Mail for being "the voice of the people" when actually it just takes some vague prejudices and gives them a veneer of legitimacy through use of half truth and rabble-rousing.

BoulevardOfBrokenSleep Fri 04-Oct-13 10:55:07

And this might be from another thread - if so I apologise - but did you say you have a degree in applied maths? If so, how can you possibly read the Mail without jumping up and down yelling, "that's not statistically significant!!" and the like? Do you steer clear of the health section? Cause it gives me the science rage.

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 10:58:20

'What if it fell into the hands of someone less principled than Dacre? <the mind boggles>'

Then the people woud stop buying it. The people are not stupid. We know what Clegg is like and we don't believe what he says.

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 11:00:41

I love the health section because it spurs me on to google and find out if there is any truth in what it tells me. I learn from it by furthering my own research.

"that's not statistically significant"

I know that there are lies, damned lies and New Labour, so I take everything with a pinch of salt.

PetiteRaleuse Fri 04-Oct-13 11:57:43

You take everything with a pinch of salt, you say, but many don't. Many People of my parents' generation don't question the news as much as we do now, especially as the line between reporting and comment has been blurred further and further over the years.

Interesting piece by Polly T in the Guardian. www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/04/no-retreat-ed-miliband-paul-dacre-murdoch

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 12:02:33

Yes, Petite, that is a good point. I think you are right there. But at the end of the day I believe in freedom and making a case by argument and am against anyone appointing themselves as an arbiter of what people should be allowed to read or believe.

I don't want spinners like Campbell or Clegg or millionaires in chateaux to have any say in bringing about regulation of a free press.

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 12:09:52

This is why the issue of a free press is so vital for us as a nation. We must be allowed to voice our real fears and to not have them swept under the carpet by millionaires in chateaux who do not face the things we face because they have more money than us and can escape our fate. We must keep fighting for our rights and our freedom to express our concerns. It is the Daily Mail that often stands alone in voicing our real concerns in our fight for these freedoms.

"When the Mail first highlighted readers’ harrowing stories about the suffering inflicted on patients and their families in the name of the Liverpool Care Pathway, the medical establishment reacted with fierce hostility.

When we called for an inquiry into the NHS-approved guidelines on end-of-life care, we were contemptuously accused of scaremongering and interfering in matters we didn’t understand.

Complaints were lodged with the Press regulatory body, seeking disciplinary action against us


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2364743/Liverpool-Care-Pathway-abolished-Victory-decency-end-life-care.html#ixzz2gkZsR9PX
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

flippinada Fri 04-Oct-13 12:13:12

Apparently now the DM is demanding an apology because some people have suggested they might be motivated by anti-semitism.

You actually couldn't make it up.

PetiteRaleuse Fri 04-Oct-13 12:21:29

Yes it was the City Editor who said they are owed an apology on the Beeb this morning. I must admit I didn't see any anti-semitism in the article but I haven't re-read it since those accusations were made. Certainly didn't strike me as anti-semitic, and the Mail in its current form has never led me to think it is anti-semitic.

flippinada Fri 04-Oct-13 12:28:57

I'm rather surprised at the audacity of asking for an apology for something somebody has suggested whilst at the at the same time refusing to apologise for something they've actually done?

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 12:31:20

flippinada, I don't think it is an official demand from the Daily Mail Newspaper, I think it is just the opinion of a journalist on the Mail.

Quangle Fri 04-Oct-13 12:41:35

ha ha at DM asking for an apology.

Yes we are vile and spread hate everywhere but how dare you suggest that we hold our knives the wrong way. How absolutely offensive of you. grin

I don't actually think their intention was anti-Semitic. But it's an obvious thought that would go through any observer's mind. Worth thinking about even if in this case I suspect it's knee jerk Mail crap rather than a particularly anti-Semitic attack (except in the sense that the Mail are anti everyone).

HesterShaw Fri 04-Oct-13 12:42:18

No one is arguing (here) that the press be muzzled. However what we do want is that they show some common decency and humanity. All of them, not just the Mail.

Quangle Fri 04-Oct-13 12:43:01

Claig, most of the press is owned by millionaires in chateaux. I wouldn't look to them to liberate you from your oppression by millionaires in chateaux.

TheHammaconda Fri 04-Oct-13 12:51:29

I'd like to know how much the DM receives from PRs to publish press releases articles on behalf of various 'celebrities' in the sidebar of shame. When they own up to the amount of money that they receive for advertisements masquerading as stories then they can lead the call for a free press.

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 13:01:55

'No one is arguing (here) that the press be muzzled. However what we do want is that they show some common decency and humanity.'

That is what Clegg and those millionaire in chateaux say, but I think Clegg is facing a public lack of trust in what he says.

'show some common decency and humanity'

That is what Campbell implies, but frankly that will be a very tough sell after his years in New Labour.

The danger is that the reasons they give for press regulation are just more of the spin that they are famed for, and the real motive is more pernicious.

The Mail seems to think so and the Mail is a formidable opoonent because it is backed by millions of middle class readers, who although despised by the great and the good, still have huge influence as voters.

flippinada Fri 04-Oct-13 13:07:21

I wonder how many chateaux are owned by the multi millionaire Viscount Rothermere?

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 13:14:01

"Claig, most of the press is owned by millionaires in chateaux. I wouldn't look to them to liberate you from your oppression by millionaires in chateaux."

Yes, that is right. The battle for power and influence is played out by different millionaires in different chateaux all vying for influence. The winners are the cleverer ones, the ones who use the people in their fight for power.

In my opinion that winner is the side that backs the Mail, because it is the Mail that has listened to the middle classes. There is only one politician who has really grasped that and that is Gove, who has gone easy on his attacks against the Mail, while some of the others in carefree abandon have recklessly and joyously kicked the Mail while it was down. But there is an old saying that Gove probably knows well and is possibly engraved on his heart in Latin

"act in haste, repent at leisure"

and the foolhardy Lords and the great and the good have forgotten it or maybe never paid attention in class when it was being taught at Eton.

Polly Toynbee's article is interesting and she implies, I think, that Miliband will eventually lose his fight with the Mail. I agree with her on that, but I disagree on why. She thinks it is because the Mail is the Establishment and that is where I think she is wrong.

I think it is the BBC, the Guardian, Clegg, the chateaux, the Lords, heseltine et al who are the Establishment and some of those characters also brought the People's Prime minister, Margaret Thatcher down.

But in taking on the Mail, they have taken on the People's Paper, and when they chose to do that, then the only way for them is down!

HomeHelpMeGawd Fri 04-Oct-13 13:15:14

The DM wrote: "We do not maintain, like the jealous God of Deuteronomy, that the iniquity of fathers should be visited upon the sons". So, a paper with a history of support for fascists chooses to defend their attack on a dead Jewish refugee war veteran by regurgitating a negative trope about the "Old Testament".

That's why people think it's antisemitic. Alex Brummer has chosen to ignore this, and to allow himself to be the living embodiment of a "but some of my best employees are Jewish" defence. Someone ought to send him a copy of the works of Rabbi Yisrael Meir Kagan...

flippinada Fri 04-Oct-13 13:21:21

I'm quite enjoying all this Daily Mail "voice of the people" stuff. Absolutely fascinating.

It's a little bit like Orwellian isn't it.. "some millionaire chateaux owners are more equal than others"

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 13:26:28

Flippinada, you are right. The battle at the top is one of Orwellian complexity and spin, and we are only the viewers on our TV screens. We are the pawns in the chess game that are advanced across the board by the players of the game.

We participate in the game by voting, and we back the side that agrees the most with our views. The winner of the game is the one who can take most of us along, and I would not place a bet against the Mighty Mail.

ttosca Fri 04-Oct-13 13:29:09

You're unwell, claig.

ttosca Fri 04-Oct-13 13:29:54

For funzies:

Mehdi Hasan Savages Daily Mail On BBC Question Time (VIDEO)


claig Fri 04-Oct-13 13:30:26

You should know!

ttosca Fri 04-Oct-13 13:31:09

Yes, I should know. I read your posts.

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 13:34:06

' I read your posts.'

But do you understand them?

flippinada Fri 04-Oct-13 13:38:46

I haven't had the chance to see that clip yet but it certainly looks interesting.

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 13:56:45

On the Daily Politics, a senior ex-Murdoch employee whose name I can't recall, said that the press regulation that those in favour of regulation want will mean the end of much of our local press and that the local press is an important part of our democracy and Kevin Macguire seemed to agree with him.

I never realised that our local press was so important to our society and that many papers would not be able to aford to operate in the proposed new press environment. But if there is truth in that, then the public will back the press as the election nears and the arguments heat up.

Those who want to regulate our free press may then be on the back foot as the election approaches.

PetiteRaleuse Fri 04-Oct-13 14:42:34

The free British press used to be as respected worldwide as the BBC still is. You would not believe how often the British tabloids, particularly the Mail, is ridiculed and disparaged on, for example, French TV. I can't speak for other countries of course as I don't watch other countries' media, other than the UK TV of course. It has proven itself again and again that it is incapable of responsible reporting. It is sad that even light regulation is being considered but you have to understand why it has come to this.

Homehelpme thanks for the explanation of the anti semitic arguement. I hadn't picked up on it in the article and hadn't read round that aspect since. I'm doubtful that the intent was anti-semitic coming from Levy, but I may be wrong.

As for the comment this morning that the Mail is owed apologies. Yes, it came from an underling, albeit a senior one, and I would be very much surprised if he would have said anything that Dacre himself wouldn't agree with. They just don't. You never hear Mail employees going against Dacre.

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 14:53:51

'The free British press used to be as respected worldwide as the BBC still is.'

Petite, the BBC is a great institution but I fear it has lost a lot of its respect. The Savile case didn't help and then there are all the executive payoffs and pensions and miscalculations etc. But apart from all of that, you are leftwing and so respect it, but the ordinary Daily Mail reader has lost some respect for it because they think it is biased towards the left over issues such as climate change, its Climategate coverage, the EU, political correctness etc etc I hope it regains its forner great reputation for unbiased, impartial coverage but I doubt it will be able to because I think it has a leftwing bias.

'You would not believe how often the British tabloids, particularly the Mail, is ridiculed and disparaged on, for example, French TV.'

Campbell doesn't work over there as well does he?

I don't like some of the Mail's positions versus the French and some of its Little Englander mentality, so I can see that the French may not be too keen on it sometimes, but on the really substantive political issues, I don't think it is bad and would be surprised if it is ridiculed.

PetiteRaleuse Fri 04-Oct-13 15:05:52

It's ridiculed for all kinds of reasons. Next time I see a comment on it I will pm you and let you know, I can't think of any specific examples right now.

Left wing? Actually I am naturally right wing. In fact if I was voting in France I would have voted Sarkozy last election. I LOATHE the champagne socialist government in France, particularly the President. It is only in UK and US politics that I would be considered left wing. Growing up in the. Thatcher years ensured I could never vote for the Tories. I did hope that Cameron would improve them but I, like so many, have been proved wrong.

The BBC actually manages to annoy both sides. To the Mail it is too left wing. To certain left wing commentors it is too right wing. It does a good job. That said the Tories when in power do everything to hinder it. But its poltics isn't actually the issue with the Mail. The Mail hates the BBC for commercial reasons, not because it is too left wing. That's just what it tells its readers.

Campbell does come on to French television from time to time. I have seen him several times. He speaks very good French, comes across as a bright person. In fact until I got UK TV installed a few years ago I had never heard him speak in English, just read of him.

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 15:20:10

'To certain left wing commentors it is too right wing.'
Are you referring to Marxists?

'That said the Tories when in power do everything to hinder it.'
I think the Tories have little power over the BBC because the BBC is the Establishment. Tebbitt accused them of bias for years, I'm not sure if they were able to influence it at all.

'The Mail hates the BBC for commercial reasons, not because it is too left wing.'
That is possible, I don't know.

'Campbell does come on to French television from time to time.'
The poor French viewers, what did they do to deserve that? What channel is that on, France 24 or TF1 etc?

limitedperiodonly Fri 04-Oct-13 15:21:05

You would not believe how often the British tabloids, particularly the Mail, is ridiculed and disparaged on, for example, French TV

Really petite what do they say? Is it proper criticism or just Brit-bashing? We French-bash so that's not my point. I'd genuinely like to know whether the criticism is valid or not.

Yesterday Sky News had the editor of the Jewish Chronicle, Stephen Pollard, on to talk about the anti-Semitism angle. I thought he was very reasonable.

His standpoint was that he could see a whiff of it but wasn't convinced it was deliberate although Jews are understandably alert to any real or perceived attack.

I think he's written for the Mail so might be minding his bank balance, but he seemed very thoughtful.

What was very funny was when Kay Burley asked him to comment on the jewish Express publisher, Richard Desmond's allegation of the Mail's anti-Semitism.

Pollard side-stepped it quite skilfully. He used to work for the Express and in his last leader before he was due to go to the Times he wrote something benign that if you read the first letter of every left-hand line vertically it spelled 'Desmond is a cunt'.

It was discovered and I think the Times rescinded the job offer.

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 15:31:49

limitedperiodonly, from what I have seen the French don't Brit-bash in the stupid way we French-bash. They do talk about an Anglo-Saxon approach etc but it is a serious discussion about difference in culture, as far as I remember, but I am interested in what Petite thinks about that too.

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 15:35:56

I thought that Boris's speech with the joke about the French mayor was not good. The way he pronounced Alain Juppe and talked about the French with their medals is typical of some English condescending attitudes and it was similar towards the Chinese in the Olympics, and I thought Cameron's stuff about showing that Russian official how good a country we are was frankly cringe-making. I agree with Ed, that type of nonsense demeans us, "Britain can do better than that".

PetiteRaleuse Fri 04-Oct-13 15:39:52

claig I don't have masses of time right now but I will try and find a link for you over the weekend about the Mail grudge against the

Most of the TV I watch in France is on Canal+, and Campbell, each time I have seen him was on an excellent daily show called le Grand Journal. The first half is dedicated to politics and serious culture, the second is more popular culture oriented. As of this year it is presented by Antoine de Caunes, who has grown up a bit since his eurotrash days of my teenage years. Boris Johnson has also been on it a few times, and I have also seen Blair on it once or twice. Anyway, they always get big hitters.

To be honest limited there is far less Brit bashing over here than Frog bashing in the uk. The French are surprisingly anglophile, at least, the media and political shows I watch are. They love British fashion, the Royals, and have a lot of respect for our popular culture as well as our history. In fact some of the shows I have seen on British history and about the Royals are as good as what we have in the uk. However, remember that the French are big on privacy, and there are privacy laws over here that the British press hate (though with the arrival of reality tv and magazines such as Closer and the accompanying 24/7 appetite for gossip that is changing). There is a certain amount of shocked admiration for the tabloids, in a 'we would never dare do that kind of way' but recognition that the tabloids have well overstepped the boundaries. Examples of gross intrusion of privacy from the Leveson inquiry were scrutinised and commented on. Every now and again there will be a section on a media show about recent articles in the British press that have everyone in pretty much gleeful shock . So a mixture of mocking, fear that the press is going downmarket in the same way here, and serious debates about privacy, legal and illegal collecting of information by journalists. There was a recent documentary on the paparazzi (lots of French paps work in the uk and usa as they can get away with so much more).

I will be keeping an eye on this weekend's programmes to see what they say about Miliband. The Mail is particularly reviled however, despite a grudging respect for how they have coped with the internet etc. Obviously no french newspaper could match that due to the language barrier.

NicholasTeakozy Fri 04-Oct-13 15:43:22

He was right about Desmond though! grin

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 15:44:14

I will look out for it on youtube.
Blair speaks French, does Boris speak French?

'The French are surprisingly anglophile'
I agree, the French are adults, not this juvenile schoolyard type knocking of foreigners.

PetiteRaleuse Fri 04-Oct-13 15:45:58

. Go beyond the banter with Boris and there's nothing left. He is bright but it is not his political skill whichhas got him where he is, it's his communication skills. Once when he was on French TV he had basically translated all the lame jokes he had been making in the British press, like the one about him being as likely to be PM as being reincarnated as an olive. In one day doing the French rounds last year he came out with that joke three times, and that's just in the things I saw or heard (he did radio shows and several news programmes that day, I didn't catch all of them).

I did a guest post for MN about him earlier this year here: www.mumsnet.com/bloggers/guest-blogs/eddie-mair-boris-johnson

I had a whole section about how the French saw him but cut it out as it wasn't relevant.

PetiteRaleuse Fri 04-Oct-13 15:47:41

Boris French is passable, probably better than he lets on. He comes across as a bumbling Brit, part of his charm, and I suspect he understands and speaks better than he does on TV (they love our accent)

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 15:49:53

Boris speaks good French grin


Can't find Campbell on youtube. Is there a French type equivalent for youtube? Is it dailymotion or something where I can search for Campbell on French TV?

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 15:50:26

Yes, he understands well, but his accent could use some work

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 15:52:47

'Go beyond the banter with Boris and there's nothing left'

I agree. I know you don't like Farage, but Farage knocks spots off him because Farage has that crucial ingredient that Boris lacks - conviction.

PetiteRaleuse Fri 04-Oct-13 16:33:21

Yes, Farage is a good speaker and does believe in what he says.

I can't find a video of Campbell on Le Grand Journal, sorry.

PetiteRaleuse Fri 04-Oct-13 16:34:43

I hadn't seen that interview. Youtube won't load but i assume he said the same as he had said on every other news show that day grin

PetiteRaleuse Fri 04-Oct-13 18:03:48

Apparently Brummer has done an interview to be broadcast on tonight's C4 news saying that the Mail got it wrong in some way.

ErrolTheDragon Fri 04-Oct-13 18:11:19

Some of you might be interested in this - Alistair Campbell has a petition on change.org challenging Paul Dacre:' Debate with me, or a professional broadcast interviewer, on TV, the attack on Ed Miliband's father and the role of the Daily Mail in the UK’s national debate' - rather than hiding behind delegating to underlings.

NicholasTeakozy Fri 04-Oct-13 19:09:28

Tory councillor and businessman turns down the chance to advertise in the Heil.

HomeHelpMeGawd Fri 04-Oct-13 19:12:35

Petite, that line that I quoted was from the weird-vile editorial the next day, hence not written by Levy and signed off by the Bigot-in-Chief.

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 20:07:27

Found Campbell speaking French.

Bravo, he is very good - better than Blair and Boris


BoulevardOfBrokenSleep Fri 04-Oct-13 20:25:59

I guess Campbell is gambling that Dacre's widely reported, er, anger management/verbal abuse issues... will come to the fore on live TV. And what a Youtube video that will make for us all grin

Apart from that, would be interesting watching him try to defend this one. Am loving, 'The headline has to be read in conjunction with the article'; translated as 'Our headlines are always complete bollocks, what are you complaining about?'

here are some fascinating quotes from Paul Dacre's early journalistic career as a leftie at Leeds University

'In 1968 as a 19-year-old student, the future Daily Mail editor took over the Leeds University newspaper Union News and immediately instituted radical change.
Dacre championed unemployed immigrants while encouraging people to join the union. He even praised Jack Straw.'

(Clearly, what you think & write as a teenager bears ABSOLUTELY NO RELATION to how you think & behave as a mature citizen wink)

PetiteRaleuse Fri 04-Oct-13 22:45:48

Well my opinions have changed over the last few years. People develop, change. Chirac, the French right wing president was a Communist as a student.

oh, mine too, PR

but for Paul Dacre, obviously, what he thinks at any given moment is the only acceptable way to think (regardless of what he may have thought & said last week) grin

but this does not apply to eg Ralph Miliband

PetiteRaleuse Fri 04-Oct-13 23:06:10

I don't think Miliband's opinions changed all that much. The extract from his diary was a what if.. He never subscribed to communism, but his criticism of the British mentality, as seen by an outsider at the time was valid. As an expat, hate the word as I am actually an immigrant, I feel able to criticise aspects of France that would be seen as anti French. But would I, in war, fight for French values? Yes, absolutely. But as an outsider I do have the privilege of being able to say I love France but...

PetiteRaleuse Fri 04-Oct-13 23:37:36

claig yes, Campbell's French is excellent. From memory he is able to hold his own in a real debate. He has even written articles for the French press, but they were no doubt rewritten by a translator - they always are.

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 23:49:21

Yes, I am very impressed. I think he lived in the South of France for a while in his earlier days. Did he study French at University or did he just pick it up over there? It is good to see some of our political figures well educated and able to converse in other languages. Good on Boris and Blair too, but Campbell is very good.

claig Fri 04-Oct-13 23:58:28

He studied French and German at Cambridge. Very good.

PatPig Sat 05-Oct-13 00:02:00

Mehdi Hazan, what an idiot:


claig Sat 05-Oct-13 00:10:15

Oh my God. You couldn't make this stuff up. grin

claig Sat 05-Oct-13 00:11:09

Did he change his mind when "Dear Mr Dacre" turned him down?

PetiteRaleuse Sat 05-Oct-13 00:11:27

Was that leaked today ? By whom?
I assume it is an old letter. Written when? Did Dacre refuse his request? Why?
It doesn't, in itself, invalidate the points he made yesterday. Just shows him up to be a (nother) hack wanting work. Cover letters for job applications are always full of arselicking bs. Why should journalists be different?

Saw his abortion views linked on another thread. Ugh.
But still, not sure this invalidates his comments from yesterday.

claig Sat 05-Oct-13 00:14:55

'Why should journalists be different?'

Daily Mail journalists are diferent. They adhere to the core values of the Daily Mail - integrity, fairness and honour.

PatPig Sat 05-Oct-13 00:18:39

It was written in 2010.

In 2011 he wrote a book raking muck about the private life of the er, um,

<drum roll>

Miliband family.

He sold the rights to the book to a certain newspaper:


claig Sat 05-Oct-13 00:19:44

'I could therefore write pieces for the Mail critical of Labour and the left, from “inside” Labour and the left (as the senior political editor at the New Statesman).'

That's charming.

PetiteRaleuse Sat 05-Oct-13 00:19:53

You reckon?


Anyway, claig and others, saw this and thought of you:


Like him or not, some very interesting comments from a been there, done that and got the tee shirt.

PetiteRaleuse Sat 05-Oct-13 00:20:49

Will save that to read for tomorrow PatPig . Thanks.

claig Sat 05-Oct-13 00:23:00

"I believe you once told sports columnist Des Kelly that he should “make them laugh, make them cry, or make them angry”. That’s something I believe I could do for you, and for your readers, on the pages of the Mail."

I think he is a man of his word. He has certainly done that.

claig Sat 05-Oct-13 00:29:43

'You reckon?'

Petite, it's not just me. These are the words of Mehdi on the Mail

'I admire your relentless focus on the need for integrity and morality in public life'

Good night, PetiteRaleuse.

What more revelations will tomorrow bring?

Are they so politically naive that they fail to realise that one messes with the Mail at one's peril? grin

PetiteRaleuse Sat 05-Oct-13 07:38:39

'Are they so politically naive that they fail to recognise that one messes with the Mail at one's peril,'

claig that is not a good thing.

Anyone know who leaked the letter?

To be honest it doesn't change much. He sucked up to Dacre in a letter to get a well paid job. The Mail is no doubt happily gloating about it today. I assume they leaked the letter. I don't think that reflects well on them. Doesn't particularly reflect well on him either, but really not on them.

claig Sat 05-Oct-13 07:53:49

Petite, you are right.

I think Mehdi may not recover from this. His credibility is shot. This line in particular is devastating.

'I could therefore write pieces for the Mail critical of Labour and the left, from “inside” Labour and the left (as the senior political editor at the New Statesman).'

There is such a thing as honour and loyalty and trust and some Labour people may have doubts about him now.

I am not too surprised, because I have long thought that he was not for real.

He is very clever and he talks a good game and can whip himself into a frenzy, but there was always something about his delivery that made me doubt his sincerity and believe that he was acting. He seened to lack the key ingredient the public looks for - conviction.

claig Sat 05-Oct-13 08:05:28

I looked at twitter about this yesterday and Mehdi is obviously trying to play it down and Louise Mensch is tweeting and she tweeted Campbell, and therefore I looked at Campbell's replies etc.

I couldn't quite believe what I was seeing on Campbell's twitter. It is like a macho schoolyard bully trying to shout down Dacre and challenge him to a fight and calling him a coward. It is pathetic and not very smart at all, and this comes from what we have been told was a good spin doctor.

He is challenging Dacre, he is challenging the Mail. Is he stupid? He is dealing with Dacre and the paper of the people. I said thy should have quit while they were ahead. They should listen to the much smarter spin doctor, McBride, but they seem to have shunned the man who worked for them for years. These are his wise words.

"He should take it out of the Mail and make it more of an issue of how we do our politics in Britain and elevate it to that level. The more it becomes a war the more it is corrosive because it is very difficult to restore those relationships."

claig Sat 05-Oct-13 08:12:48

Some of the commentators on Guido's site are saying that they think the BBC will try not to mention or cover this Mehdi letter in the hope that the public won't find out about it.

But the Mail has already put an article on it in its paper and it is all over twitter.

HomeHelpMeGawd Sat 05-Oct-13 08:22:56

It is in fact possible that Mehdi Hassan would have been willing to work for the Mail three years ago, but not now. The tempo of vileness has certainly increased recently, eg the Le Pen support

PetiteRaleuse Sat 05-Oct-13 08:30:33

I doubt they would report on it because it is irrelevant to the main issue. They aren't mentioning the situation at all today. Guardian doesn't seem to have mentioned it either, and they have been following this quite closely.

PetiteRaleuse Sat 05-Oct-13 08:33:14

It's just the Mail throwing its toys out of the pram and bullying an ambitious individual. Storm in a teacup.

claig Sat 05-Oct-13 08:34:21

'Guardian doesn't seem to have mentioned it either' grin

This is only the beginning. As the Titans clash heads, the public will find out things about some of the players that we have never been told.

What will be the next revelation? The Mail must know lots about some of the players, but will they tell us the public?

claig Sat 05-Oct-13 08:39:48

Will the public demand an end to the attempts of the Establishment to regulate the public's free press?

Will the public back the Establishment or will it back the Mail?

There is no contest. We know the outcome already, all the public have to do now is grab the popcorn and watch the show and demand the right to know.

PetiteRaleuse Sat 05-Oct-13 08:41:35

Actually I think this is the end of it. We'll move on to press pregulation this week as the Privy Council meets. I wouldn't brag about the power of the Mail claig it abuses its power on a regular basis. This is not a good thing.

PetiteRaleuse Sat 05-Oct-13 08:47:01

Looking at the comments on their bragathon this morning the letter doesn't appear to have turned the tide too much.

BoulevardOfBrokenSleep Sat 05-Oct-13 08:51:25

He doesn't actually say anything that bad in the letter; he wanted to write socially conservative stuff for the Mail <shrugs>. Probably thinks he's going to make a better job of it than Melanie Phillips.

And apparently they do pay well for the industry; hence why most of the people who work there don't believe the crap they print.
Particularly when they know they've made it up. Integrity my arse

claig Sat 05-Oct-13 08:51:30

Petite, this is a vital battle for the public.

When the Mail campaigned against the Liverpool Care Pathway, the Establishment tried to shout them down and there was talk of reporting them to the Press Regulator for daring to question the Establishment orthodoxy while some elderly people were being placed on the Liverpool Care Pathway without even informing their relatives. The Mail didn't give up then and it won't give up now over press freedom, and the public will back the Mail over the Establishment when they begin to realise what is really at stake.

I think the Mail will refuse to sign up to the politicians' charter and as the election approaches, the battle for press freedom will heat up, and some of the Establishment may no longer be able to hold the Establishment line, and may break ranks and join the people, the Mail and the communes behind the barricades of freedom.

And when the battle is finally over, there will be rejoicing in the land and people will applaud the Mail's stand.

claig Sat 05-Oct-13 08:53:59

'Looking at the comments on their bragathon this morning the letter doesn't appear to have turned the tide too much.'

Yes, you are right there. That is surprising. But over the coming weeks I think it will begin to change as people realise what this battle is really all about.

PetiteRaleuse Sat 05-Oct-13 09:14:06

They misreported the LCP though. They twisted and misrepresented facts to create hysteria. Again.

Catkinsthecatinthehat Sat 05-Oct-13 09:52:04

Hassan is an extreme conservative Islamist, who has been caught on camera at a private Muslim-only event condemning us "kuffar" as animals. I'm not massively surprised he wanted to write anti-abortion and anti-women articles for the Mail. I still enjoyed his QT rant, though I suspect it stuck in his throat to be on the side of the gays and Jews...

Quentin Letts is still digging a hole, saying 'well, yah, but at least we didn't go through Ed's bins'. If your best defence against slandering a dead man is that the tacky Daily Mirror stole Ivan Cameron's soiled nappies for a story in 2007, then you really are screwed. Just shows that all the downmarket press has been completely out of control for years.

flippinada Sat 05-Oct-13 10:42:06

Errol - thank you for that link. I referred to the petition earlier but didn't think to put an actual link to it. Just chekced it and there are over 76,000 signatures on it. How that compares to other polls on Change.org I don't know.

Whatever your (general your) opinion about Alistair Campbell..and I don't think he would deny being a bully...he did help Labour win 3 elections, one with an overhwhelming landslide. So like it or not he is, or was, an influential figure.

I didn't know much about Mehdi Hassan...interesting to read his background. Hmmm. Still haven't seen the QT clip, must watch it.

flippinada Sat 05-Oct-13 10:43:59

*checked <ahem>.

flippinada Sat 05-Oct-13 10:47:13

Just finished reading that interview with Neil Kinnock Petite, thanks for the link. Bought back some memories of the 1992 election, which I was slightly too young to vote in.

PetiteRaleuse Sat 05-Oct-13 10:55:52
claig Sat 05-Oct-13 11:27:20

"The Labour leader's camp say they are not intimidated. "This [row] is like Syria and Rupert Murdoch," says the aide. "Once again, Ed's breaking the rules." For all his mildness, he is a disruptive politician, most effective and engaged when shaking things up. He is not a Marxist as the Mail alleges – he wants to reform capitalism, not abolish it – but in his willingness to take on institutions such as the Mail, he is the sort of Labour leader his father might grudgingly have approved of.

And like Dacre, Miliband is stubborn. One of his heroes is the limpet-like England batsman Geoffrey Boycott. It is even possible that Miliband will outlast Dacre, who is employed on a one-year contract. Rothermere still reportedly values his editor highly, but lower down the Mail food chain, out of Dacre's eyeline, there has been dismay and weariness this week that the editor may, for once, have bitten off more than he can chew. And there has been another emotion, too. When Dacre's deputy was desperately trying to hold the line against Alastair Campbell on Newsnight on Tuesday, a source at the Mail tells me: "There was laughter."


Interesting article, but I think it shows how the Establishment Guardian and others on the Establishment Left are deluding themselves. They wish it was so that Ed will be able to humble the Mail.

As if some supposed lower down journalistic unease at the mail can bring down Dacre and Britain's most successful newspaper. They're dreaming and when they wake up the reality will look totally different.

Mehdi can play to the gallery on Question Time, but the Mail has removed some of his phoney shine.

Amateurs and bullies like Campbell can shout on the BBC about Dacre being a coward and he can wag his finger and jab and challenge Dacre to a duel, but the self-inflated fantasist is like Don Quixote challenging a windmill to a duel.

How much the Labour Party now need the wisdom and calm thinking of McBride, but what's stopping them from using him is their ego and wounded pride.

The Guardian journalist says

'When Dacre's deputy was desperately trying to hold the line against Alastair Campbell on Newsnight on Tuesday, a source at the Mail tells me: "There was laughter."

But was it laughter at Campbell's bombastic, finger-jabbing charade and the knowledge that there is nothing behind the facade?

From that Guardian piece

'Eighty-nine years ago this month, under the headline "Moscow orders to our Reds: great plot disclosed", it published the infamous Zinoviev letter, later shown to be a forgery, suggesting subversive forces were at work in the Labour party. Four days after the story ran, the first-ever Labour government was thrown out of power.'

But I can't believe that govt lost the election because of the 'infamous Zinoviev letter' (any more than I believe The Sun won the 1997 election for Labour grin)

lower down the Mail food chain, out of Dacre's eyeline, there has been dismay and weariness this week that the editor may, for once, have bitten off more than he can chew. And there has been another emotion, too. When Dacre's deputy was desperately trying to hold the line against Alastair Campbell on Newsnight on Tuesday, a source at the Mail tells me: "There was laughter."

no, not at Campbell, claig grin

PetiteRaleuse Sat 05-Oct-13 12:40:07

Would love to be a fly on the wall at Mail meetings.

claig Campbell isn't a facade. Yes he has a personal vendetta against the Mail but people listen to him, and people will be far more willing to listen to him than Mail editors. Such is the reputation of the press nowadays.

Catkinsthecatinthehat Sat 05-Oct-13 12:42:31

Gawd, it's still dragging on. I just turned on BBC find Ann Leslie defending the Mail. They are going to run out of employees to send on TV soon. We'll have Betty the Daily Mail tealady on Sky news next.

Anyway, according to Ann Leslie the Mail isn't anti-Semitic as it loves Israel, the Mail isn't damaged, Ed Miliband is damaged as he's childish and whiney and so on. The presenter kept pressing her on the 'the man who hated Britain' headline, the thing that sparked all this off. She eventually had to concede that 'the headline was very silly'. But they ain't apologising.

PetiteRaleuse Sat 05-Oct-13 12:50:11

Would love for one of them (the writers on tv) to slip up and apologise. Might finally smoke Dacre out of his whole. Unless he imploded in pure rage grin

limitedperiodonly Sat 05-Oct-13 12:52:44
claig Sat 05-Oct-13 12:56:15

I like Ed and so far it looks like he has principles and conviction and that is what all of us want in politicians. I like the fact that he has distanced himself from the Blairites, whom I don't think had principles. I woud like a real alternative in politics, one based on principles, even though I prefer the principles of the Mail.

But, as I look at the total ineptness and self-delusion of Labour's strategists, spinners, bullies and bounders, and see Ed being sucked into the Mail's web, then I can only see Ed being the loser.

Looking at the bombastic posturing of some of their advisers and thinkers and communicators, I can only think that New Labour can only have been in power for such a long time due to the backing of Murdoch, and as soon as he dropped them, they were history.

I wonder how much of their soul they sold to Murdoch, I wonder how far they sold their loyal supporters and the people as a whole down the river.

We have seen what Mehdi is like and we have seen the letter he wrote to "Dear Mr Dacre", where he said

"For the record, I am not a Labour tribalist and am often ultra-critical of the left – especially on social and moral issues, where my fellow leftists and liberals have lost touch with their own traditions and with the great British public."

Did the New Labour gang write a similar letter to Dear Mr Murdoch?

Are they cut from the same cloth as Mehdi?

In this battle between bombasts and the principled paper of the people, we may learn many truths that have hitherto been concealed.

I can only think that New Labour can only have been in power for such a long time due to the backing of Murdoch, and as soon as he dropped them, they were history

other way around, claig - he was very good at seeing which way the wind was blowing, & moved accordingly. He didn't make it happen - he moved because it was clear what was going to happen - both ways

claig Sat 05-Oct-13 13:36:49

Yes, you are right, it was both ways. The Tories were so discredited that even I voted for Blair to kick the Tories out, and Murdoch knew the way the wind was blowing so he did a deal with Blair.

Nancy66 Sat 05-Oct-13 14:04:17

"Your beef is less with the Mail than with the Great British public. Many of them are sods, you see"

Beautifully put grin

In fact this entire paragraph hits the spot

'The Mail’s politics are not my own but it is a mistake to assume that the Mail leads its readers. If the Mail is an opportunistic, hypocritical, hyper-censorious newspaper that may be because there are many opportunistic, hypocritical, hyper-censorious people in this country and I see no reason why they should not be permitted a newspaper that reflects their passions and prejudices No-one else need read it. The Mail does not so much make the political weather as reflect it. It is powerful because it is read by millions not because it is a corrupting influence on millions of British people. Your beef is less with the Mail than with the Great British public. Many of them are sods, you see.'

limitedperiodonly Sat 05-Oct-13 15:00:52

Yes, that is good

claig Sat 05-Oct-13 15:04:45

TheOne, the author makes a few points in that paragraph that are spot on, such as the Mail follows its readers and does not lead them, which is why its readers like the paper.

But unfortunately, he also makes some points, as highlighted in bold by you, that appear on first reading to be so far off base as to suggest that he is either joking or referring to a paper known as the Guardian.

He is right that the Mail is not much of a fan of Cameron, and neither are its readers. While Tory Party membership has plummeted under Cameron, I bet that Mail readership has increased. The Daily Mail's readers are not Tories because the Tories do not reflect their views, but they are Mail readers because the Mail reflects their views. That is why it is a huge mistake for Miliband's advisers to attack the Mail. They should stick to attacking the Tories, because the Mail's readers haven't got much time for them either, but if they attack the Mail, then they attack the people, and then there can only be one winner.

What the author does not spell out is why Labour want to attack the Mail. It is not really to do with the reasons they state, because even if the Mail apologised, that would not be enough for them, because they want to influence its culture and change its culture. But its views are not Tory views, they are instead the vies of millions of ordinary people and that is why Labour will fail.

The advocates of press regulation and Labour attacks on the Mail pretend that their motives are to protect the weak and powerless, but their real objective is to stifle the opinions and concerns of millions of ordinary Mail readers and stop the Mail reflecting those concerns such as the concerns over the Liverpool Care Pathway, EU climate policy, secret courts and all the other policies that ordinary Mail readers are concerned about.

They want to silence political opposition, the only real opposition to the consensus of parties that are all the same.

The Mail knows that, and it also understands that when the people understand it as the fight over press freedom heats up, then the people will back the Mail against the career politicians and the special interest lobbyists.

claig Sat 05-Oct-13 15:19:31

'Many of them are sods, you see'

Yes that sums it up. That is what the Establishment thinks of Mail readers and millions of ordinary people, and that is why 25% of the people voted for the anti-establishment party - UKIP.

The more they insult the Mail and Mail readers, the more ordinary people will join together in solidarity.

Polly Toynbee is spot on when she said

"Politicians and journalists are equally reviled, so standing outside the establishment is the place to be."

But it is the Mail and its millions of readers who are outside the establishment and it is the career politicians, the chateaux and the characters who have emerged from the nooks, crannies and shadows to give the Mail a gleeful kicking, who are the establishment.

There are plenty of nice people who work for the Daily Mail.

Even some longstanding MNetters!

Its about the prevalent culture, not the individual workers.

PetiteRaleuse Sat 05-Oct-13 15:33:22

True DeFarge and I can imagine that there are times when they are embarassed about it. However, it must be an excellent experience as a journalist. Journalists have to follow the house opinion to a certain extent in their writing and I like to think that a good deal of the Mail hacks aren't xenophobic misogynists.

The Spectator piece does show a different viewpoint on the subject, thanks for that nancy but I wouldn't underestimate the influence it has on its readers. As do all newspapers of course. Some of the nastiest bigots I have come across are Express readers.

Of course a reader chooses the paper, not the other way round, but a bit more responsibility from the paper on what it chooses to feed a reader would be nice.

limitedperiodonly Sat 05-Oct-13 15:48:58

the author makes a few points in that paragraph that are spot on, such as the Mail follows its readers and does not lead them

Up to a point. The truth is out there; you just have to read widely. Most people don't, and why should they?

If you report news in a particular way, and you've mentioned Liverpool Pathway, then the people who read it will become concerned. Or scared, to put it another way.

There are things to be gravely concerned about in the NHS. For instance, a friend is currently in a hospital in failing measures that has seriously fucked up. I'm treading a line between supporting her husband and encouraging him to complain. Actually, I've said nothing about a complaint though I'm dying to, because this is not the time.

I was struck by the Liverpool Pathway threads here where people who knew, whether as practitioners or relations, said the Liverpool Pathway was not as portrayed in the Mail.

Most of us fear death and thankfully most of us aren't familiar with suffering until the end.

But some very dignified and informed posts made me understand that in many cases death without help is painful, undignified and miserable.

When I say help, I'm not talking about killing people. I'm talking about easing their pain and treating them with dignity.

I'd rather people weren't scared of that mercy, but were scared of the kind of thing my friend and her DH are going through.

When the Mail reports about that kind of cock-up, all power to them. But Liverpool Pathway? It's a cheap shot aimed at terrifying people.

limitedperiodonly Sat 05-Oct-13 16:10:25

petiteraleuse I don't think most people are bigots. I think all of us are fearful of the unknown and even the smartest of us is easily manipulated.

I cringe at some of the things I believed 20 or 30 years ago. I was naive. Still am on certain subjects, but because they're blind spots, how would I know?

Because I'm a journalist I'm in the privileged position of not only being exposed to a lot of different people and situations, but my naturally bolshy family disposition has been honed by my training.

I do realise that paragraph makes me sound a right patronising cow. If the cap fits, and yes, it does. grin

I have absolutely no hard evidence for this, but I also take pride in the fact that apparently journalists are some of the most liberal people going. With a few exceptions, obviously grin

Anyway, my mum is coming to stay in about an hour. She's going to be so disappointed that I've bought the Telegraph. She likes the Review section's TV guide but much prefers the Mail's Weekend.

I have to agree, it's good and the stories suit her much better.

But I have a special reason for getting the Telegraph and with Austerity Britain and all that, I can't go throwing money away on two Saturday papers grin

claig Sat 05-Oct-13 16:13:50

limitedperiodonly, that is your view and it is also the view of the Medical Establishment and presumably Labour who were instrumental in bringing that policy in.

But it is a grave mistake to believe that it is the Mail that influences its readers; it really is the other way around, and the Mail does not voice the true extent of the feelings of millions of ordinary members of the public, it does not reflect the true extent of the things said in pubs and cafes and on street corners all over the land. It voices many of the public's concerns, but goes nowhere near far enough to reflect the true concerns of millions of people. But Mail readers buy the Mail in their droves simply because it is the paper that at least voices some of their real concerns.

The stark and sad reality is that the people do not trust many of their politicians, they do not trust the people who were in charge when thousands of people were dying unnecessarily in our hospitals of dehydration and when the newspapers were not reporting it but when people on street corners were already talking about it. They do not trust the people who were in power when there were gagging orders in place to prevent the true grim reality being revealed in our public press.

Mail readers don't trust some of these politicians and their only resort is to hope that they can trust the Mail to voice their concerns, and that is why many people wrote in to the Mail about their experiences and their families experience of the Liverpool Care Pathway, and the Mail did begin to publicise their stories which were dismissed by the establishment and the liberal media as irresponsible scare stories by people who did not have a clue.

"When the Mail first highlighted readers’ harrowing stories about the suffering inflicted on patients and their families in the name of the Liverpool Care Pathway, the medical establishment reacted with fierce hostility.

When we called for an inquiry into the NHS-approved guidelines on end-of-life care, we were contemptuously accused of scaremongering and interfering in matters we didn’t understand.

Complaints were lodged with the Press regulatory body, seeking disciplinary action against us


The public no longer trust many of their politicians and representatives. That is why they rely on their newspapers to fight their cause and expose what is going on, just as the papers eventually exposed the scandal over expenses of their elected representatives. The public knows that without their papers, these scandals will never be exposed.

That is why Mail readers like the Mail because it expresses to a partial extent their true concerns.

That is why a free press is not a theoretical luxury, it is a necessity.

And that is why the attempts to prevent open exposure and political opposition, by regulation of our free press, to some things that are going on and will continue to go on in the future will ultimately fail.

limitedperiodonly Sat 05-Oct-13 16:36:04

I don't agree with your views, claig, but I respect your right to hold them.

What I would say is that you are unfailingly polite; much more polite than I am and definitely much more polite than other right-wing posters I won't mention.

btw I can be right-wing on some subjects too. I think it's called liberalism wink

claig Sat 05-Oct-13 16:37:46

How many stories did the high and mighty intellectual Guardian newspaper or even our unbiased, impartial publicly funded BBC publish of family members who died of dehydration in our hospitals?

I bet it is nowhere near the amount published by the Mail, and the ones published by the Mail are only a fraction of the ones that actually occurred.

We vote these people in, we know they get perks and expenses and can get lucrative directorships when they finish their political careers and we know that some of them have chateaux, and some of them may even be 'cabs for hire'.

We can put up with all of that, but we can't accept our relatives dying unnecessarily in our hospitals of dehydration or anything else. There is a limit to what the public can put up with and we keep buying copies of our papers as long as they keep reflecting our concerns that something should be done about it.

PetiteRaleuse Sat 05-Oct-13 16:41:27

I always enjoy chatting with claig as she is always polite, you are right limited

And I also agree that most people are not bigoted. But they are influenced by their papers. I'll go back to my mum. She is a DM reader, and it plays on her fears and axaggerates them. She is convinced that most rape victims are liars. The Mail never says that most rape victims are liars, but it gives disproportionate coverage of cases where the accuser has proven to be lying. This is massively unfair on women in general, and rape victims in particular.

claig Sat 05-Oct-13 16:42:06

limitedperiodonly, you are always polite and it is always a pleasure to discuss with you.

Yes, there are some rightwing posters who are quite rude sometimes. It is a shame, but maybe their rudeness sometimes stems from their anger at some of the things that are done in our name or done under our noses.

None of us are the ones to blame for what goes on. We should all direct our anger at those who are in power and who hold responsible positions that should be in service of the public rather than themselves.

flippinada Sat 05-Oct-13 16:49:59

"None of us are the ones to blame for what goes on. We should all direct our anger at those who are in power and who hold responsible positions that should be in service of the public rather than themselves."

Although I am coming from a different perspective I agree 100% with this.

This has been a really interesting and (for me at least) an educational discussion.

claig Sat 05-Oct-13 21:05:15

Fascinating 13 minute BBC Radio 4 profile of Paul Dacre.

Sounds a bit of a nightmare to work for - a bit of a tyrant it seems.

Very interesting contribution by Damian McBride. He says that Dacre believes that "the power of the Daily Mail came from its readers and that sense that it represented the mainstream public opinion in Britain" and that Dacre was unimpressed by power and did not kowtow to anyone in power but instead spoke "truth to power".

I don't know much about McBride and he obviously did do unethical things, but he sounds far smarter to me than the bombastic Campbell who seems to act like a saloon bar drunk challenging Dacre to come and have a go if you're hard enough.


HomeHelpMeGawd Sun 06-Oct-13 00:28:21

Claig might be polite, but she holds some perniciously wrong ideas. The notion that thousands of patients were dying of dehydration each year in the NHS is just one of them. It is not based on any sort of evidence, just a moral fervour that it is The Truth and that The Establishment likes to kill people. Despite the Establishment in this case being medical professionals.

It's crap, and that's putting it politely. It reminds me of vaccine scaremongers. Or idiots who persuade people to stop taking Antiretrovirals

claig Sun 06-Oct-13 02:46:47

I got that wrong by saying dehydration, because I added that word in at the end and didn't reread it before pressing send. I meant thousands of people were dying. And I did not say each year.

Don't you understand that the public has lost faith in the Establishment? Don't you understand that we are against their gagging orders that seek to hide from us the real truth?

It was the Mail that campaigned so strongly about the mothers who were jailed under this medical/psychiatric diagnosis of "Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy".

It was the Mail that demanded, day in day out, the resignation of the NHS Chief, whom they termed "The Man With No Shame", and it was the public who paid for their copy of the Mail every day and cheered them on as the government continued to maintain that they had full confidence in him.

"It reminds me of vaccine scaremongers"
And it was the Mail that published the story that Labour's Policy Review Chief, Cruddas, had even contemplated a policy that made some benefits partially conditional on vaccine jabs.

"Taking child benefit away from parents whose children are not given the MMR vaccine is an "interesting idea", Labour's policy chief has said, while stressing it is not being considered."

"Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls has dismissed the idea out of hand, saying that making state assistance dependent on parental choice on vaccinations would be "punitive"."


The Mail published its story because they know its readers care about things like this and that we don't find these ideas "interesting" and that "punitive" is not a strong enough word for us, we believe they are pernicious.

The Mail reader does not trust the Establishment, we do not trust some politicians and spin doctors who take us to war on the basis of dodgy dossiers, and we do not trust some of the same people who want to regulate our free press or change the culture of our Daily Mail newspaper, and we do not have faith in some of our Medical Establishment either, such as the NHS Chief, dubbed "The Man With No Shame" by the Daily Mail.

They said what the Mail thought was scaremongering and crap over the Liverpool Care Pathway, but after months and years of pressure from the Mail, the politicians eventually had to hold a review into the policy and they eventually scrapped it because they found some aspects of it unacceptable.

"When the Mail first highlighted readers’ harrowing stories about the suffering inflicted on patients and their families in the name of the Liverpool Care Pathway, the medical establishment reacted with fierce hostility.

When we called for an inquiry into the NHS-approved guidelines on end-of-life care, we were contemptuously accused of scaremongering and interfering in matters we didn’t understand.

Complaints were lodged with the Press regulatory body, seeking disciplinary action against us


The reason that the Mail is so adamant that it will fight attempts to have any form of state regulation of our free press is because it knows that this could be the slippery slope that leads to the Establishment shutting up the voice of dissent and preventing the awkward revelations of the truths behind their gagging orders. The Mail represents the views of millions of people and it follows their views rather than leads them and it is in fact way behind them, but at least it is with them, unlike so much of the rest of our Establishment media, even though the public actually funds some of it.

In the course of writing replies to this thread, I stumbled on the Spectator. i don't read the Spectator as I usually only find time to read the Mail. But there is some brilliant writing on there and I will have to try and find time in future to start reading it.

This is something written by Rod Liddle and it is what many of us really think is behind the Establishment's attacks on the Mail and its attempt to have some form of state regulation of our free press.

"As some of us said at the time of Leveson, the metro-liberal left does not really give a toss about intrusion into the lives of drug-addled slebs. It wishes instead to stop newspapers saying stuff with which they fervently disagree. David Sillitoe’s piece for the BBC last night confirmed this; and if the BBC can make use of Alastair Campbell for this purpose, then so be it."


Custardo Sun 06-Oct-13 02:51:05

can't agree more with your 16:42 post claig

claig Sun 06-Oct-13 03:14:13

They should stick to attacking the Tories, and in some regards we will agree with them.

But if they attack the Mail, then they attack the people and if they deride and mock the Mail reader, then they attack the people, and millions of us will join together and sing the words of that brilliant Muse song, and we will be triumphant and we will maintain our century old rights to a free press.

"They will stop degrading us, They will not control us, We will be victorious"

claig Sun 06-Oct-13 03:18:03

Thanks, custardo. We very rarely agree on things, but we must put aside all our differences and unite and prevent any attempts to divide and rule us, because how we are governed affects each and every one of us in the same way.

Custardo Sun 06-Oct-13 03:20:26

i'm sure Mr. bellamy would be overjoyed at being the lyricist for the mail.

The papers rarely report the news as far as politics is concerned, they control it

therefore the masses are spoon fed whatever tripe offered by whatever newspaper.

claig Sun 06-Oct-13 03:28:50

Yes, you are right, but in a free country with a vibrant free press that remains profitable and can still flourish, then there are always competing philosophies, views and ideas - there is never the one Establishment state-controlled, regulated consensus.

Different newspapers feed us different tripe from their different positions, but in the melee of ideas, some of them necessarily, will give voice to the millions of people out there who have no voice at all. We have seen that the politicians don't do that, our only hope is that some of our free press can do that.

It was the same in medieval days. It was the invention of the printing press that was so devastating for the powers that be at that time and for the Church establishment at that time, because it enabled the voice of the people to circulate and be heard.

A free press is the basis of a free country. Our press is not perfect and lots of it is twaddle and full of crap, but without it, we are truly stuffed.

HomeHelpMeGawd Sun 06-Oct-13 08:12:37

Oops, I should not have said "each year". But as I say, perniciously wrong. The idea that thousands of people were dying unnecessarily is perniciously wrong, based on a wilful over interpretation of HSMR data. That is why the Mail was accused of scaremongering - because it said thousands of patents were dying unneccessarily when they bloody well weren't.

I understand very well that the typical Mail reader likes to think of themselves as a doughy fighter against the Establishment.

But it is not true and leads to cognitive dissonance and wilful blindness. For example, it was that hated pillar of the Establishment, the BBC's Today Programme that notoriously did not trust the dodgy dossier and said so. In doing do, the Beeb ended up fighting an existential crisis. I'd love to see any contemporaneous headlines from the Mail inveighing against the dossier or arguing that the country should not go to war....

claig Sun 06-Oct-13 08:55:05

'I understand very well that the typical Mail reader likes to think of themselves as a doughy fighter against the Establishment.'

The Mail reader doesn't like to think it the Mail reader does distrust the Establishment, which is probably very different to your faith in them, and Dacre understands that well and reflects the views of his readers.

Whether Dacre shares the Mail readers' views, i don't know, but given that he has lasted for so long in that role and delivered such success for the Mail, my assumption is that he shares many of the same concerns as us and that he is a principled man.

'In doing do, the Beeb ended up fighting an existential crisis'

Existential crisis? Don't believe it. A good tale but I doubt it. In fact, Patten, I think, said that the Savile crisis was the biggest crisis that the BBC had faced over the past many years, even more critical than the dodgy dossier affair. But of course, the Savile affair was not an existential one either, because tghe BBC is part of the Establishment and we read today in the Mail


The BBC is above real censure because they are opart of teh great and the good and the public pay for them.

I never quite bought all the Gilligan, BBC stuff and the supposed battle with the old mucker, Coward-baiting Campbell. The end result was that a good man, Dr Kelly, had his name was revealed. But I haven't really looked into it, so I don't have a full understanding of it.

'I'd love to see any contemporaneous headlines from the Mail inveighing against the dossier or arguing that the country should not go to war'

I don't know if it argued against the war, i can't remember. But, Mail readers do not believe everything the Mail says. The Mail loves Thatcher but Petite's mum, a dedicated and doubtless doughty Daily Mail reader, does not. The Mail reader can spot spin and is rarely taken in. The Mail reader has an alacrity of mind, a grasp of facts and a critical faculty that some have described as being similar to Occam's Blazer.

The Mail has all points of view. There were articles against the Kosovo War and articles for. The Mail does not shy away from debate, and there are probably some articles that support the BBC and the Establishment too, but most Mail readers skip those because they understand that those ones are spin.

claig Sun 06-Oct-13 09:00:08

BBC - Blair Broadcasting Corporation

Existential crisis? You're taking the piss!

claig Sun 06-Oct-13 09:07:09

Is the BBC worried about its independence and press freedom on its internet sites etc. Is it with the Mail, and the people, and most of the rest of our media in opposing state regulation or doesn't it care, because it may already be regulated and already back the socialists, enemies of promise, enemies of freedom and enemies of a free press in their attempt to stifle political dissent?

claig Sun 06-Oct-13 09:09:40

No, i remember now, the BBC has no fear because it is impartial and unbiased and politically neutral, so it will not take positions on issues such as climate change which are in any way controversial.

claig Sun 06-Oct-13 09:51:09

In fact, all this stuff about the Mail being anti the BBC for commercial reasons is I suspect false. The Mail, the people's paper, doesn't fear competition from the BBC in any way because it knows that the Mail's readers don't believe much of what the BBC says. The BBC has lost its credibility.

I suspect the BBC fears the Mail because they know that the public is awake and they know that the issue of truth is at stake.

I listened again to that great Muse track called 'Uprising'. These lines spell out what the battle for press freedom is all about

"keep us all dumbed down and hope that we will never see the truth around"

"and all the green belts wrapped around our mind and endless red tape to keep the truth confined"

"They will not force us, they will stop degrading us.
They will not control us, we will be victorious"

And at the vanguard in the fight for freedom will be the Daily Mail.

When they took on the Daily Mail, they took on the wrong enemy.

HomeHelpMeGawd Sun 06-Oct-13 10:03:33

As I say, cognitive dissonance and wilful blindness - fully on display here. I might add, a willingness to make unwarranted assumptions about other individuals, such as your ascribing to me a faith in the Establishment.

Convincing yourself that losing the CEO of an organisation due to government pressure, as happened with the dossier, was not an existential crisis for the BBC, is as clear a sign as could be of wilful blindness.

You assert that Mail readers have sharply honed critical faculties and a heterogeneity of views. But you are unwilling to acknowledge a fact that challenges your personal orthodoxy that the BBC is always a slavish part of the Establishment. I think that's a great shame

claig Sun 06-Oct-13 10:13:46

'Convincing yourself that losing the CEO of an organisation due to government pressure, as happened with the dossier, was not an existential crisis for the BBC, is as clear a sign as could be of wilful blindness.'

Greg Dyke - leftwing,
Campbell - Coward-baiter and leftwing
Blair - Tory
BBC - Blair Broadcasting Corporation

Patten said that the Savile Crisis was an even bigger crisis. Yes some people got sacked and reshuffled, but was there real change?

No, I don't think that the BBC is always a slavish part of the Establishment. they have freedom on issues of less importance, but when it comes to issues of national importance, then of course they are subject to the Establishment and I agree that that should be the case and is only right. I don't believe that they are independent.

Many leftwingers dislike what the BBC did at Orgreave during the Miners' Strike. I can understtand why the BBC did what it did, because that was a critical issue.

The problem with the BBC, in my opinion, is not on the big issues (where they have no independence), but on the small issues where they should show independence and yet nearly always back the left rather than the Mail reader.

PetiteRaleuse Sun 06-Oct-13 10:23:09

It's not competition from the BBC as a website or paper that they fear, it is to do with commercial local interests. I'm trying to find an explanation for you, it is a long time since I read up on it.

claig Sun 06-Oct-13 10:23:36

I love the BBC because it is one of our country's greatest institutions and we watch it from before we can talk until we die.

I am sorry that it is losing its credibility with many people because it is not impartial enough on issues of lesser importance. I hope it strikes a better balance so that we can all believe what it says about the polar bear a bit more.

claig Sun 06-Oct-13 10:36:10

People laud these bullies like Campbell, but in my opinion, he has ruined the great Labour Party's credibility.

The Labour Party is also one of our greatest institution that goes back over 100 years and was responsible for great advances for our people.

We read how some of this New Labour gang of bullies and bounders were pissed off their faces, how they swore like troopers and punched chairs and threw mobile phones and called some of their lifelong voters bigots and looked as if they were about to knock out in a fit of fury, anyone unfortunate enough to be present in the office, if a Daily Mail headline was not to their liking. They have discredited the great Labour Party.

The spinners, the corrosive corrupters of the truth have destroyed its credibility and it will take them years to recover and during that time they will not be able to effectivly serve teh people

I don't want these same spinners, or any others like them, to be anywhere near the BBC, because spin destroys the trust the people have in the BBC.

Chipstick10 Sun 06-Oct-13 18:24:54

There are many left wing posters who are beyond rude. Some are down right scary. Wishing death and pain on Tories. Lunacy I call it.
Why is it only right wingers who are nutters? Don't get it!

Custardo Sun 06-Oct-13 18:44:37

i think what you are saying is that there are rude people whatever the politics...no?

there was an article the other day ( forget which paper) which looked at why tories always say the left are 'misguided' loony left etc.

extremists with little self control are the bane of all political parties. elected or no.

PetiteRaleuse Mon 07-Oct-13 09:42:22

Extremists in any field give the moderates a bad name but they are a necessary evil to help put things in perspective I think.

claig Mon 07-Oct-13 10:26:04

We mentioned the condescending views so many of our elite and supposedly educated class have towards the French earlier on.

On the Andrew Marr Show this Sunday, they had the brilliant Frrench singer Zaz on, whom I have never heard of. I was blown away, it was amazing.

But luckily she didn't speak too good English so she couldn't understand Andrew Marr's clumsy, insulting, condescending question to her

"Has French music come of age, do you think?"

That idiot showed his ignorance and his rudeness at the same time.


PetiteRaleuse Mon 07-Oct-13 10:33:26

Ooh yes, good job she didn't understand that. Just because french music isn't to British tastes on the whole doesn't mean to say it hasn't got a huge following in France and Canada.

claig Mon 07-Oct-13 10:41:39

It is some of the best music in the whole world.
The ignorant buffoon.

The reason that English artists have been so successful is because of the English language, and they only followed and initially copied the American artists.

To claim that the French can't do pop shows the fool's insularity and blinkered understanding of the world outside his BBC studio.

HesterShaw Mon 07-Oct-13 22:06:25

France has produced some of the most elegant and beautiful composers of music ever <gavel>

claig Mon 07-Oct-13 22:11:39

Well said, HesterShaw.

I have been reading up on Zaz, they call her "la nouvelle Piaf".
It doesn't get much better than Piaf.

HesterShaw Mon 07-Oct-13 22:12:45

I'm going to look up Zaz.

claig Mon 07-Oct-13 22:20:03

On youtube there are some clips of her busking live in the street in Montmartre. She is better live than in the studio, because the studio can't capture her raw feeling, power and energy.

This is the same song "Je Veux" live in the street.


HesterShaw Mon 07-Oct-13 22:24:54

Oh goodness, I'm completely in love with her!

HesterShaw Mon 07-Oct-13 22:26:18

(though I may have to get better at French).

limitedperiodonly Mon 07-Oct-13 22:26:39

I'm afraid I scrambled for the remote yesterday. I found her very yowly.

HesterShaw Mon 07-Oct-13 22:26:42

Off topic, much? grin

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now