Why is the Diana interview a bigger news story than the farmers being shafted over Brexit?

[JackieWeaverHandforthCouncil]

Just that really? Yes it’s an interesting story but the fact the deal means Australian farmers can sell their produce cheaper in the U.K. which will decimate British farming is a much bigger one.

Truss has to be the worlds worst negotiator. The Australians must be pissing themselves laughing. They have farms bigger than the U.K. and can flood the market.

@BackforGood

To go back to the original question - it is because it isn't about Lady Diana per se it is about the BBC and broadcasting standards.

I can't believe it took until NiceGerbil's post on P5 to actually answer the question.

The BBC are the national broadcaster who are supposed to be impartial and honest.
What Martin Bashir did was truly shocking and the editorial decision and consequential cover up is what the issues / 'news story' is.

The BBC is publicly funded and holds itself up as an integral organisation respected throughout the World. That is why it is a shocking report.

Indeed. And also the fact that it’s not just about things that happened 25 years ago, Martin Bashir was reemployed, and promoted, only five years ago by someone who knew what he had done.

@Horehound

Maybe because farmers voted for Brexit..

Did they? I'd like to see some stats on that. I know a few farmers and years ago spoke to 3 of them about brexit. All 3 voted remain and were very vocal about how brexit would ruin farming.

@Andante57

Whats happening now is just a re writing of history, blaming the "leftie BBC" for this tragedy, instead of looking at how the media (overall) behaves and still does

I agree the media behaves appallingly but just because the BBC isn’t the only media outlet to behave badly - or in the Martin Bashir case, criminally - then that doesn’t mean when evidence as has emerged, the perpetrators shouldn’t be censured.
Do you think because many newspapers use appalling methods the News of the World shouldn’t have been criticised because it wasn’t the only one behaving badly?

But i didn't say that. I ve read the rubbish written about Meghan, she rubs her bump and is called self centred and attention seeking, Kate does the same and its called caring, wonderful and sensitive.

The hypocrisy is sickening and i equally remember how Diana was treated, even more despicable given her husbands behaviour, Charles was and still is, given a free pass, because as a privileged white male, he gets one by default.

The BBC covered up terrible journalism, thats undeniable but the fact remains is that Diana wanted that interview and would have done one regardless, by 1995, she was public property and wanted her say!

ALL the MSM needs to take a good hard look at itself, not just the BBC but as the national broadcaster, its a very easy target fot the right wing press to rip into.

Well if we extrapolate from the fact that Brexit won the referendum, we come to the conclusion that everyone voted for Brexit. So fuck us all.

This logic is fucked up, why are seemingly intelligent people unable to realise 'farmers' are not a homogenous mass.

And why are we blaming them instead of shining a light on the campaign that lied to them??? Ditto fishermen.

Stop being so decisive and use a little critical thought.

Understanding UK farmers’ Brexit voting decision: A behavioural approach
Author links open overlay panelDanielMayaLouiseManning

This is from the Journal of Rural Studies

@SundayBloodySunday

Understanding UK farmers’ Brexit voting decision: A behavioural approach Author links open overlay panelDanielMayaLouiseManning

This is from the Journal of Rural Studies

Really interesting! Education seems to have been the most significant factor. The more qualified you were, the less likely you were to vote to leave.

Thanks for posting it.

I think that level of education was a factor in terms of Brexit voting generally.

I would be interested to hear from MN farmers why they think a significant percentage of farmers voted leave. Would they not have had significant concerns about subsidies being withdrawn and trade deals with other countries?
I also can't follow how shipping food from the other side of the world is a good thing. The environment costs need to be taken into account as well as the impace on local farmers and farmland.

I agree with the OP that this story needs to have much more prominence.

I think the assumption that the UK will be “flooded” with cheap meat is probably wrong.
Australian meat is generally very high quality and in demand all around the world. All meat produced is exported and or sold locally at high prices (there isn’t excess meat in the system).
Only a certain percentage of land here is suitable for farming and substantially increased production is not really a possibility. Farming land is now super expensive; combine that with high labour costs (much higher than the uk) and it is not possible to produce very low cost meat let alone send it halfway around the world.
Australians import a large amount of food from the UK (more than we sell actually even when wine is included). Most of the imported English food is “value added” (processed).
Australians see the benefit of a trade deal as having options. Our current arrangements which are “China centric” expose us to covert and unfair behaviour and a deal with the UK levels the playing field. Australian farmers won’t stop selling to China, Japan’s and Indonesia at high prices to sell low to the UK.
I’m consistently bewildered as to why Australia is painted as the “bad guy”. The UK and Australia are different countries, both with our respective faults. However, surely our common ground makes it easier for us to work together than the UK working with France or us working with China.

That's a really interesting study.

Anecdotally older farmers HATE being told what to do. They have often been king pin in their own little empire for far to long.

Also, anecdotally many of them just didn't believe subsidies would go. The older generation of farmers now are the post war generation who have had subsidies their whole lives and think it unbelievable the government would put our national food security at risk. The really really old ones remember pre war and were a little more cautious. The younger could see the gravy train was coming to an end.

www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/may/19/australian-farmers-rush-to-reassure-uk-over-looming-free-trade-agreement

I would say literally because of what you said The government loves to pick a good time to bury bad news and this is it. The Diana story is inconsequential and most people don't care but will fill headline news while other things are going on. The Diana story also serves as a convenient excuse to shaft the BBC which is a policy the tories are committed to.

@flowerycurtain

That's a really interesting study.

Anecdotally older farmers HATE being told what to do. They have often been king pin in their own little empire for far to long.

Also, anecdotally many of them just didn't believe subsidies would go. The older generation of farmers now are the post war generation who have had subsidies their whole lives and think it unbelievable the government would put our national food security at risk. The really really old ones remember pre war and were a little more cautious. The younger could see the gravy train was coming to an end.

I sort of agree with this.

FIL is 76 and still farming like he's 40. He's still the senior partner in our business. It's a constant battle to get through to him that 'having a word' with the local NFU man and letting them sort it, or simply saying 'no thanks' to Natural England or RPA will mean he can carry on farming like he did in the 70s unencumbered. He doesn't get that Natural England and The RPA basically own us and can do what they like.

Most farmers have a sense of farming being 'in their blood' and don't appreciate being told that they must do x/y/z by 'some townie busybody'. Due to a lack of educational opportunities lot of very clever and intelligent farmers completely fail to articulate WHY they do something the way they do it if someone who doesn't understand farming asks them.

The pro Brexit voice in farming came from a sense of not wanting to be told how to farm any more. This had been systematically blamed on 'Europe' when mostly that wasn't he case, it was successive governments passing the buck for poor agricultural and food security policies.

However, were subsidies a gravy train? For some, perhaps. Not my experience though. subsidies allowed us to continue to survive on a hill farm producing beef and lamb at a price point below the real cost of production. I wish I could be an observer rather than a forced participant in what will essentially be a massive social experiment over the next few decades regarding food sustainability and costs in the UK.

Even with subsidies we basically break even most years in our farm.

Actually we don't because I bring in £17k a year in my part time job off the farm. That's what we actually live off. But we aren't allowed to admit that...

@JackieWeaverHandforthCouncil

Yes because I could understand if she was still alive but she died about 25 years ago. It’s not a top story. Sky had it on for ages interviewing all sorts who worked at the BBC when I was still at school. I’m now in my 40s.

Escapism? The present economic situation is scary. History is more comforting, even sad history like tragic life of Lady Di because it has happened before and we survived it. The present is worrying and the future scary.

@Scrowy sorry, you're absolutely right about hill farms not having a gravy train.

I'm in arable where the situation is rather different!

Don't you remember bans on lamb exports. after Chernobyl. And the ban on importing beef by EUrope and US went on for ages after the BSE crisis. I think US still don't import bovril. It's any excuse to ban imports By countries to protect their own.
and how can welfare standards be as high as ours if you can ship the meat half way round the world and it still be cheaper.
Cattle on a 5000 acre ranch will be wild - imagine if we started herding wild deer , chasing them into corrals, dehorning them ( animals must be terrified) , forcing them onto trains. That would go down v well in the U.K., trade would last 5mins. I'm sticking to meat from well cared for uk cows

Anecdotally older farmers HATE being told what to do. They have often been king pin in their own little empire for far to long.
Ignoring the search king pin bit - please show me a group of knowledgable , experienced people who do like being told what to do by Gov- builders?? teachers?? Nurses??

Should be sarky not search

Water scarcity must make Australian production (of meat or wheat) more expensive than UK production, but...

Does the deal with Aus mean reduction or stopping subsidies -- is that the actual change looming that will undermine domestic production? IIRC, there is something in WTO rules about level playing field between imports & local production.

The gov has already started cutting what was EU subsidies to farmers in the U.K. - there will be some replacement by environmental improvement schemes , but I suspect these are much less, which is why farming priducts which don't have high environmental and welfare standards being imported is seen as unfair, not surprisingly.

I think a lot of people are more concerned that the BBC which is the National broadcaster for which we all pay for, stooped to forgery, lying and fraud.
It also caused terrible damage to innocent people such as Tiggy Legge Bourke and Diana’s private secretary, not to mention the young Princes.

Yes, exactly that.

Far too many people are rushing to politicise it.

I’m going to write to my local (Tory) MP to say that the bbc stuff is a ridiculous distraction. It’s worth doing that - especially if you have a Tory MP. They do pay attention if enough constituents make noise.

The bbc story is a dead cat - to distract from the bullshit about PHE hiding data on covid in schools (doesn’t suit the narrative about people not taking up vaccines) and the bullshit about Brexit.

This government make me so fucking angry!

@RickiTarr

I think a lot of people are more concerned that the BBC which is the National broadcaster for which we all pay for, stooped to forgery, lying and fraud. It also caused terrible damage to innocent people such as Tiggy Legge Bourke and Diana’s private secretary, not to mention the young Princes.

Yes, exactly that.

Far too many people are rushing to politicise it.

Yes. Also if it had been the Daily Mail who’d been caught out using these awful methods there’d be a lot of gloating on mn and no talk of ‘oh it was ages ago, forget it.’

Also if it had been the Daily Mail who’d been caught out using these awful methods there’d be a lot of gloating on mn and no talk of ‘oh it was ages ago, forget it.’

Ha! Can you even imagine?

@Quincie I wasn't being sarcastic. They are often a generation that inherited a farm early as their parents were the last of the farmers who had a truly physical role which put paid to a lengthy retirement. Often for the last 30/40 years they've had complete control over their business not answerable to anyone.

Nurses and teachers both have to work in teams. Farmers often don't do that.

Nursery and teachers also retire at
A decent age. I know a lot of farmers in their 70's who refuse to relinquish control and don't keep up to date with things.

@RickiTarr

Also if it had been the Daily Mail who’d been caught out using these awful methods there’d be a lot of gloating on mn and no talk of ‘oh it was ages ago, forget it.’

Ha! Can you even imagine?

Err the Levison report has never been implemented, the 'papers got away with phone hacking and no one anymore gives a shiny shit.

I'd imagine the effects on some families was terrible but who cares now.