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

[claig]

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.

[northernlurker]

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]

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]

I wonder if Dacre will get his right to reply? Evening Harold link.

[hackmum]

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]

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]

Perhaps we ought to identify exactly who and what the DM hates?
teachers
nurses
social workers
unions
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
lefties
The NHS
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]

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]

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]

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.

[tobiasfunke]

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]

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]

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.

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 .)

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]

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.

[TheOneWithTheNicestSmile]

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

(\link{http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/10/01/daily-mail--jon-steafel-alastair-campbell_n_4026312.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Cuk-ws-bb%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk2%26pLid%3D212802\Huffington Post})

[niceguy2]

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]

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]

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 .

[niceguy2]

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.

[TheOneWithTheNicestSmile]

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?

[claig]

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]

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

[claig]

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

[CogitoErgoSometimes]

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]

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.