Priorities? (2)

Recently we have witnessed our Prime Minister watching a treaty he vetoed being signed by 25 of the 27 Member States; we have witnessed an abrogation of political principle, one held by the Conservative Party, to a smaller political party who form the present government, over the 50p tax rate purely, I would suggest, to enable those of the Conservative Party to remain in power; we witness a disgraced MP accused of behaviour unbecoming of one in his position, able to continue in office unless sentenced to a period of incarceration of more than 12 months whilst our democratic system does not allow those who elected him - and pay him - to effect his dismissal; and we witness that someone appointed to the position of Strategy Advisor for the largest party in the coalition government (whose appointment and salary did not have the permission of the people) is to take a sabbatical. Serious journalistic output on any of the foregoing has been - or will be?


And what is the subject dominating the MSM? Whether our Prime Minister rode a particular horse - and while so doing - what was discussed with the female minder of that horse.


That journalism, as practised today, makes a point to know very little about an extremely wide variety of topics is how they manage to remain in existence. Oberon Waugh is reported to have said that generally speaking the best people nowadays go into journalism, the second best into business, the rubbish into politics and the shits into law. Well, he got that wrong because it is obvious that the shits go into politics and journalism.


Just saying...................

What a surprise - not?

Via Politics Home we are advised that Dav il Cam is to challenge the idea of 'devo-max' where the question of Scottish independence is concerned because 'it would affect the whole of the UK'.

And this is news? I suppose, to the 'talking heads' amongst the MSM, it is, but for those of us with a brain it was obvious that granting 'devo-max' to Scotland would also have entailed granting the same to England, Wales and Northern Ireland. In so doing it would also have taken away virtually all the powers that politicians possess, ones they have gradually usurped from the people over time, thus rendering them powerless. It would also further call into question why 600, let alone 650, MPs are required and just what would we be paying them for.

To have granted 'devo-max' would have been to grant the beginnings of direct democracy - and that is the last thing Dav il Cam and his fellow sycophant politicians want! These bastard politicians are control freaks and like the EU, control over our own lives is the last thing they will grant us.

Once again, just saying.........

Just a normal piece of 'flint'?

Caroline Flint virtually bares all (steady male readers, I write in the metaphorical sense) in the Standard, during an 'interview' in which she provides details of her past, details which if we wanted to know we could quite easily ascertain from the internet.


Leaving to one side the 'PR' and 'Spin' aspects of the article, it is important to pay attention to the contradictions contained in what amounts to a 'puff piece' by one who is supposed to be a 'journalist'. The fact she has turned 50 is neither here nor there - and it would have helped if some indication had been given as to what the figure '50' referred. Presumably it did not refer to any aspect of her physical appearance - like the size of her mouth?


She states that energy companies should do something to simplify energy tariffs, yet were not said tariffs just as complicated during her time in government? Also the reason people are paying so much must surely be due the government, of which she was a member, adhering to diktats 'de Bruxelles'? She complains of being used as 'window dressing', yet presumably there was no coercion suffered by her when she posed for pictures such as these? Was not Flint also 'tolerating sexism' when she posed for those pictures? It is not surprising, knowing the standard of journalism currently practiced, that there is not one word on the points I have raised.


In agreeing to this article Flint can be accused of being hypocritical, just as the newspaper - and the journalist writing for that newspaper - can be accused of engaging in 'propaganda' for the promotion of a politician. That is not what journalism is supposed to be about, unless of course said journalist worked for the likes of OK Magazine, or similar publications.


I am fairly certain that were anyone to praise prostitutes and the use thereof, both Flint and Mensch would promptly mount (now there's a thought) their high horse and complain about sexualisation of women - yet is that not what both have done, Flint in this article and Mensch by posing for GQ magazine?


Oh the power of the press - used so expertly by both our government and our politicians!

Separating the 'wheat' from the 'chaff'

The point is often made by those commenting on blogs that the internet is the only source for 'real news, ie: 'news without spin'.

No matter where you look at sites that profess to provide 'news' - Politics Home, Conservative Home, Labour List, Liberal Democrat Voice, coupled with all those 'independent' commentators - all they do is provide 'news' from within the 'political Westminster bubble', whilst linking to each other in that 'bubble'.

Whilst in no way decrying the efforts of EU Referendum, Your Freedom and Ours, IanPJ on Politics - and many, many others all of whom are not members of the  MSM - where is the media source of unadulterated, opinion free, news and comment? (Just the facts, ma'am, just the facts) Does not a 'responsible' media have a duty to inform and question that which politicians would have us believe? Do not 'media moguls' have a duty to their readership to provide just that? Do not what are 'information sites', albeit with political affiliation, not have that same duty? Politics Home is supposed to be, so they would have readers believe, 'without 'political affiliation' yet I notice that whilst  links to EU Referendum are 'legion' - when he questions political venality, principles, behaviour; such posts seem to be studiously 'ignored' by that website.

People, beware - the internet, per se, is not an impartial source of news. As with the MSM, it is still necessary to employ the use of a filter - which begs the question why, in a free society which is supposed to be a democracy, this should be necessary. Or am I being naive? (don't answer that!)

Just saying..........................

Wednesday 7th December 2011

I am, unfortunately out until mid-afternoon but, in the meantime, I thought it might exercise the brains of the 'unenlightened' if I left, for further consideration, a thought on why our MSM is in the dire straits it is. (paraphrasing Bertrand Russell)

"A stupid man's report of what a politician says can never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand."

Is it any wonder, therefore, that the public is so ill-informed?

Just saying...........

Facts & Figures = Deception

We all have to learn our 'trade' and when dealing with the public most employers ensure that we have some expertise and knowledge of a product or idea prior to our being 'let loose'. Not so it would appear where the Daily Telegraph is concerned, especially in relation to Sebastian Payne who we are informed is a data reporter (what ever the hell that is) and writes about facts and figures in a sensible way.

That the MSM is in the business of misinformation is well known, a talent that young Sebastian appears to have easily grasped in the manner of a duck taking to water. This young lad writes what I believe is termed a 'puff piece' playing down the importance of the European Union and the effect it has on our lives. Whilst acknowledging that a poll explained that voters do not particularly rate Europe as a pressing issue, we then get the 'throw-away' line: "though many of the higher-ranked matters are intrinsically linked to our continued alliance". He then continues:

"Only 10 per cent of voters cited Europe as an issue important to the country, ranking 8th – below the economy, crime and immigration to name a few. For issues important to individual voters, Europe ranks even lower, at 11th place with 8 per cent expressing a concern."

It doesn't appear to have crossed this young man's mind that problems with our economy, crime and immigration are directly related to our membership of the EU - and if it had crossed his mind, he conveniently forgets to mention it. Likewise, earlier in his piece he writes that during last week's PMQs Cameron stated (for the umpteenth time) that he did not see a case for an in/out referendum and that he believed Cameron had judged the public mood correctly; whilst not bothering to acknowledge that where the governance of this country is concerned it is the people who should be asked the specific question and that it is not one that an elected dictator should pre-empt.

Mind you, where the art of misinformation is concerned young Sebastian is in good company, namely that of Roger Helmer against whom Autonomous Mind has another 'pop' in a well-crafted dissection of both Helmer and the 'Useless Eustice Eurosceptics' group of Conservative MPs. On this subject of disinformation Guido Fawkes has a post, one in which if he deleted the word 'theory' would mean that his opinion of  this Useless Eustice movement would be 'bang on the money'.

It is disgraceful that our MSM, who should be informing the public whilst at the same time exposing the disingenuousness of our political elite, continue to avoid their true function - and the newspaper section of the MSM continue to wonder why their circulation figures fall? Where the politial elite and journalists are concerned, as I have said previously, it is virtually impossible to discern in whose pocket is who.