Whatever else Ed Miliband does, the one overriding lesson he could surely learn from the Gordon Brown era, is not to pander to what must be the most vile and despicable media in the world.
We don’t want a leader chasing his tail trying to please Nick Robinson, Jeremy Paxman, John Humphries or the odious Michael Crick. And they are just the venal crowd from the BBC. Chuck in the flotsam and jetsam from Sky, the Daily Mail and the lying pack who eke a living writing crap for Murdoch and you have a real bag of snakes. They have long since abandoned reporting the news, these days their job is to make the news.
In an interesting post on Liberal Conspiracy Don Paskini points out that not all of those things the media identify as ‘left’ are unpopular with the electorate.
But Lord Ashcroft’s research highlights a key dilemma for Ed Miliband and Labour. He won the leadership despite the opposition of newspapers, all of which endorsed his brother, and his success was due to his ability to adopt mainstream policies, from Iraq to the living wage, and his ability to articulate them with conviction and passion. The same challenge will present itself at the next general election. Principled and mainstream policies which swing voters strongly support will be denounced by the political elite.
Ed will be advised by some to show the Westminster Village that he is not “Red Ed”, that he shares the prejudices of wealthy newspaper editors and won’t “lurch to the left”. The evidence shows that most swing voters are at worst indifferent to the prospect of Labour moving to the left, that they want Labour to change, and that policies like a mansion tax, living wage and High Pay Commission are all fine examples that would help to show how Labour has changed for the better.
You’re right, Bob, Labour aren’t ever going to win over the media, and can find way more useful things to do with their time. Often the compromises they make end up being another way for the media to give them a kicking.
However, what’s different these days is that the general public are less likely to trust what they read in the papers, and make up their own minds.
Spot on, they did for poor Gordon, Just an occasional choice morsel for Polly would be nice, especially as that’s the only paper we are still able to read ? If big brother David decides to desert his little brother it will show that not electing him was a wise move, however if he decides to stay and support his brother it will show you all elected the wrong brother.
I was exasperated by the Today program this morning: in between Sarah Montague’s monotonous drone “it was the unions what done it!” various no-mark commentators declaimed that “Red Ed” would have to have his own “Clause 4 moment”, say three Hail Marys and salute the flag, denounce the unions as dinosaurs, etc. ad nauseam. Someone even remarked that David Miliband’s wife was furious about the leadership election result. Oh well…in that case it will have to be re-run!
As you pointed out in your reply to Duffers: shock-horror union executives and members exercised their democratic rights. At a time of financial crisis how about a bit more media attention on the filthy rich who want their democratic cake but aren’t prepared to pay for it: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11415870
Oh dear…the BBC have pulled their Panorama doc on Lord Bankroll of Belize and also pulled the above story on their website: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11423777 – naturally no political pressure was exerted on the BBC. Nothing to see here, move along…