So I said to Gordon Brown, I said...The Spectator -
Home and awayDaniel Hannan MEP: The devalued Prime Minister of a devalued Government!Prime Minister, I see you’ve already mastered the essential craft of the European politician: namely the ability to say one thing in this chamber and a very different thing to your home electorate. You’ve spoken here about Free Trade – and amen to that. Who would have guessed, listening to you just now, that you were the author of the phrase ‘British jobs for British workers’ and that you have subsidised, where you have not nationalised outright, swathes of our economy, including the car industry and many of the banks? Perhaps you would have more moral authority in this house if your actions matched your words? Perhaps you would have more legitimacy in the councils of the world if the United Kingdom were not going into this recession in the worst condition of any G20 country?The truth, Prime Minister, is that you have run out of our money. The country as a whole is now in negative equity. Every British child is born owing around £20,000. Servicing the interest on that debt is going to cost more than educating the child. Now, once again today you try to spread the blame around; you spoke about an international recession, international crisis. Well, it is true that we are all sailing together into the squalls. But not every vessel in the convoy is in the same dilapidated condition. Other ships used the good years to caulk their hulls and clear their rigging; in other words – to pay off debt. But you used the good years to raise borrowing yet further. As a consequence, under your captaincy, our hull is pressed deep into the water line under the accumulated weight of your debt.We are now running a deficit that touches 10% of GDP, an almost unbelievable figure. More than Pakistan, more than Hungary; countries where the IMF have already been called in.Now, it’s not that you’re not apologising; like everyone else I have long accepted that you’re pathologically incapable of accepting responsibility for these things. It’s that you’re carrying on, wilfully worsening our situation, wantonly spending what little we have left. Last year - in the last twelve months – a hundred thousand private sector jobs have been lost and yet you created thirty thousand public sector jobs. Prime Minister, you cannot carry on for ever squeezing the productive bit of the economy in order to fund an unprecedented engorgement of the unproductive bit. You cannot spend your way out of recession or borrow your way out of debt. And when you repeat, in that wooden and perfunctory way, that our situation is better than others, that we’re ‘well-placed to weather the storm’, I have to tell you that you sound like a Brezhnev-era apparatchik giving the party line. You know, and we know, and you know that we know that it’s nonsense! Everyone knows that Britain is worse off than any other country as we go into these hard times. The IMF has said so; the European Commission has said so; the markets have said so – which is why our currency has devalued by thirty percent. And soon the voters too will get their chance to say so. They can see what the markets have already seen: that you are the devalued Prime Minister of a devalued government.It is a matter of some concern to me that, no matter how much 'they' might not agree with what is said, the majority of the
MSM has seen fit, so far, to not cover something that has captured the
public's imagination. I seem to recall such as the BBC, when caught out in the past, usually sniff that such things are 'not newsworthy'. Can't wait for
Newswatch. What's the betting it will be an in-depth defence of the Jade coverage.
NewsnightIain Dale -
Hannan Tells Brown Like It IsBBC -
Brown looks to Obama for consensus
22. At 08:30am on 25 Mar 2009, BenHLondonAmazing what can be done in the edit suite. In another blog I suggested it was hard to do much with what you put in... seems I was wrong.
As to what you re-splice or leave out, well enough said. Maybe Mr.
Hannan's speech, and the reaction to it, is 'not newsworthy'.
BBBC -
Dan the Man - as of lunch, 26 March, no word in much of the
MSM yet.
600,000 hits - wow!Ah, see now, there you have it: it's obviously 'not really newsworthy'
'Compare the news feed, what con?' Simples!
Telegraph -
My speech to Gordon Brown goes viralLumme. 15 pages... and counting.
All that needs to be said has been. Even by the apologists, which in the face of wit and literacy merely show the value of free speech, if only to humiliate themselves and their causes.
A shame some in the
MSM still deem it 'not newsworthy'. But I do believe a pretty teleprompter reader might have a few months of 'hold the front page' wedding plans to hold us in thrall.
BBBCOrder Order -
What the BBC Wouldn’t Let Guido BroadcastOrder Order -
Hannan Tells Gordon He Is “Pathologically Incapable” - Note the comment on coverage
Order Order -
Rushies, Co-Conspirators: “Hannan is Our Leader”Order -Order -
Gordon in New York: Hannan Attack Front Page Drudge SKY -
Hannan Hits Where It Hurts - the defence of the
MSM by the author in comments is...telling.
Telegraph -
Fox got Hannan. Why didn't the BBC's 'Newsnight'? -
The
MSM does rather seem to have missed the boat, and by missing it and trying to pretend it doesn't exist as a consequence is going to look at tad silly.
Saying 'it's not newsworthy' when it's en route to a million hits, that for a political speech, by the way, takes some
Nelsonian eyepatch.
So far, to their credit,
Newsnight's mods have allowed me to enquire what's (not) going on, but let's wait and see.
I started (not the first) on the BBC political editor's blog, but just got an email saying that my enquiring what everyone was going on about was 'off topic'.
How Catch 22 is that?
If they don't know about it, or choose not to see it, it therefore doesn't and hence cannot exist or be asked about?
This is NOT what I co-fund a news broadcaster to not provide.
Telegraph -
Hurrah for Hannan: Brown hasn't been spoken to like that for decadesGuardian -
Why has Daniel Hannan become an internet sensation?'MEP's tirade against Gordon Brown is top of YouTube's most viewed'I must check out the definition of 'tirade' again.
Took me a while to find it because, bless 'em, those who 'know' what's 'newsworthy' and 'good for us to know' felt it something they didn't feel worth being aware of, for some reason.
I was referred to on Nick Robinson's BBC political editor's blog, but because I asked what most folk were talking about in the thread that wasn't in the main blog test, it was removed for being 'off topic'.
Quaint. And very Catch 22.
'If we haven't heard about it, or don't like it, it doesn't exist' Therefore you cannot ask about it, as it does not exist. Nifty reporting standards.
And some wonder why folk are getting their political info and insights from other sources these days.
At least you acknowledged the piece, and allow discussion. Shame those I co-fund don't seem to feel the same way.
Ch 4
Snowmail -
Finally, Twitter and a brilliant speech lambasting Gordon Brown in his presence at the European parliament two days ago, deliver what the conventional media failed to spot at the time: a very embarrassing moment for the prime minister.Euro
Snowclouds -
Hannan and Brown:
http://tinyurl.com/caq6n9Addendum - For all the airy dismissals from the
MSM's dead tree dinosaurs, old boy broadcasters and their slavish supporters, many surrounding the relative obscurity of the 'incident' (an
MEP, in the Brussels Parliament, and a noted commentator on a major UK quality daily), it might have been better that the commentator made his political point by lobbing a shoe to be deemed 'newsworthy', as opposed to polite, calm, but deadly, not to mention well-aimed words.
It seems quaint for a few to bleat that it's time to move on, and throw toys out the pram that some do not feel ready to, when the point at issue is that something of not insignificant political note, and public interest, remains essentially glossed over, apparently through not conforming to a desired narrative.
How much better to have given the piece the objective coverage it warranted at the time... and
then move on. Now, each time a non-group think politician is fingered for putting their bins out on the wrong day, the credibility of those that suddenly get excited by trivia over substance spirals ever lower.
Newsnight -
Anger NightAlso, I am only now 'finding out' but for some reason from oddly selective sources, that a world leader (The President of Brazil no less), came out with
a rather 'interesting' take on the racial breakdown that should be considered in the global banking crisis.
Is this lack of reporting due to who was standing next to this person, given a pass to be more than a tad racist when others might find the full glare of liberal ire upon them? Maybe it is, as
SKY's anchor suggested, 'yet another embarrassment for the PM'.
If anyone should be embarrassed, it should be those caught editing by omission whilst claiming objective reporting.
Telegraph -
For once, Gordon Brown had to sit and listenOrder-Order -
Hannan Breaks the Million Views BarrierTelegraph -
Daniel Hannan vs pretty much everyoneAddendum
I am more and more watching SKY News in the morning, despite forays into celeb/trash TV that makes the
bouffant's obsession with Kate
Silverton's nuptials seem cerebral.
But when they address real news, they actual get their teeth in.
On top of actually mentioning the
Hannan 'affair' and how it's got the
MSM in a tizzy (not in a good way), it was followed by an interview with Dear Leader.
Clear, straight...unedited... the interview I mean.
And unlike some media giants and their overpaid, over-pensioned, beholden, market rate talents, the interviewer would not allow him to get away with 'What you should be asking is...' and stuck with getting him to simply answer the question.
It goes beyond party political or anything else, the stuttering buffoon was like a rabbit in the headlights over a simple question posed by someone (again) looking him in the eye and asking for straight answers.
Leadership requires the ability to lead, and anyone who follows this person, based on such performances as i just witnessed, have truly taken the
Kool-Aid.
BBC -
Wot no Dan? - The dead tree press, Old Boy broadcasters and their mates: when in hole, dig deeper.
BBC -
EU speech is an internet phenomenon - so... the BBC 'has run it'. 'And that's all
we have time for'. Dig, dig, dig...
Mr. Draper did impress. No really. A guy running a blog (well...) trying claim that all other blogs and their
commenters are somehow different, and worse, despite him getting few users and them often millions... quaint.
I see him as a regular on the BBC now, mind. 'Their kinda guy'.
Gaurdian -
A dull display of viral virility - speaking of whom.
Telegraph -
Questions for BBC and ITV over Daniel Hannan speech coverageTelegraph -
Does anyone at the BBC read the Telegraph?The phrases 'comfort zone' and 'group think' spring to mind. Me, I find roaming all over the place rounds out my awareness of objective fact and subjective opinion no end.
It is an 'interesting' (and not in a good way) notion that our premier, multi-million, multi-thousand strong national news broadcaster doesn't see anything a bit wrong in being unaware of anything they don't know about.
A piece of Catch 22 logic that got my request for more info to a few of Aunty's blogs removed for being 'off topic'.
And now I read, thanks to others and Matthew, that a highly-paid, market rate talent journalist/interviewer I co-fund 'forgot' he had had you on the self-same programme that only a week later he professes that no one knows of you? Priceless!
Is there a link to that? I'd love to see those two spliced together (the BBC can do that seamlessly (just ask
Newnight's Susan Watts, but it does need to be in the spirit of 'enhancing the narrative') with the timeline between them
inbetween.
Is that also the one I've (now) heard about where you reduce the interviewer to a gibbering
numptie when trying to allude to a 'they' s/he can't actually explain, even under the guise of confidentiality when trying to provoke a rise?
Telegraph -
Dan Hannan shames the BBC and proves need for broadcasting freedomOrder Order -
Cameron Hails Hannan’s “Brilliant Response”Just
so's you know you read it hear first (7.05am - 28/02/09) - I hark back to a chemistry lecture in my youth, I think about the discovery of how carbon molecules bond in some compounds. The discoverer apparently had a dream of a snake eating its own tail. I may be wrong... no matter. Now, thanks to this case, I would wish a skilled cartoonist could create a ring, comprising the great and 'good' of our inter-dependent, self-serving, Westminster Useful Village Idiot politico-media establishment (Brown,
Mandleson, Draper, White, Robinson, Neill,
Mardell... it could be a big ring) connected, not with hands in pockets (I think that's been done), bent over with their heads buried in the place the sun don't shine of the next in line. That, to me, would sum up the current state of government, and the media that 'report' to the public they are in theory supposed to serve (and in the case of the BBC, uniquely funded to do so objectively).
Go-fourth -
Hold on HannanDear Go Fourth,
Just looked at the new video.
Please define 'fun'.
It looks more like a desperate attempt at attacking the man and not the argument.
Keep on digging, er, for victory!
Still, good luck with the hit-rates.
Labourlist -
The devalued Dan Hannan - not sure it is quite working out as intended
Newsnight -
Hannan -
I know it will be on the site somewhere, for a while, but I think it worth preserving
an important discussion...Two very different ends of the scale, but calm and articulate in their views. I was impressed... and encouraged.
Not so sure about the
representative of the profession that sees all things in terms of 'there must be someone to blame'.
To me, that is not the same as holding people to account and, as again well articulated by Mr.
Hannan, a lot of frustration comes from 'our' electorate feeling powerless to influence anything... in a democracy with a vote!
From quangos to
lobbyists to backroom deals to EU telling UK what to do or face a fine to my
MP's whip telling him how to vote, it's a very lost plot.
And one smugly overseen by the dead tree press and the old boy broadcasting network.
No wonder 'we' turn to the
internet. For all the good even that does.
Telegraph -
You can't please everyone -
Hey, if some wish to keep on digging (maybe trying to pretend you didn't exist was a better call) in their own back yard, I am sure that there are many more than happy to spread around the nightsoil they bring up, so the stench of their own words and deeds can serve, as ably did your speech, to show their, um, 'positions'.
Speaking of which.... (above)
Speaking of whom...
Nice to see Aunty at last felt the need to notice what you have stirred up, on Newsnight at least (Mr. Robinson still offline, I fear, and Mr. Mardell sulking at the response to his sniffy attempt at justification)
No wonder 'we' turn to the internet. For all the good even that does.
Speaking of which...
Interesting to view the 'counters' on LabourList and GoFourth... er forth, and how well they have gone down.
It seems that all in the blogosphere are equal, but some expect more equal coverage in the MSM than others, in the face of actual accepted IT/media audience measures, because, well, they are just 'right' and others just don't know the 'right' people.
Indy -
Mr Angry and Mr Slightly-Cross -
Mr. 3 replies - early days. But, like other such political heavyweights as Mr. White over at the Grauniad, I am sure that elusive million is not far off.
At least, like him, you got round to the topic. If a bit late. And a tad grudgingly. That's the dead tree, old boy broadcasting system for you!
However, and I may be wrong here, but I think telling a bunch of folk who use the internet to get their info because they have lost faith in the objectivity of those who think they are the sole bearers of what is news that they are misguided is... quaint. Especially on a blog. And speaking of minorities, especially when you read the replies. I guess those in support of your world views are just lurking, cowed from supporting you. Or maybe, as some claim, the 'right wing' has hired half the country to spam you. Not a counter going down well with those, like me, who simply enjoy 'independent' (ahem) thought.
It seems that all in the blogosphere are equal, but some expect more equal coverage in the MSM than others, in the face of actual accepted IT/media audience measures, because, well, they are just 'right' and others just don't know the 'right' people.
BBC -
Newswatch is worth a gander...
I've popped in a thought:
Any chance of addressing the Daniel Hannan speech phenomenon? Then I 'could be making the news next week'. Or not.Especially as it seems so un-newsworthy as to merit either no coverage, grudging mention or sniffy dismissal, in that order, to date.Or, in the case of myself, being excised from approved moderated political blogs for being 'off topic'... for simply asking if it will be mentioned.How Catch 22 is that?I would complain, but, funnily enough the site is down. Too many telling the BBC what it doesn't want to know... or hear?But to quote this week's surly 'why drag me out of my bed' Editor, who seems in some groupthink loop, I am sure 'You don't think there's an issue here'. I am sure you don't.Remind me, why may I NOT opt out of paying the licence fee to help fund such folk's salaries?At least later on you acknowledge that, in the spirit of 'enhancing the narrative' and 'interpreting events', the corporation seems a wee bit more interested in what 'might happen', especially if it is influenced at its hands.Is that the new, intended role? If so, I think I'll claim my refund now.PajamasMedia -
The Gordon Brown Takedown Goes Viral - As other see us.
'Unless you have been living under a rock or only have access to left-wing media'. Yup, the UK population.
Rather amazingly, most in the UK MSM are trying to claim it was, is and shouldn't be 'newsworthy'... and suffering the consequences when brave/dumb enough to do it online with comments enabled.
Or... it seems (caution 'til confirmed), trying to 'bend' things to help 'enhance the narrative':
British Bias Corporation --
Daniel Hannan RemasteredTelegraph -
Lefties feel threatened by the internet - On the QC...
The BBC...uh, whose money is it ? Voters can stop it, no ?Chris long April 03, 2009 11:52 PM GMTYou'd think... hope. But I have much more chance of serving notice for dire performance on my elected representative every few years than I have have had, do or will have with the state prop... broadcaster. At least I can pull my enforced funding from one via the ballot to express... concern.
For the rest... there's The Trust. You should read their latest publication, which is pretty satisfied with the way the licence fee is 'collected'.
The blogosphere must never let down its guard, as it is rapidly becoming the only source of material from which you can hope to acquire a decently informed, balanced view.
The next few weeks on Aunty will be a good time to bury or ignore news, as all their 'reporters' seem to be off on carbon-free (I'm sure) school hols.
Mr. Nick Robinson has been kind enough to share this on his blog, and doubtless needs a rest having had to get up early these last few days, and getting inconvenienced getting to work by all those beastly common folk who run events that can't tell hoi poloi from media legends.
Speaking of tools, it is interesting that one used more and more by some keen on comment being free, but some freer than others, is the 'now closed' button.
From CiF to HYS, it seems to be unleashed erratically, but often when things are not going quite according to narrative. Or even to pre-empt matters.
Mr.Robinson's latest, rather ironically, has 'closed for comment' before any can be made.
Says it all really. Or, rather, when it suits, doesn't.
_____
YouTube -
The speechYouTube -
Glenn Beck, FoxMeanwhile, to show total balance....
BBC -
Labour's 'vampire' attack on Tory - Hat tip
Not a Sheep - As some have already pointed out elsewhere, this 'effort' may not have quite the effect intended for the creators or their uniquely-funded, objective PR agency:)
