And Another Thing…

My main problem with this is that it is supposed to be a NEWSpaper. They should lay out the facts and not tell their readership what to think.

Unfortunately they all have their owner’s/editor’s agendas, even, apparently, the BBC.

You’ll get your legs slapped.

Wise words from a consummate communicator.

It’s probably worth revisiting the strategy that delivered New Labour its first term in Government.

In the early 1990s Fleet Street was still closed to Labour. So the likes of Ali Campbell (washes mouth out) and co developed a very effective campaign of targeting local media and building relationships with them; bypassing national print media.

Think local act global.

PS And then please lose the election

Tom said “The loss of The Sun’s support is a blow to Labour. It’s a setback. Trying to pretend otherwise would be seen, rightly, by the electorate as an attempt to kid ourselves.”

Still, that won’t stop your comrades from doing that anyway…

Are you looking forward to being on the opposition benches yet?

Again the responce should have been to express regret at losing any support from anywhere, but no it the petulant child again showing us who is the nasty party.
Labour will be judged on the last 12 years not on future bribe promises like free parking at hospitals. Why did that no go when we had the money then.

I’m happy though, to call it for what it is – a marketing exercise. I’m sure you receieved the same breathless midnight email from the Sun’s Emma Patterson inviting us to follow the story as it broke. This smacks of a large marketing exercise more than anything else – at a time when newspapers are hemmoraging readers.

I’m not saying it doesn’t have a political impact, but let’s remember to remind people what it actually is and call it out as such.

In any case, for many the isght of a Murdoch paper going back home may even be of some benefit to Labour.

First mature comment from a Labour supporter I’ve seen. Might want to have a word with the rest of your party though. They’ve made lots of comments which may seem that they’re taking the news rather badly.

Perhaps you could pass the message to Labourlist. They have an article that the internet will save Labour.

Ironic, given that during Gordon Brown;’s speech yesterday and the best part of 1 hour after, not one message was posted – presumably because Alex was busy at conference?

Tom: perhaps you can show them how to do it as even you – with your limited resources (you) – are often quicker than Labour List.

Meanwhile Gordon’s busy fighting wars on two fronts with the Sun and Sky:
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2662254/Brown-goes-into-TV-meltdown.html

Seems not to have learned any lessons at all since becoming Leader. ” I am right, we are right, we did the RIGHT things”.

Surprisingly voters are human and expect both errors and humility at times. Tony Blair was brilliant at humility even if maybe insincere. Gordon appears not to do humility…

I really am trying not to say “I told you so” (and I am sure you are as well).

Well it is the Sun pretending it sets the agenda, when in reality it is following the crowd. I think Tony Blair and Alistair Campbell getting the Sun’s support was a vital part of the New Labour Project to make Labour safe to vote for by positioning the party in the centreground as the Tories lurched rightwards and the Lib Dems lurched leftwards and rightwards depending on where you live.

Labour have lost the centreground, primarily due to a recesssion which wasn’t their fault but they will still get blamed for.

The most important aspect of the Sun decision might be that the Tories try to win the election from the right not the centre, which would be a social and economic disaster for the country.

Personally, I think in the remaining months you have left in office, one of the best things the Labour party could ever do in this country, would be to mandate that all newspapers must be owned by British citizens, resident in the UK.
What have you to lose now?
That’d screw Murdoch, them two dopey brothers on their little tax haven in the Channel. Moreover, we’d actually then have a more responsible media, with less of the scumbags like Murdoch around the place. Why does an Australian-American global corporate politician wield so much power over our media anyway? The largest tabloid, broadsheet and commercial TV network are all controlled by that lying bawbag.

The Sun is no friend to the SNP either, with that ridiculous noose on page 1 in the 2007 elections….
Personally, I don’t believe the date in the Sun, and anyone who reads it has to do some serious legwork before I’ll see them in any kind of respectable work, but I understand there are those that do believe that rubbish….
I pity them.
Still, doesn’t change anything for Labour vs. Tory’s in England, you were gonna lose anyway, this just makes it a bit more certain….

Compare the number of copies of “The Sun” (and many other papers, tabloid or other) with the membership of any of the political parties.

I understand that “Sun” buyers outnumber card-carrying Labour party supporters by more than 17 to 1. Worse than that, they reaffirm their allegiance six days a week, not just once a year when the subs are due. Even that assumes that only one person reads each copy of the paper – they claim a readership of 10M people, compared to 177k members of the Labour party in 2007.

In context, at the last General Election there was a 61.4% turnout from (presumably) 50M voters – about 30M people. If the current polls are to be believed, Labour can hope for 25% of the popular vote (sic). That’s 7.5M votes; less than is claimed to read “The Sun” every day.

Even if you believe that tabloid readers are closer in genetic makeup to a pot plant than an ape (and I don’t make that assumption), they still have both a vote of their own, and friends and family to sound off at. It’s the “dripping tap” influence. Hear it for long enough, and it becomes the norm.

Consider what proportion of these readers are also in Labour held marginal seats – is there a tabloid distribution correlation here? It’s easy to believe that a relatively small number of disgruntled readers can tip the balance in a Labour marginal.

Therefore I can only conclude that the host of this blog is well versed in understatement.

If Cameron wins next year, would the last person to leave the country please turn out the lights?

You’re right Tom, but that hasn’t stopped your political compadres doing exactly what you are advising against.

They ARE making Labour look bitter and . . .well? . . . nasty, really.

I hope you conveyed these wise words to your Dear Leader as, judging from his interview with Adam Boulton, he is going about this one all wrong.

More importantly: What is the girl on Page 3 saying about Gordon’s speech in News In Briefs?

Newspaper? I almost read it.

So The Sun doesnt shine on the righteous after all.

Personally I wouldn’t have said it’s so much of a blow as you think it is, because it had already happened informally a couple of years ago and we all knew it would “come out” at some point. Insofar as it does affect the way its readers vote, I think it already has – that may be one reason why you’re struggling so much in the polls.

That said, the timing could have been better…

The loss of The Sun’s support is a blow to Labour. It’s a setback.

Absolutely, Labour’s (and the PM’s) angry responses today show that it does matter to them even if they’re pretending it doesn’t.

After all if the Sun’s front page was irrelevant there would have been a collective shrug of the shoulders by Labour and a relatively inaudible; ‘so what?’.

Personally I think the electorate have already made up their minds: the Sun’s following not leading. Symbolically it’s important but I don’t think it will actually make a great deal of difference to eventual result.

Still; Labour, ferrets, sack – only a few months to go.

P.S. Tom with sensible posts like this why are you not PM?

@Math Campbell

Great news for News International. It’s Chairman and CEO, James Murdoch, is UK born. That’s that fox shot, burned and its ashes scattered to the four winds…

Unfortunately you can’t attack the sun’s readership because those braindead, knuckledragging neanderthals have the same vote as everybody else. Unfortunately

Tiffany (19) says : Gordon’s speech was a real disappointment for those hoping he’d retake the political centre ground.

The Sun backing the Conservatives is just the latest result of Gordon’s decision to abandon ‘the project’ (e.g. His and Tony’s attempt to make Labour electable by stealing all of the Conservative’s policies).

What is surprising is their timing, right after Gordo’s speech and designed to achieve maximum damage by eating into Labour’s conference coverage.

@ Colin

I think the subtext of Math Campbell’s plan was that British papers shouldn’t be owned by anyone with the surname Murdoch.

Now that Rupert Murdoch has come out for the Tories, I hope that GB agrees to the leaders debate conditional on it being shown exclusively on the BBC which most of us have access to.

The Sun supported Gordon Brown so he could destroy the Labour Party. Now they are confident he’ll finish the job on his own.

@ Ani

Sky already made it clear the they would offer it free to both the BBC and ITV.

By supporting the Blue Team instead of the Reds, the Sun is reinforcing the two-party state.

This should concern all of us who want both lots out the way so that their places might be taken by people who are wise, just and patriotic.

Well, it wasn’t quite that blatant a pitch…

Although that’s a good idea, law shouldn’t be aimed at specific people, it’s a bad idea, sadly.

Still, the idea that newspapers must be solely owned and operated by shareholders and management that are resident in the UK, to avoid undue foreign influence in our media is a good one IMHO.

Don’t know if it’s a direct consequence but YouGov has Labour halving the Tory lead (7%) plus 60+% of voters thought GB’s speach was a good or excellent.

Tories on 37 – surely this is the end for Cameron? He’s never really established himself as a strong leader, or one with ideas. Despite the economic situation, an anti-Brown media agenda and money flowing in, he’s never established the party on the 40%+ they need. And now this.

Will there be a challenge at the conference do you think? What’s the latest SP in the Westminster hot-house? Davis? Will Boris make his move now – or wait till after the election? Ken Clarke as a safe pair of hands – that could be dangerous for Labour.

We mustn’t become complacent though …

The Grim Reaper said earlier “Still, that won’t stop your comrades from doing that [kidding themselves that this doesn't matter] anyway…”

And to prove my point, what does Harriet Harman do? Ah yes – she uses conference to have a pop at the News In Briefs section. She clearly reads The Sun far more than she wants us to know.

The end result of this, is that the damage done by the Sun will come in two forms. Obviously the first damage is that what should have been the highlight of the Labour conference the leaders speech and the rise in Labour morale with hopefully a rise in the polls has been blunted. Gordon Browns policies are not being talked about on the news tonight but the decision of the Sun newspaper.

Still the second damage is more pervasive and though it is correct people do not read a newspaper to see who to vote for it still is a medium to pass ideas over. The longer that this medium has to push these ideas the more they become accepted. That means there is at maximum 7 months left before an election and with the conservatives also going to get a boost from there conference and Labour morale still blunted this may well have a bad result for Labour.

Of course there is another option. Labour is disunited and has had negative publicity it is also in effect the underdog. If Gordon Brown calls an election for the beginning of next year then he can make the campaigning season start. An election campaign will help to pull Labour together but also force Conservative policies to the fore and there they can be ripped into.

I am fatigued by the feverish speculation over the election, so here’s a poem:

Close now thine eyes and rest secure;
Thy soul is safe enough, thy body sure;
He that loves thee, He that keeps
And guards thee, never slumbers, never sleeps.
The smiling conscience in a sleeping breast
Has only peace, has only rest;
The music and the mirth of kings
Are all but very discords, when she sings;
Then close thine eyes and rest secure;
No sleep so sweet as thine, no rest so sure.

Francis Quarles

Goodnight, Tom

It’s all become embarrassing now. Even for those not involved the Labour conference is cringe-making.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6856017.ece

Really, it’s time to call an election and put the party out of it’s misery.

@ Pete b

The figures you’re quoting are from the “moving average” figures on yougov, based on people who said they would definitely watch Brown’s speech (e.g largely Labour supporters and supporters of Brown at that).

You can find extended coverage on politicalbetting.com where the poll is described as “meaningless” by their own polling team.

I wouldn’t uncork the bubbly just yet!

Pete B @10:26 PM

Don’t hold your breath, Pete…

The only things that are open to speculation now, are the size of the Tory majority and how long it’ll take for New Labour to implode, post election.

Pete B – sorry, you are misinterpreting the poll.

As one of the people who responded to it I said I’d watch the PM’s speech. And I did.

That doesn’t mean I’ll vote for him – in fact the reverse. If anything I am more in the ABL (Anyone but Labour) camp.

For me, I found the speech mainly a repetition of the past, rebranding of failed polices and a few awful curve balls (yes, lets really crucify the “middle classes” as that makes the party faithful happy).

Thankfully, only one more political speech to sit through. All this conference season has done is reinforce the need to get rid of many, many politicians.

I hope that GB agrees to the leaders debate conditional on it being shown exclusively on the BBC.
As for Labour imploding after the election? Were you around when pundits said that about the Tories in the run up to the 97 election?
Dream on.

@ Ani
re the ‘leaders debate’

Gordon still hasn’t bitten the bullet despite there being no real choice in the matter. If he bails then Sky have explicitly said that they will still run the debate (simulcast on the beeb and ITV) with DC, Cleggy and an empty podium.

Great quote from Dave who said he couldn’t work out if Gordon was bottling or dithering and that it was probably a mix of both.

I was never greatful for their support and although I would never touch the rag, being from Liverpool, I understand they haven’t been supportive for a long time.

They want to pick the leading horse which is understandable and the Labour Party is clearly not that, but don’t make of it more than it is. Come the day after the general election it wont be the Sun what won it.

@Pete B

What a difference a day makes:

Con 40
Lab 26
Lib Dem 20

As Politicalbetting makes clear polls during conference season are subject to artificial movements and should always be treated with caution.

http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2009/10/01/what-a-difference-a-day-makes/

I disagree.

Firstly this will help motivate the Labour party’s membership: if the Sun ain’t backing it, there must be something right with it.

Secondly most people have at least half a notion that The Sun, since Murdoch bought it, has tried to back what it predicts will be the Winner of a General Election (well since 1979, so not all that long after its purchase).

Thirdly some of its readers will see this as prevarication, although they may not use that word. Treachery is not popular, and some may take that view.

Their pouting trolling of the past: – “It was the Sun wot won it!” may well be resumed, to Labour’s advantage.

Coming out fighting, Tom?

I hope that GB agrees to the leader’s debate conditional on it being shown exclusively on the BBC, and chaired by Humphries.
And that he takes on Cameron and Clegg separately.
And yes, I know what Sky have said, and so all must kow tow to the dirty digger?
.

‘Great quote from Dave who said he couldn’t work out if Gordon was bottling or dithering and that it was probably a mix of both.’
And that’s a ‘great’ quote?
Still, for Dave, on Coulson’s day off, I suppose it is…

@ Ani

“I hope that GB agrees to the leader’s debate conditional on it being shown exclusively on the BBC, and chaired by Humphries.”

The two scenarios I see as possible are;

1) Gordon will publicly set a whole bunch of pre-conditions (specifically ones that can’t be met, like pre-vetting of all questions or that he debate Cameron only) and will then use Sky’s refusal as an excuse to bail. Result: An empty chair and Brown looks like a bottler.

2) Gordon will (at some point) accept the reality that the other opposition leaders have already accepted the debate and will reluctantly agree to show up.
Result : He will be publicly booed, grin like a chimp and have rings run round him by both Cameron and Clegg.

Pretty sad that someone with the guts to make his own decisions and announce them in his own time, rather than being bullied by supposedly grown up public school fags and monitors etc is accused of dithering etc.

I prefer individuals with such courage, over the herd of toadies Chameleon is proud of.

He was really miffed when he had to cut back on the Old Etonians in his shadow cabinet, and, funnily enough, it was the garagiste element of the younger Cons MPs which suffered most when he launched his laughable expenses clean up.

Anyone trust a man who marries the daughter of a fellow Bullingdon, appoints a fellow Bullingdon as his Leadership Campaign manager, and then Shadow Chancellor (in the face of all common sense) and calls on another Bullingdon to stand as Tory Candidate for London’s Mayor?

Somehow reminds me of a cartoon about the Beatles’ parrot . . .

Pre vet the questions? GB? The PM, to use a rather rude expression, knows the ins and outs of Meg’s ar$e, and it will be Coulson needing to vet the questions so that he can get Cameron coached and his cribs set up.
.

Quietzapple – used to read your comments on Cif ages ago, good to see you here. :0)
Agree with you at 7:19, membership has been increasing in my area for some time.

Having just returned from the conference, I think I can sum it up best by quoting the title of a recently released film.

The Damned. United.

@ Ani

Gordon doesn’t do ‘answering questions’, he does soundbites and tractor production statistics.

He’s frit because he knows that an any way decent moderator (Bolton, paxo, dimblebore, etc) will slap him down the second time he tries to evade a question by listing Labour’s supposed achievements over the past 12 years and Cameron will make him look stupid and incompetent by constantly quoting “zero percent rise”, “end to boom and bust”, etc back at him if he tries it.

More discussion on the leader’s debate at ConHome, and the comments are, as ever on there, interesting.

http://tinyurl.com/y9xwrbg

@ Liberanos

Well, the Damned certainly. I don’t know about the united part.

@ani

judging by the reaction to the Sun decision, if they lose the election, anything is possible.
Implosion may be the least of their worries…

@Ani Chameleon constantly opens himself to the charge of “prattling and blethering” of course. Glad membership is rising, I may rejoin myself, if they’ll have me.

I wonder which C i F incarnation you recall?

http://quietzapple-musing.blogspot.com/2009/07/comment-is-not-free.html & etc

@Richard

The desperate nature of the situation forced us all to cling together in our misery.

It will not last, I absolutely assure you.

A government needs a bunch of clever people setting strategy, planning policy, and making decisions. People like Gordon Brown.

The big problem for Labour, though, is that in politics the Leader needs to perform a different role.

In the modern world (and maybe it was ever thus) the leader’s role is really about managing the press and other media, because their take on things determines public opinion, which in turn determines whether the government is allowed to keep governing.

Unless I’m missing something, most voters don’t have detailed views on policy and are only vaguely aware of what the government has or hasn’t achieved. However, if the press consistently show pictures of Brown looking haggard and dazed, with headlines like “Labour’s lost it”, the public are given a pretty strong steer. The government look like losers, and in politics it’s not great to look like a loser.

That, IMHO, is the main reason why Blair won elections and Brown won’t. Blair’s round the clock love-bombing of media executives and newspaper editors delivered generally benign coverage and three Labour terms.

Tabloid newspapers are loathsome, but they’re immensely powerful in our democracy.

[...] the Sun is once again supporting the Conservatives, although not in Scotland just yet, if at all.  Tom Harris is big enough to admit that losing their support is a blow to Labour and Jeff says Gordon Brown is [...]