Interesting that both the Times & Mail have 'split ticketed' with the daily & Sunday publications opting for opposite sides of the vote (IN: Daily Times, Sunday Mail, OUT: Daily Mail, Sunday Times)
The MoS and Daily Mail are entirely different operations in different offices so it's not a split ticket. The two wings hate each other's guts. Take it from me. Well, if you will take anything from me but I do write for both papers.
I've always thought the MoS was a lot bitchier.
It pays me well so I don't care
I actually prefer writing for The Sun which I also do a lot: they're great.
I do enjoy the Sun, even the bad stuff isn't grim. The MoS has a whole tutting tone.
Yes that's very much my Agent's view. There's an honesty about The Sun and I find the people who dislike it tend to do so because they dislike Murdoch. It's very easy to get snobbish about The Sun but I generally prefer my dealings with them. I write for the Sunday Times and Telegraph too but always enjoy switching into Sun mode: it's a fun way to write I find them very easy to work with: fast, direct, no bullshit or snobbishness. It's good stuff!
I still miss NOTW. Used to buy that and ST or STele every week.
Interesting that both the Times & Mail have 'split ticketed' with the daily & Sunday publications opting for opposite sides of the vote (IN: Daily Times, Sunday Mail, OUT: Daily Mail, Sunday Times)
The MoS and Daily Mail are entirely different operations in different offices so it's not a split ticket. The two wings hate each other's guts. Take it from me. Well, if you will take anything from me but I do write for both papers.
I've always thought the MoS was a lot bitchier.
It pays me well so I don't care
I actually prefer writing for The Sun which I also do a lot: they're great.
I do enjoy the Sun, even the bad stuff isn't grim. The MoS has a whole tutting tone.
Yes that's very much my Agent's view. There's an honesty about The Sun and I find the people who dislike it tend to do so because they dislike Murdoch. It's very easy to get snobbish about The Sun but I generally prefer my dealings with them. I write for the Sunday Times and Telegraph too but always enjoy switching into Sun mode: it's a fun way to write I find them very easy to work with: fast, direct, no bullshit or snobbishness. It's good stuff!
In terms of writing I've long thought The Sun the best written paper out there - concise & pithy. The content on the other hand....
It's from Friday, thought it was interesting to compare the changes. I'm avoiding the news entirely now. It's so OTT.
Ah ok (and Carlotta)!
I think a lot of people have switched off and that shows in social media trends yesterday. We have two big non-political events on Monday: the England game and a potential humdinger GoT episode.
I'd caution about reading anything into polls during this febrile atmosphere. We're going to have two intense days of campaigning next week though
Interesting how little difference there now is between Remain & Leave voters in propensity to vote and likelihood of changing their minds. In attitudes too very little has changed in the past two weeks - views of politicians are already dire, or getting direr.
One shift did stand out:
Do you think you personally would be financially better or worse off if Britain left the European Union, or would it make no difference? (vs 11 days ago)
Here's a little anecdote. I once wrote a big feature for the Sunday Times and Rupert Murdoch pulled me in to meet his lawyers late on Saturday to clear it line by line. I was waiting on my own below when this flame of red descended the staircase. She stopped for some time and surveyed me with her take-you-to-bed eyes.
I'm starting to seethe with anger at the thought that Remain could win.
The lies on Turkey. The lies that no more powers will go to Brussels. The lies over our special protections. The moment ANY more power is handed to Brussels the Conservative Parliamentary Party must block at all costs and attempt to force another referendum. If it brings down the government and tears the Tory Party apart then do it.
If Remain are to win this on promising no more powers to Brussels and then proceed to hand over more powers, then we're entitled to have another referendum. False prospectus.
If my opponents were honest and argued for a federal Europe and closer union and I lost then fair enough. But what makes me so angry is how they'll lie through their teeth to us. My blood boils.
I feel sympathy with your anger, but both campaigns are selling a false prospectus.
As they would in any conceivable politically-rebooted universe - regardless of the subject of the referendum!
How is it possible that we can have 650 MPs, all, presumably, of average personal integrity, all starting out with reasonable motives, and yet what comes out as the end product is just lies, damn lies and tractor stats?
Ignorant voters.
Too facile, Edmund. There is nothing wrong with the voters. It is the system that rewards that sort of behaviour.
It's a democracy, the voters create the system. If they tell you the truth you won't vote for them, you vote for someone who tells you the lies you want to hear.
The voters only provide rewards to politicians once every five years. The rewards from the party system and the Westminster system are far more frequent, immediate and valuable to politicians than the 5-yearly mandate, and hence drive behaviour more.
The main goal of the parties is to get reelected. If the voters rewarded honesty, that's what the parties would be enforcing. The fact is that the voters reward dishonesty and punish honesty, which is why you get the same problems everywhere, regardless of the length of the election cycle.
But there is no choice between honesty and dishonesty. Just between dishonesty and dishonesty. And good luck with anyone trying to launch a third party.
Interesting how little difference there now is between Remain & Leave voters in propensity to vote and likelihood of changing their minds. In attitudes too very little has changed in the past two weeks - views of politicians are already dire, or getting direr.
One shift did stand out:
Do you think you personally would be financially better or worse off if Britain left the European Union, or would it make no difference? (vs 11 days ago)
Better off: 10 ( - ) Worse off: 33 (+10)
That is a notable change.
It slackens off with age and is very discernible among London ABs.
This is where some of the disconnect arises. London is so completely different to everywhere else in the UK.
Interesting that both the Times & Mail have 'split ticketed' with the daily & Sunday publications opting for opposite sides of the vote (IN: Daily Times, Sunday Mail, OUT: Daily Mail, Sunday Times)
The MoS and Daily Mail are entirely different operations in different offices so it's not a split ticket. The two wings hate each other's guts. Take it from me. Well, if you will take anything from me but I do write for both papers.
I've always thought the MoS was a lot bitchier.
It pays me well so I don't care
I actually prefer writing for The Sun which I also do a lot: they're great.
I do enjoy the Sun, even the bad stuff isn't grim. The MoS has a whole tutting tone.
Yes that's very much my Agent's view. There's an honesty about The Sun and I find the people who dislike it tend to do so because they dislike Murdoch. It's very easy to get snobbish about The Sun but I generally prefer my dealings with them. I write for the Sunday Times and Telegraph too but always enjoy switching into Sun mode: it's a fun way to write I find them very easy to work with: fast, direct, no bullshit or snobbishness. It's good stuff!
I still miss NOTW. Used to buy that and ST or STele every week.
For all its faults (not so grave compared to Mirror Group) the NOTW did have some genuine newsy scoops - at least its successor will outlast the Observer/Grauniad in print.
Interesting how little difference there now is between Remain & Leave voters in propensity to vote and likelihood of changing their minds. In attitudes too very little has changed in the past two weeks - views of politicians are already dire, or getting direr.
One shift did stand out:
Do you think you personally would be financially better or worse off if Britain left the European Union, or would it make no difference? (vs 11 days ago)
Better off: 10 ( - ) Worse off: 33 (+10)
That is a notable change.
It slackens off with age and is very discernible among London ABs.
This is where some of the disconnect arises. London is so completely different to everywhere else in the UK.
Which tallies with SeanT's angst.
My guess is that next week will be economy vs immigration. It'll only need another migrant boat story to swing things again. But who knows?
Interesting how little difference there now is between Remain & Leave voters in propensity to vote and likelihood of changing their minds. In attitudes too very little has changed in the past two weeks - views of politicians are already dire, or getting direr.
One shift did stand out:
Do you think you personally would be financially better or worse off if Britain left the European Union, or would it make no difference? (vs 11 days ago)
Better off: 10 ( - ) Worse off: 33 (+10)
That is a notable change.
It slackens off with age and is very discernible among London ABs.
This is where some of the disconnect arises. London is so completely different to everywhere else in the UK.
It'll only need another migrant boat story to swing things again. But who knows?
But there is no choice between honesty and dishonesty. Just between dishonesty and dishonesty. And good luck with anyone trying to launch a third party.
Where I came in was that AnneJGP was wondering why these reasonably honest, well-meaning people ended up resulting in this consistently dishonest end product. I don't think you can answer that with, "The main parties are dishonest". I think you have to ask what makes the main parties dishonest. And the answer is that dishonesty is incentivized by the voters.
Thinking about the rest of the European Union, if Britain votes to leave do you think they will... Be favourable in making deals with Britain (net) REMAIN: -58 LEAVE: +50
Touching optimism, or haven't fallen for scare stories?
Looking at the new 3 vs 3 tv debate lineup. REMAIN are clearly in panic mode. They even add a male. But how will the big 2 issues now go? Who on the REMAIN side can talk knowledgeably on the UK Economy? Answer none. Sadiq and the TUC lady will disown Osborne's emergency budget and attack austerity. An own goal. Ruth will suck that up and risk talking on UK matters with just Scots examples. Middle england shudders.
Who on REMAIN can say anything attractive to immigration concerns? Answer none. GiselIe can empathise with promises for LEAVE and REMAIN will promise .... no hope of change.
They could always go with Gove's ringing endorsement:
I don’t think there will be a recession as a result of a vote to leave.
Like the Sunday front pages much?
These adverts with a Pic of Cameron and Osborne with a "Wipe the smile off their faces" heading may have more effect than whatever newspaper headlines are.
You do realise that advert is personally targeted, don't you?*
Yes. But my browsing history rarely strays into Labour/leftie areas except the BBC..... and PB.
It appeared for me the first time I loaded PB while back in the UK.
But there is no choice between honesty and dishonesty. Just between dishonesty and dishonesty. And good luck with anyone trying to launch a third party.
And the answer is that dishonesty is incentivized by the voters.
If voters want to modify politicians' behaviour they need to change what they reward.....
Thinking about the rest of the European Union, if Britain votes to leave do you think they will... Be favourable in making deals with Britain (net) REMAIN: -58 LEAVE: +50
Touching optimism, or haven't fallen for scare stories?
I don't think there is a right or wrong answer with this. People are making assessments based on their reading of probabilities and it is possible to see arguments on both sides as to why deals may or may not be done, and how quickly they will be struck.
It is interesting that people do not favour an immediate dash for the exit without sensible negotiation. It is also interesting to see the percentage of people open to a second referendum if a new deal arises.
Morning all. Interesting to see the MoS come out all guns blazing for Remain, whereas the DM is all guns blazing for Leave. The Times titles have their own views but generally put both sides of the story.
It's said that tabloid writing is actually much more difficult, having to write concisely while only using a small subset of the dictionary and thesaurus to get what might be a complicated point across to an uneducated audience. It also shows why in 2010 the new PM was prepared to burn political capital to keep his former tabloid editor advisor on his team despite the scandal.
Thinking about the rest of the European Union, if Britain votes to leave do you think they will... Be favourable in making deals with Britain (net) REMAIN: -58 LEAVE: +50
Touching optimism, or haven't fallen for scare stories?
I don't think there is a right or wrong answer with this. People are making assessments based on their reading of probabilities and it is possible to see arguments on both sides as to why deals may or may not be done, and how quickly they will be struck.
It is interesting that people do not favour an immediate dash for the exit without sensible negotiation. It is also interesting to see the percentage of people open to a second referendum if a new deal arises.
The hesitancy over dash to exit is driven by REMAIN - LEAVE are net in favour of a swift exit.
On the statement "Leave the European Union quickly, within a year or two, even if this means negotiations over our exit are hurried", only 49% of Leavers give backing.
The remainder either don't know or favour a more diligent negotiation.
On the statement "Leave the European Union quickly, within a year or two, even if this means negotiations over our exit are hurried", only 49% of Leavers give backing.
The remainder either don't know or favour a more diligent negotiation.
"Only" 49% favour swift exit? I'd say that's darn close to a majority....and if we exclude Don't knows it's a clear majority.
Interesting how little difference there now is between Remain & Leave voters in propensity to vote and likelihood of changing their minds. In attitudes too very little has changed in the past two weeks - views of politicians are already dire, or getting direr.
One shift did stand out:
Do you think you personally would be financially better or worse off if Britain left the European Union, or would it make no difference? (vs 11 days ago)
Better off: 10 ( - ) Worse off: 33 (+10)
That is a notable change.
It slackens off with age and is very discernible among London ABs.
This is where some of the disconnect arises. London is so completely different to everywhere else in the UK.
I'm starting to seethe with anger at the thought that Remain could win.
The lies on Turkey. The lies that no more powers will go to Brussels. The lies over our special protections. The moment ANY more power is handed to Brussels the Conservative Parliamentary Party must block at all costs and attempt to force another referendum. If it brings down the government and tears the Tory Party apart then do it.
If Remain are to win this on promising no more powers to Brussels and then proceed to hand over more powers, then we're entitled to have another referendum. False prospectus.
If my opponents were honest and argued for a federal Europe and closer union and I lost then fair enough. But what makes me so angry is how they'll lie through their teeth to us. My blood boils.
I feel sympathy with your anger, but both campaigns are selling a false prospectus.
As they would in any conceivable politically-rebooted universe - regardless of the subject of the referendum!
How is it possible that we can have 650 MPs, all, presumably, of average personal integrity, all starting out with reasonable motives, and yet what comes out as the end product is just lies, damn lies and tractor stats?
Ignorant voters.
Too facile, Edmund. There is nothing wrong with the voters. It is the system that rewards that sort of behaviour.
It's a democracy, the voters create the system. If they tell you the truth you won't vote for them, you vote for someone who tells you the lies you want to hear.
The voters only provide rewards to politicians once every five years. The rewards from the party system and the Westminster system are far more frequent, immediate and valuable to politicians than the 5-yearly mandate, and hence drive behaviour more.
The main goal of the parties is to get reelected. If the voters rewarded honesty, that's what the parties would be enforcing. The fact is that the voters reward dishonesty and punish honesty, which is why you get the same problems everywhere, regardless of the length of the election cycle.
But there is no choice between honesty and dishonesty. Just between dishonesty and dishonesty. And good luck with anyone trying to launch a third party.
Don't be ridculous.
You get to choose between blue dishonesty, pink dishonesty and yellow dishonesty
But there is no choice between honesty and dishonesty. Just between dishonesty and dishonesty. And good luck with anyone trying to launch a third party.
Where I came in was that AnneJGP was wondering why these reasonably honest, well-meaning people ended up resulting in this consistently dishonest end product. I don't think you can answer that with, "The main parties are dishonest". I think you have to ask what makes the main parties dishonest. And the answer is that dishonesty is incentivized by the voters.
Yes and no. Voters respond really well to carefully explained honest views, and will vote for you because you took the trouble even if they don't agree with all of them. But it's not possible in today's media to have a detailed discussion of the issues, and if it boils down to tabloid headlines that voters will just glance at, then dishonest scare stories is what politicians have found get most coverage, are most read by voters and have most effect.
Take education. The realistic truth is that government action is only one lever among many (parental guidance, social culture, etc.) and a really good schools policy will only bump up actual exam results by a few per cent, though it might have extra long-term benefits. But you'll never get any coverage for saying "We can reaonably hope that our policies will improve exam results by 4%". If, however, you say "We will transform the future for our children, and our opponents will set the next generation back with DISASTROUS consequences", the papers will cover it, people will glance at it and you'll get some votes. Even though everyone involved - you, the media, the voters - know it's at best an exaggeration and possibly dishonest, the voters get the drift and feel you're probably partly right. EiT is right that if exaggeration and even dishonesty had a negative effect with voters, people would stop doing it.
Comments
I think a lot of people have switched off and that shows in social media trends yesterday. We have two big non-political events on Monday: the England game and a potential humdinger GoT episode.
I'd caution about reading anything into polls during this febrile atmosphere. We're going to have two intense days of campaigning next week though
Interesting how little difference there now is between Remain & Leave voters in propensity to vote and likelihood of changing their minds. In attitudes too very little has changed in the past two weeks - views of politicians are already dire, or getting direr.
One shift did stand out:
Do you think you personally would be financially better or worse off if Britain left the European Union, or would it make no difference? (vs 11 days ago)
Better off: 10 ( - )
Worse off: 33 (+10)
And that was the first time I met Rebekah Wade.
It slackens off with age and is very discernible among London ABs.
This is where some of the disconnect arises. London is so completely different to everywhere else in the UK.
My guess is that next week will be economy vs immigration. It'll only need another migrant boat story to swing things again. But who knows?
Thinking about the rest of the European Union, if Britain votes to leave do you think they will...
Be favourable in making deals with Britain (net)
REMAIN: -58
LEAVE: +50
Touching optimism, or haven't fallen for scare stories?
It is interesting that people do not favour an immediate dash for the exit without sensible negotiation. It is also interesting to see the percentage of people open to a second referendum if a new deal arises.
It's said that tabloid writing is actually much more difficult, having to write concisely while only using a small subset of the dictionary and thesaurus to get what might be a complicated point across to an uneducated audience. It also shows why in 2010 the new PM was prepared to burn political capital to keep his former tabloid editor advisor on his team despite the scandal.
The remainder either don't know or favour a more diligent negotiation.
You might want to do that anyway
You get to choose between blue dishonesty, pink dishonesty and yellow dishonesty
Take education. The realistic truth is that government action is only one lever among many (parental guidance, social culture, etc.) and a really good schools policy will only bump up actual exam results by a few per cent, though it might have extra long-term benefits. But you'll never get any coverage for saying "We can reaonably hope that our policies will improve exam results by 4%". If, however, you say "We will transform the future for our children, and our opponents will set the next generation back with DISASTROUS consequences", the papers will cover it, people will glance at it and you'll get some votes. Even though everyone involved - you, the media, the voters - know it's at best an exaggeration and possibly dishonest, the voters get the drift and feel you're probably partly right. EiT is right that if exaggeration and even dishonesty had a negative effect with voters, people would stop doing it.