Welcome To Zelo Street!

This is a blog of liberal stance and independent mind

Tuesday 12 November 2013

Mail’s Theresa May Hypocrisy

The Mail was beside itself with joy yesterday, as it found an ally in its constant fight against the hated Beeb: “BBC website is 'destroying' local newspapers and harming democracy, warns Home Secretary Theresa May” proclaimed the headline. The Home Secretary had suddenly become Very Bestest Friends with the legendarily foul mouthed Paul Dacre and his obedient hackery.
What's f***ing wrong with selective quoting, c***?!?

I use the term “suddenly” advisedly, as that band of hacks is at the same time leering at Ms May’s every appearance and making the entirely spurious comparison between her and model Cara Delevigne: “With each passing day, it is becoming more difficult for Ms May to continue to laugh off comparisons between her and fashion icon Cara Delivingne”. Oh f*** right off. This is idiotic.

Theresa May wears a strapless dress. Then she wears something with a pair of boots. Then a tartan pattern suit. Then the morons at Northcliffe House scour the Web for evidence of Cara Delevigne – who, as a model, by definition, wears, often briefly, a shed load of outfits, many of which she wouldn’t choose to wear if it was down to her – in something similar. That’s false equivalence, desperate journalism.

And not only is the Mail praising Ms May while trying to stir up mock horror over her wardrobe, but the hacks are also being highly selective with what they allow into print. Her speech to the Society of Editors’ annual conference also contained two significant items which do not fit the Vagina Monologue’s agenda. Both were left out of the Mail’s report. So here they are.
Anyone going anywhere near the Mail recently knows that the editorial line on the Snowden material being published by the deeply subversive Guardian is deemed to be “assisting the enemy. Ms May acknowledged yesterday that the “Guardian did go through processes at senior Government level before publishing Snowden leaks”. So much for the “irresponsible and harmful” meme, then.
And, worse for Paul Dacre and his crusade against properly independent press regulation, Evan Harris noted “Theresa May says that the Royal Charter system has no mechanism in it which can impact on newspaper content”. So much for the idea of politicians telling editors what they can and cannot print, and the much-trailed idea that the new system would involve prior restraint. It wouldn’t.

But all that the Mail reported was the supposed attack on the BBC. That’s a particularly extreme act of selective reporting, even for the Mail. And added to that is the constant suggestion that Ms May is dressing inappropriately, and so by inference may not be of totally sound judgment.

What a bunch of steaming hypocrites they have at Northcliffe House. No change there, then.


ngb said...

Clicked the link but couldn't go any further than the second sentence -
Warns it could "dangerous to the health of democratic politics"
Interesting approach to grammar there DM.
Oiky would have a fit.

rob said...

A guessing game for readers?

Q. What is the common link between The Daily Mail and Theresa May?

A.They may or may not be making it up.

That's not very "healthy for the health of democratic politics" either.

SteveB said...

BBC is legally bound to at least try to be honest and balanced.

Local newspapers can be as biased as their owners want them to be. Surely not good for the health of democratic politics?

Anyway, here in Crewe we don't have viable local papers. One has spent years simply sorting and placing text from press releases without any attempt to check facts (and then charges 80-odd-p a copy before giving it away as the free edtion next week), one has no real presence in Crewe and just rehashes stories from north cheshire to try and make them fit Crewe and the third isn't even from this region and just sticks a token Crewe story in to call it the Crewe edition. None will touch the story of "Edward Hunter" and the tax avoidance schemes that helped make him rich.