During the 2016 EU referendum campaign, an awful lot of dark money was being spent on advertising, and most of that advertising was for the Leave side. It was therefore no surprise when both Vote Leave and Leave EU were judged to have broken the law on campaign spending. But now that Brexit is under pressure as never before, the dark money is back. And once again, nobody is owning up as to who’s paying.
This time, as so often, it was not our free and fearless press who exposed the spending, but the New York Times, with one Tweeter observing “Over the past 10 months, an unknown organization spent more than 250,000 pounds on hardline pro-Brexit ads opposing Theresa May's negotiations with the EU. The ads reached 10-11 million people & disappeared suddenly this week”. Not exactly loose change, then.
TechCrunch picked this up, with editor-at-large Mike Butcher telling “Somebody out there - and no one knows who - has spent over £250,000 in less than a year to push pro-Brexit messages to over 10 million people in the UK. Who’s going to investigate this?”
To no surprise at all, this news then reached the Observer’s Carole Cadwalladr, who confirmed “Britain, 2018. An unknown donor has spent upwards of a quarter million £ to place these dark ads on Facebook seen by up to 10 million people. Nobody knows who paid for them. Only Facebook. And it’s not telling” and gave us a name: Mainstream.
Who they? Ah well. What we do know is who Mainstream is targeting, thanks to Mike Hind, who gave us a sample list of targeted MPs from last month. “Today's ads target the following (slightly revised) list of MPs. @GloriaDePiero @iainastewart @MaryRobinson01 @LauraSmithMP @DavidEvennett @NickBoles @JustinTomlinson @DamianCollins All activity hidden from public scrutiny by operating from behind a domain privacy service”.
Collins is being targeted because of his actions as head of the Commons DCMS Committee. Others, like Laura Smith who represents Crewe and Nantwich, is getting the treatment because her constituency is at present ultra-marginal and voted Leave (although the margin was smaller than the UK average).
The MPs are being urged to “ditch Chequers”. Fine, whoever is paying is entitled to take whatever political stance they wish. But as this is yet another attempt to intervene in the workings of Parliament, and the actions of our elected representatives, We The People are entitled to ask who is paying. And Mainstream has decided it won’t tell us.
But help is at hand: Facebook has just appointed one Nick Clegg, who has claimed he is joining the company “To build bridges between Politics and Tech”. Well, do we have an ideal first case for you to handle, Mr former Deputy Prime Minister (with a side order of being the man who single-handedly wrecked British Liberalism).
So how about it, Nick? Build us a bridge between your new tech (and the rumoured seven figure salary) and the politics you left behind. Ms Cadwalladr has all the information you need. What could be simpler in your efforts to rehabilitate Facebook?
Of course, Clegg could be full of crap. I’ll just leave that one there.
Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by adding to its Just Giving page at
Rest assured he'll be as full of crap in The New Bright Shiney Right Wing Grauniad as he was in government with the tories.
Especially when it comes to increasing education fees.
The fellow's a total hypocrite who got rumbled by the electorate and booted out. Which is why of course he's now employed at right wing Viner's Grauniad.
What do you mean Anonymous? Employed by the Guardian? Did you miss the point of all the recent press - that Nick Clegg is starting a new job with Facebook?
Lighten up touchy Carol dude and check out the seventh screen shot in this blog.
Anon - it is just an article written by him about his new job with Facebook, that is what the screen shot says, not that he is joining the Guardian too.
Anon at 21/10 13:38
If all opinion pieces in the Guardian are written by staff, the canteen must be pretty cramped.
I have read opinion pieces in the Guardian that have been written by the PM of Britain, the First Minister of Scotland, the Irish PM, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Secretary General of the UN, the President of the EU, the President of France, the German Chancellor and many others who hold high positions of office.
Anon at 00:20.
Nor did I say Cleggy was/is "joining" the Graun.
My original point still stands.
This really is at the ridiculous sophist low level now. So I'll leave you to it. The floor is yours, as it is for Gonzoland, cramped or not.
Anon at 22/10 11:02
So, your original point, "Which is why of course he's now employed at right wing Viner's Grauniad.", still stands?
Clegg isn't employed at the Guardian and he's never been employed at the Guardian.
Clearly, you do not understand how 'Guardian Opinions' operates. I gave you examples of people in high office who have had opinion pieces published in the Guardian who do not work for the newspaper, but you continue to fail to get it.
Gonzoland at 12:18.
Clearly you fail to understand the term "employed".
You could, for instance, ask the victims of "zero hours contracts" - though I doubt you would "get it" even then.
But, as said, this was bound to go down the sophist road......
Not that it makes one ha'aporth of difference to the utterly discredited reputations of Clegg or the Grauniad.
Anon at 15:27
You appear to have a different definition of "employed" to nearly everyone.
Clegg does not have a contract of employment with the Guardian and he has never had a contract of employment with the Guardian.
Under the Law of Employment in England & Wales, an employee has rights including the right to a written contract specifying terms and conditions. Those employed on zero hours contracts are entitled to a contract of employment in the same way as every other employee.
Maybe Clegg was paid for his piece or, maybe he wasn't. Either way, it does not make him employed by the Guardian. Clegg is no more an employee of the newspaper than you buying a painting from an artist's studio makes you the employer of the artist.
Post a Comment