Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Corbyn & Cabinet in the Media

Cat Smith just handled an interview with Newman on C4 brilliantly. Newman was almost hysterical in her swiping at Corbyn, talk about daggers out. Cat remained calm, coherent and convincing in her responses, well done to her.

She was really good on Newsnight on Monday as well, politely pointing out the (many) flaws in an Ayesha Hazarika piece of the "Corbyn Hates Women" / Harman / pink limo kind.
 
Give it a few months and it'll be why does mad men hating Corbyn favour women. I would take any wager against it.


T+C's apply.
 
do you seriously think if he plays ball and smiles and does interviews and oh so perfectly timed leaks etc etc the press attitude will change?

I suspect that Corbyn is taking the view that the media-consuming public will get sick to their back teeth with the bullshit, and that some will vote with their feet. Falling circulation figures and viewer/listener numbers will motivate even the most right-wing media barons.
 
Hes doing well - pity he didn't have in anyone in the Tower to top

Now are our brows bound with victorious wreaths;
Our bruised arms hung up for monuments;
Our stern alarums changed to merry meetings,
Our dreadful marches to delightful measures.
Grim-visaged war hath smooth'd his wrinkled front;
And now, instead of mounting barded steeds
To fright the souls of fearful adversaries,
He capers nimbly in a lady's chamber
To the lascivious pleasing of a lute.

Ah some Co-op car park beckons......
 
I'd never heard of Progress before today, so I looked em up on twitter. Many retweets much like this:



Not right wing, not conservative, but socialist. Ok, so I go to their web site to have a look round, and found this article from the recently published list.

Radicalism is not the same as anti-capitalism | Progress | News and debate from the progressive community
Capitalism can be a difficult subject for the left. Attitudes tend to range from those who are downright hostile through to the moderately suspicious. Sometimes those who see genuine positives in a capitalist system are challenged as to how they can even describe themselves as left wing. No wonder that we often just focus policy and debate on our traditional areas of strength in the public sector. Yet in Britain today, market-driven private firms accounts for around 60 per cent of GDP and 80 per cent of employment. They are just as essential to Britain as the public sector. Unless we truly believe that the state should control all the means of production (a view which surely has no place in the Labour party) then ignoring it is as ridiculous as deciding to ignore one of your legs.

Forgetting for a second the obvious false dichotomy of "Either capitalist OR everything state owned" with no mention of co-ops and unions and forgetting the the state can own nothing and it could still not be "responsible capitalism", how does the above tweeter bridge the gap between calling himself a socialist, whilst clearly believing in small-c capitalism?

The doublethink is unbelievable really. Genuinely perplexed.

John McDonnell is spot on. For a group built on socialist values, anyone belonging to this group would be to the right of that group.
 
Names will be , shambles won't

People paying attention will remember an entirely manufactured controversy, and people who are not paying attention won't even recall a reshuffle happening.

Indeed. There's a manufactured controversy of some sort almost every time there's a reshuffle, Cabinet or Shadow, and it's always forgotten immediately. This one feel exaggerated because of the Get Corbyn onslaught, and the fact that Cameron doesn't move his pawns around as often as the previous few PMs (didn't Blair do it several times a year?), but it's not that different.
 
The reshuffle was presented as a fiasco and also to divert the public's attention away from anything that is a thorn in the side of the Tories this week. No doubt next week we will witness more diversion tactics, perhaps a cold snap or refugees.
 
Forgetting for a second the obvious false dichotomy of "Either capitalist OR everything state owned" with no mention of co-ops and unions and forgetting the the state can own nothing and it could still not be "responsible capitalism", how does the above tweeter bridge the gap between calling himself a socialist, whilst clearly believing in small-c capitalism?

The doublethink is unbelievable really. Genuinely perplexed.

John McDonnell is spot on. For a group built on socialist values, anyone belonging to this group would be to the right of that group.
it isn't doublethink (although no doubt some of them are in denial about their actual politics), it's rhetoric: ensuring it's they who're thought of as the reasonable centre/left part of the party, and those criticising them hysterical, hateful trotskyists.
 
it isn't doublethink (although no doubt some of them are in denial about their actual politics), it's rhetoric: ensuring it's they who're thought of as the reasonable centre/left part of the party, and those criticising them hysterical, hateful trotskyists.
yeh but they can't be the centre of the party as there aren't that many people to the right of them in the labour party.
 
Forgetting for a second the obvious false dichotomy of "Either capitalist OR everything state owned" with no mention of co-ops and unions and forgetting the the state can own nothing and it could still not be "responsible capitalism", how does the above tweeter bridge the gap between calling himself a socialist, whilst clearly believing in small-c capitalism?
pretty much the first thing i was ever taught in economics was that there are no pure market economies or command economies but varying degrees of mixed economy: and that was round the time i was 12 or 13. surprised yer man doesn't know that.
 
Indeed. There's a manufactured controversy of some sort almost every time there's a reshuffle, Cabinet or Shadow, and it's always forgotten immediately. This one feel exaggerated because of the Get Corbyn onslaught, and the fact that Cameron doesn't move his pawns around as often as the previous few PMs (didn't Blair do it several times a year?), but it's not that different.
Reading between the lines, what happened what happened was a barrage from both sides over what was going to happen in a reshuffle. Journos have already admitted getting the Benn will be sacked stories from Livingston, Abbot and Milne. As its over Xmas and there was not a lot going on officially, the Blairites had a chance to counter plot....A threat of one out all out if Benn et all went. Much arguing....but Corbyn tested water with first sacking (already forgotten his name) , unprecedented twitter endorsements of the sacked bloke from rest of shadow cabinet. So change of tack rather than sack, change jobs where possible , and only sack the also men...still some other also men stuck to the one out all out...


That's not really a 'manufactured' controversy, certainly not by the media at any rate. If you don't do politics, and most people don't really, its just one of those things, but if you are one of those people who does politics, even if its just colouring in the bottom half of the internet. It was an event of some significance.
 
Reading between the lines, what happened what happened was a barrage from both sides over what was going to happen in a reshuffle. Journos have already admitted getting the Benn will be sacked stories from Livingston, Abbot and Milne. As its over Xmas and there was not a lot going on officially, the Blairites had a chance to counter plot....A threat of one out all out if Benn et all went. Much arguing....but Corbyn tested water with first sacking (already forgotten his name) , unprecedented twitter endorsements of the sacked bloke from rest of shadow cabinet. So change of tack rather than sack, change jobs where possible , and only sack the also men...still some other also men stuck to the one out all out...


That's not really a 'manufactured' controversy, certainly not by the media at any rate. If you don't do politics, and most people don't really, its just one of those things, but if you are one of those people who does politics, even if its just colouring in the bottom half of the internet. It was an event of some significance.
The media coverage was, to some extent, manufactured though. A huge smoke-screen was raised around Cameron's massive 'u-turn' and concession to rescind cabinet collectively responsibility for his ministers in the EU referendum campaign. No. 10 clearly used the Lab reshuffle media maelstrom as cover/distraction.
 
Last edited:
The media coverage was, to some extent, manufactured though. A huge smoke-screen was raised around Cameron's massive 'u-turn' and concession to rescind cabinet collectively responsibility for his ministers in the EU referendum campaign. No. 10 clearly used the Lab reshuffle media maelstrom as cover/distraction.

Need to get over it. Labour want to run the country and therefore deserve scrutiny.

What's not acceptable is presenting the story with bias and agenda. But making it a big story isn't that because it's still so unclear as to what the Labour Party will look like when it emerges from this turmoil. That's surely a big event in the small world of UK Politics.
 
pretty much the first thing i was ever taught in economics was that there are no pure market economies or command economies but varying degrees of mixed economy: and that was round the time i was 12 or 13. surprised yer man doesn't know that.

i imagine that the purest socialised economy, the type that i would welcome, would necessarily feature vibrant locality based services (various shops cafes etc) . State ownership should probably be limited to (until such a time when the need for a state had gone) banks energy transportation health and welfare care and perhaps a few other major industrial processes.

Others may prefer a different balance, but the essential thing has to be economic democratic procedures to enable everyone to have their say in that balance.

i'm now beginning to wonder if my natural home is within Progress? or maybe i ought to remain in the asylum..
 
The media coverage was, to some extent, manufactured though. A huge smoke-screen was raised around Cameron's massive 'u-turn' and concession to rescind cabinet collectively responsibility for his ministers in the EU referendum campaign. No. 10 clearly used the Lab reshuffle media maelstrom as cover/distraction.

Labour would have known that Cameron's statement on EU was pencilled in before Xmas, as would have been the mayoral launch. Putting a reshuffle in the mix is their error not Cameron's. I do suspect however, the delay on the Tuesday of announcing after the print editions came out, was a well its late now but if we make it even later the print edition will have to run harder with the Tory EU thing. Which they did.
 
Need to get over it. Labour want to run the country and therefore deserve scrutiny.

What's not acceptable is presenting the story with bias and agenda. But making it a big story isn't that because it's still so unclear as to what the Labour Party will look like when it emerges from this turmoil. That's surely a big event in the small world of UK Politics.

Nah, rail fare hikes, the sell off of social housing, NHS morale being at an all time low and the UK being embroiled in yet another pointless, unwinnable war are big issues. They have important ramifications in the lives of ordinary people. Corbyn removing a disloyal non-entity from a role that is pretty much the political equivalent of milk monitor at school is only of interest within the Westminster bubble and to PPE bores with blogs.
 
That's not really a 'manufactured' controversy, certainly not by the media at any rate. If you don't do politics, and most people don't really, its just one of those things, but if you are one of those people who does politics, even if its just colouring in the bottom half of the internet. It was an event of some significance.

Maybe it's a bit of both. I 'do' politics, and have had jobs in the past where I had to attend to every in and out of this kind of thing, although I spend plenty of time colouring in too. A lot of things which might feel significant when you immerse yourself like that turn out not to be in the longer run. Time will tell...
 
with killary muzzled, danczuk in the Beasts Corner and a half-hearted round of resignations it hasn't been that bad a re shuffle surely? Certainl the resistance has proven rather limp so far
 
Moving forward though, Corbyn isn't going to be able to remove the more entrenched Blairite big beasts without sacrificing one of his wannbe weathermonger allies.
 
Back
Top Bottom