From news hound to feral beast...
The following (in ST, Thurs 14 Jun) is excerpted from a speech made on Tuesday in London by British Prime Minister Tony Blair on public life and the media
A FREE media is a vital part of a free society. You only need to look at where such a free media is absent to know this truth. But it is also part of freedom to be able to comment on the media. It has a complete right to be free. I, like anyone else, have a complete right to speak.
My principal reflection is not about 'blaming' anyone. It is that the relationship between politics, public life and the media is changing as a result of the changing context of communication in which we all operate. No one is at fault - it is a fact. But it is my view that the effect of this change is seriously adverse to the way public life is conducted; and that we need, at the least, a proper and considered debate about how we manage the future, in which it is in all our interests that the public is properly and accurately informed. They are the priority and they are not well served by the current state of affairs.
I first acknowledge my own complicity. We paid inordinate attention in the early days of New Labour to courting, assuaging and persuading the media. In our own defence, after 18 years of Opposition and the, at times, ferocious hostility of parts of the media, it was hard to see any alternative. But such an attitude ran the risk of fuelling the trends in communications that I am about to question.
From Stanley Baldwin's statement about 'power without responsibility being the prerogative of the harlot through the ages' back to the often extraordinarily brutal treatment meted out to Gladstone and Disraeli through to Harold Wilson's complaints of the 60s, the relations between politics and the media are, and are by necessity, difficult. It's as it should be.
The question is: Is it qualitatively and quantitatively different today? I think yes.
Why? Because the objective circumstances in which the world of communications operates today are radically altered.
I am going to say something that few people in public life will say, but most know is absolutely true: A vast aspect of our jobs today is coping with the media, its sheer scale, weight and constant hyperactivity. At points, it literally overwhelms.
Talk to senior people in virtually any walk of life today - business, military, public services, sport, even charities and voluntary organisations - and they will tell you the same. People don't speak about it because, in the main, they are afraid to. But it is true, nonetheless, and those who have been around long enough, will also say it has changed significantly in the past years.
The danger is, however, that we then commit the same mistake as the media do with us: It's the fault of bad people. My point is: It is not the people who have changed; it is the context within which they work.
We devote reams of space to debating why there is so much cynicism about politics and public life. In this, the politicians are obliged to go into self-flagellation, admitting it is all our fault. Actually not to have a proper press operation nowadays is like asking a batsman to face body-line bowling without pads or headgear.
My view is that the real reason for the cynicism is precisely the way politics and the media today interact. We, in the world of politics, because we are worried about saying this, play along with the notion it is all our fault. So I introduced first, lobby briefings on the record; then published the minutes; then gave monthly press conferences; then Freedom of Information; then became the first Prime Minister to go to the Select Committee's Chairman's session; and so on.
None of it to any avail, not because these things aren't right, but because they don't deal with the central issue: how politics is reported.
There is now, again, a debate about why Parliament is not considered more important and, as ever, the government is held to blame. But we haven't altered any of the lines of accountability between Parliament and the Executive. What has changed is the way Parliament is reported or rather not reported. Tell me how many maiden speeches are listened to; how many excellent second reading speeches or committee speeches are covered. Except when they generate major controversy, they aren't.
If you are a backbench MP today, you learn to give a press release first and a good Parliamentary speech second.
My case, however, is: There's no point either in blaming the media. We are both handling the changing nature of communication. The sooner we recognise this, the better, because we can then debate a sensible way forward.
The reality is that as a result of the changing context in which 21st century communications operates, the media are facing a hugely more intense form of competition than anything they have ever experienced before. They are not the masters of this change but its victims.
The result is a media that increasingly and to a dangerous degree is driven by 'impact'. Impact is what matters. It is all that can distinguish, can rise above the clamour, can get noticed. Impact gives competitive edge. Of course the accuracy of a story counts. But it is secondary to impact.
Broadsheets today face the same pressures as tabloids; broadcasters increasingly the same pressures as broadsheets. The audience needs to be arrested, held and their emotions engaged. Something that is interesting is less powerful than something that makes you angry or shocked.
The consequences of this are acute. First, scandal or controversy beats ordinary reporting hands down. News is rarely news unless it generates heat as much as or more than light.
Second, attacking motive is far more potent than attacking judgment. It is not enough for someone to make an error. It has to be venal. Conspiratorial.
Third, the fear of missing out means today's media, more than ever before, hunts in a pack. In these modes it is like a feral beast, just tearing people and reputations to bits. But no one dares miss out.
Fourth, rather than just report news, even if sensational or controversial, the new technique is commentary on the news being as, if not more important than the news itself. So - for example - there will often be as much interpretation of what a politician is saying as there is coverage of them actually saying it. In the interpretation, what matters is not what they mean, but what they could be taken to mean. This leads to the incredibly frustrating pastime of expending a large amount of energy rebutting claims about the significance of things said, that bears little or no relation to what was intended.
In turn, this leads to a fifth point: the confusion of news and commentary.
Comment is a perfectly respectable part of journalism. But it is supposed to be separate. Opinion and fact should be clearly divisible. The truth is a large part of the media today not merely elides the two but does so now as a matter of course. In other words, this is not exceptional. It is routine.
The final consequence of all of this is that it is rare today to find balance in the media. Things, people, issues, stories, are all black and white. Life's usual grey is almost entirely absent. 'Some good, some bad'; 'some things going right, some going wrong': these are concepts alien to today's reporting. It's a triumph or a disaster. A problem is 'a crisis'. A setback is a policy 'in tatters'. A criticism, 'a savage attack'.
NGOs and pundits know that unless they are prepared to go over the top, they shouldn't venture out at all. Talk to any public service leader and they will tell you not that they mind the criticism, but they become totally demoralised by the completely unbalanced nature of it.
Is it becoming worse? Again, I would say, yes. In my 10 years, I've noticed all these elements evolve with ever greater momentum.
It used to be thought - and I include myself in this - that help was on the horizon. New forms of communication would provide new outlets to bypass the increasingly shrill tenor of the traditional media. In fact, the new forms can be even more pernicious, less balanced, more intent on the latest conspiracy theory multiplied by five.
But here is also the opportunity. At present, we are all being dragged down by the way media and public life interact. Trust in journalists is not much above that in politicians. There is a market in providing serious, balanced news. There is a desire for impartiality. The way that people get their news may be changing, but the thirst for the news being real news is not.
The media will fear any retreat from impact will mean diminishing sales. But the opposite is the case. They need to re-assert their own selling point: the distinction between news and comment.
It is sometimes said that the media is accountable daily through the choice of readers and viewers. That is true up to a point. But the reality is that the viewers or readers have no objective yardstick to measure what they are being told. In every other walk of life in our society that exercises power, there are external forms of accountability, not least through the media itself.
So it is true politicians are accountable through the ballot box every few years. But they are also profoundly accountable, daily, through the media, which is why a free press is so important.
I am not in a position to determine this one way or another. But a way needs to be found. I do believe this relationship between public life and media is now damaged in a manner that requires repair.
I've made this speech after much hesitation. I know it will be rubbished in certain quarters. But I also know this has needed to be said.
My principal reflection is not about 'blaming' anyone. It is that the relationship between politics, public life and the media is changing as a result of the changing context of communication in which we all operate. No one is at fault - it is a fact. But it is my view that the effect of this change is seriously adverse to the way public life is conducted; and that we need, at the least, a proper and considered debate about how we manage the future, in which it is in all our interests that the public is properly and accurately informed. They are the priority and they are not well served by the current state of affairs.
I first acknowledge my own complicity. We paid inordinate attention in the early days of New Labour to courting, assuaging and persuading the media. In our own defence, after 18 years of Opposition and the, at times, ferocious hostility of parts of the media, it was hard to see any alternative. But such an attitude ran the risk of fuelling the trends in communications that I am about to question.
From Stanley Baldwin's statement about 'power without responsibility being the prerogative of the harlot through the ages' back to the often extraordinarily brutal treatment meted out to Gladstone and Disraeli through to Harold Wilson's complaints of the 60s, the relations between politics and the media are, and are by necessity, difficult. It's as it should be.
The question is: Is it qualitatively and quantitatively different today? I think yes.
Why? Because the objective circumstances in which the world of communications operates today are radically altered.
I am going to say something that few people in public life will say, but most know is absolutely true: A vast aspect of our jobs today is coping with the media, its sheer scale, weight and constant hyperactivity. At points, it literally overwhelms.
Talk to senior people in virtually any walk of life today - business, military, public services, sport, even charities and voluntary organisations - and they will tell you the same. People don't speak about it because, in the main, they are afraid to. But it is true, nonetheless, and those who have been around long enough, will also say it has changed significantly in the past years.
The danger is, however, that we then commit the same mistake as the media do with us: It's the fault of bad people. My point is: It is not the people who have changed; it is the context within which they work.
We devote reams of space to debating why there is so much cynicism about politics and public life. In this, the politicians are obliged to go into self-flagellation, admitting it is all our fault. Actually not to have a proper press operation nowadays is like asking a batsman to face body-line bowling without pads or headgear.
My view is that the real reason for the cynicism is precisely the way politics and the media today interact. We, in the world of politics, because we are worried about saying this, play along with the notion it is all our fault. So I introduced first, lobby briefings on the record; then published the minutes; then gave monthly press conferences; then Freedom of Information; then became the first Prime Minister to go to the Select Committee's Chairman's session; and so on.
None of it to any avail, not because these things aren't right, but because they don't deal with the central issue: how politics is reported.
There is now, again, a debate about why Parliament is not considered more important and, as ever, the government is held to blame. But we haven't altered any of the lines of accountability between Parliament and the Executive. What has changed is the way Parliament is reported or rather not reported. Tell me how many maiden speeches are listened to; how many excellent second reading speeches or committee speeches are covered. Except when they generate major controversy, they aren't.
If you are a backbench MP today, you learn to give a press release first and a good Parliamentary speech second.
My case, however, is: There's no point either in blaming the media. We are both handling the changing nature of communication. The sooner we recognise this, the better, because we can then debate a sensible way forward.
The reality is that as a result of the changing context in which 21st century communications operates, the media are facing a hugely more intense form of competition than anything they have ever experienced before. They are not the masters of this change but its victims.
The result is a media that increasingly and to a dangerous degree is driven by 'impact'. Impact is what matters. It is all that can distinguish, can rise above the clamour, can get noticed. Impact gives competitive edge. Of course the accuracy of a story counts. But it is secondary to impact.
Broadsheets today face the same pressures as tabloids; broadcasters increasingly the same pressures as broadsheets. The audience needs to be arrested, held and their emotions engaged. Something that is interesting is less powerful than something that makes you angry or shocked.
The consequences of this are acute. First, scandal or controversy beats ordinary reporting hands down. News is rarely news unless it generates heat as much as or more than light.
Second, attacking motive is far more potent than attacking judgment. It is not enough for someone to make an error. It has to be venal. Conspiratorial.
Third, the fear of missing out means today's media, more than ever before, hunts in a pack. In these modes it is like a feral beast, just tearing people and reputations to bits. But no one dares miss out.
Fourth, rather than just report news, even if sensational or controversial, the new technique is commentary on the news being as, if not more important than the news itself. So - for example - there will often be as much interpretation of what a politician is saying as there is coverage of them actually saying it. In the interpretation, what matters is not what they mean, but what they could be taken to mean. This leads to the incredibly frustrating pastime of expending a large amount of energy rebutting claims about the significance of things said, that bears little or no relation to what was intended.
In turn, this leads to a fifth point: the confusion of news and commentary.
Comment is a perfectly respectable part of journalism. But it is supposed to be separate. Opinion and fact should be clearly divisible. The truth is a large part of the media today not merely elides the two but does so now as a matter of course. In other words, this is not exceptional. It is routine.
The final consequence of all of this is that it is rare today to find balance in the media. Things, people, issues, stories, are all black and white. Life's usual grey is almost entirely absent. 'Some good, some bad'; 'some things going right, some going wrong': these are concepts alien to today's reporting. It's a triumph or a disaster. A problem is 'a crisis'. A setback is a policy 'in tatters'. A criticism, 'a savage attack'.
NGOs and pundits know that unless they are prepared to go over the top, they shouldn't venture out at all. Talk to any public service leader and they will tell you not that they mind the criticism, but they become totally demoralised by the completely unbalanced nature of it.
Is it becoming worse? Again, I would say, yes. In my 10 years, I've noticed all these elements evolve with ever greater momentum.
It used to be thought - and I include myself in this - that help was on the horizon. New forms of communication would provide new outlets to bypass the increasingly shrill tenor of the traditional media. In fact, the new forms can be even more pernicious, less balanced, more intent on the latest conspiracy theory multiplied by five.
But here is also the opportunity. At present, we are all being dragged down by the way media and public life interact. Trust in journalists is not much above that in politicians. There is a market in providing serious, balanced news. There is a desire for impartiality. The way that people get their news may be changing, but the thirst for the news being real news is not.
The media will fear any retreat from impact will mean diminishing sales. But the opposite is the case. They need to re-assert their own selling point: the distinction between news and comment.
It is sometimes said that the media is accountable daily through the choice of readers and viewers. That is true up to a point. But the reality is that the viewers or readers have no objective yardstick to measure what they are being told. In every other walk of life in our society that exercises power, there are external forms of accountability, not least through the media itself.
So it is true politicians are accountable through the ballot box every few years. But they are also profoundly accountable, daily, through the media, which is why a free press is so important.
I am not in a position to determine this one way or another. But a way needs to be found. I do believe this relationship between public life and media is now damaged in a manner that requires repair.
I've made this speech after much hesitation. I know it will be rubbished in certain quarters. But I also know this has needed to be said.
~~~~~
THIRST FOR REAL NEWS
At present, we are all being dragged down by the way media and public life interact.
THIRST FOR REAL NEWS
At present, we are all being dragged down by the way media and public life interact.
Trust in journalists is not much above that in politicians.
There is a market in providing serious, balanced news. There is a desire for impartiality.
The way that people get their news may be changing,
but the thirst for the news being real news is not.
~~~~~~~
14 June 2007 Hollow laughter at Tony Blair's attack on the feral media and their effect on public life Teaching standards Bruises and dangers Island ways Anchor for the C of E Censored Porridge Effects of brilliantine German captain recommended VC award Difficulties for Britain in leaving the EU True dedication
Hollow laughter at Tony Blair's attack on the feral media and their effect on public life
Sir - As a man who for 15 years courted, used, misused and spun the media, Tony Blair must have lost touch with reality if he did not realise his attack on them (report, June 13) would cause hollow laughter.The worst part of his last few days in power is that his words and actions reflect on this country. He now presents a rather pathetic figure, both here and abroad. Don Roberts, Prenton, The Wirral
Sir - Whatever one's political allegiance, Mr Blair's criticism of the media's subversive role in undermining 21st-century British society is absolutely right. And to describe the various lobbyists, parliamentary journalists and media hacks as "feral" is soft-pedalling it.The British media, once revered for their integrity and balance, are a parody of themselves, devoid of moral backbone. Their stories, as Mr Blair says, undermine faith, self-belief and confidence in our society. Newspapers and broadcasters have washed their hands of any responsibility for building a better Britain, as if they are somehow exempt from the task. Journalists have limply succumbed to Rupert Murdoch's conquest of Britain. Comment has become fact in their minds.And Mr Blair has it right when he singles out television news. The political commentators are now more powerful than those in office, simply because they get more air time. It isn't journalism, but extreme social manipulation.The time has come for the media to police themselves properly, or hand the job over to a responsible, independent body.Michael Phillips, Taunton
Sir - A key quotation from Mr Blair's sideswipe at the media would be highly apt if the phrase "this government" were substituted for the word "media".It would then read: "I do believe this relationship between public life and this government is now damaged in a manner that requires repair. The damage saps the country's confidence and self-belief; it undermines its assessment of itself, its institutions; and above all, it reduces our capacity to take the right decisions, in the right spirit, for our future."Ian Hymes, Dodleston, Cheshire
Sir - Mr Blair accuses the media of being "more interested in impact than accuracy". This from a man who brought us the Dodgy Dossier and the 45-minute claim.Simon Sholl, Oxford
Sir - What turns us off politics is the apparent complete inability of politicians to be honest with us. Politicians seem to recognise only an outright lie told to Parliament as being of any consequence. What they choose to ignore is the fury of voters when a straight question is blatantly evaded.Take as an example the forthcoming talks on the EU Constitution. Mr Blair would have us believe that this is no more than a tidying-up treaty and that he can therefore avoid his commitment to give us our say in a referendum.Unfortunately, his colleague Angela Merkel has already let the cat out of the bag with her catalogue of deceptive measures to enable this "treaty" to be slipped past the European electorate.Kevin Byron, Coupar Angus, Perthshire
Sir - Many of us regard the media with genial contempt, but they are the only effective opposition to lunatic governments. More ferocious power to their elbows!Christopher Egerton-Thomas, Hove, East SussexSir - Is it too much to hope that, if Mr Blair embraces Roman Catholicism, he will do so as a member of a closed and silent order?Prof Peter Hills, Shipton-under-Wychwood, Oxfordshire
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.editorsweblog.org/print_newspapers/2007/06/tony_blairs_criticism_of_the_media_spark.php
Tony Blair’s criticism of the media sparks a range of reactions.
In his last and highly covered speech on domestic issues, Tony Blair called British media “a feral beast, just tearing people and reputation to bits.” Rebuking the “impact driven” nature of a media that “hunts in a pack,” the British Prime Minister blamed journalists for simultaneously letting quality slide and sapping the confidence of the nation.
Blair suggested revisions in regulation of television and newspapers, arguing that current systems of accountability are no longer applicable when trends in multimedia convergence have led to unclear media distinctions. Singling out The Independent in his critique of commentary-heavy coverage, he posited that the media itself is in the best position to bring about such changes.In the range of debates sparked by Blair’s remarks, many editors agreed with his imperative for reforms of a media that privileges controversy and attacking people’s motives. Others criticized Blair for unfairly holding media to an impossible standard of objective reporting, claiming that news commentary is what gives British journalism its vibrant edge. Still others simply viewed Blair’s remarks as a parting shot to let off steam before he steps down on June 27th. Source: Reuters and The Independent
Posted by Mica Swyers on June 13, 2007 at 03:22 PM
1 comment
On June 13, 2007 at 05:47 PM, fidle said :
The Prime Minister is right. Such eratic Media Institution such as in britain has given birth to stooges who think reporting is tantamount to watching 'Toy Stories.'
BBC Online
Press reaction: Blair on the media
Tony Blair predicted his speech criticising the media would not get a good reception from the press - and he was right.
The prime minister gets some credit in Wednesday morning's newspapers for his point about the voracious appetite of the 24-hour news media.
But the general tone of the coverage - across broadsheets and tabloids - is critical.
There is particular anger about Mr Blair's suggestion that statutory regulation may be needed - and widespread incredulity that he should be complaining about media manipulation, even if he accepted part of the blame.
"Labour cannot hail 9/11 as a 'good day to bury bad news' and then accuse the media of manipulation," says the Sun in an editorial.
It concludes: "Politicians who complain about the media are like sailors who moan about the weather. We can dish it out and we can take it. But what worries us about the PM's speech was his threat to shackle the media.
"It should worry everyone who believes true democracy cannot exist without a free press."
Kevin Maguire, writing in the Daily Mirror, says: "Tony Blair took Britain to war in Iraq on a lie, blocked an arms bribery inquiry and was addicted to spin. No more sour lectures, thank you, Prime Minister".
'Self-serving'
Stephen Glover, in the Daily Mail, writes of Mr Blair's "magnificent self- delusion".
If the al-Yamamah case ever comes within sight of justice, it will be no thanks to an honest prime minister, an alert cabinet, a Wilberforce-style MP, a government auditor, a policeman or a lobbyist. It will be thanks to a muck-raking media, described yesterday by Tony Blair as a 'feral beast' of cynicism Simon Jenkins Guardian
He says the prime minister had a point when he spoke about the demands of the 24-hour media environment and the increasing cynicism of the press.
"The trouble is that it was delivered by Mr Blair. Coming from him, it sounds more than slightly batty and self-serving," he writes, saying Mr Blair enjoyed an unusually good press for much of his time in power.
This state of affairs might have continued had it not been for the Iraq war, writes Mr Glover - a point taken up by the Independent, the only newspaper to be named by Mr Blair in his speech.
The prime minister criticised the paper for lacking balance, saying "it was started as an antidote to the idea of journalism as views, not news. That was why it was called the Independent. Today it is avowedly a viewspaper".
'Ideals'
The Independent's editor Simon Kelner replies in a front page editorial, which asks: "Would you be saying this, Mr Blair, if we supported your war in Iraq?"
"We are unabashed about the way in which The Independent has evolved, although we would point out that this newspaper was not established as an antidote to the idea of journalism as views, but as an antidote to proprietorial influence and narrow political allegiance."
He argues that the paper abides by its founding ideals, respects the privacy of people in public life and the Press Complaints Commission (PCC) codes.
"But after 10 years of the Blair administration, a decade of spin and counter-spin and dodgy dossiers, of 45-minute warnings, of burying bad news, of manipulation and misinformation, we feel that the need to interpret and comment on the official version of events is more important than ever."
And he adds: "What clearly rankles with Mr Blair is not that we campaign vociferously on certain issues, but that he doesn't agree with our stance."
'Feral beast'
Simon Jenkins, writing in the Guardian, says the recent expose of secret payments by BAE systems to a Saudi prince, by his newspaper and the BBC's Panorama, shows the value of the free British press.
The press should be more willing to admit that most politicians enter public life out of a sincere desire to improve the lives of their fellow citizens The Times
"If the al-Yamamah case ever comes within sight of justice, it will be no thanks to an honest prime minister, an alert cabinet, a Wilberforce-style MP, a government auditor, a policeman or a lobbyist. It will be thanks to a muck-raking media, described yesterday by Tony Blair as a 'feral beast' of cynicism," he writes.
Times sketch writer Ann Treneman, who has swapped her normal by-line picture for a snap of a werewolf, is thrilled by her new "feral" identity.
"How exciting is that? I stopped taking notes for a minute. Indeed I am not sure that feral beasts have to take notes. Why bother with fiddly notebooks, when you can roam round, foaming at the mouth, mauling wildebeests and reputations?" she writes.
In its leader column, the Times says that although Mr Blair "protests too much" about the media's treatment of his own party, his wider critique "has much to recommend it".
'Viewspapers'
The modern 24-hour media can "lead to a collective stampede that is frequently an unattractive spectacle," it argues, adding "the press should be more willing to admit that most politicians enter public life out of a sincere desire to improve the lives of their fellow citizens and that they often have to make decisions with less time and less information than they would wish. None of us is perfect in that respect".
It also takes a thinly-disguised swipe at its rival, The Independent, saying: "The tendency of some so-called newspapers to act as viewspapers would have profoundly negative aspects if universally followed".
It adds: "Journalists are right to hold politicians and companies to account, but journalists should not be afraid of being held to account themselves".
The Daily Telegraph mounts a defence of the freedom of the press and its own reporting, insisting it never blurs fact and comment either in print or online.
This, the newspaper argues in an editorial, makes a mockery of Mr Blair's argument that statutory control is needed because "technology blurs the distinction between papers and television".
"He ignores the point that if people don't like a particular newspaper they need not buy it. He cannot be so naive as to imagine that putting newspapers under statutory regulation will do anything other than make them, eventually, obedient to the government of the day," the paper says.
Story from BBC NEWS:http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/uk_politics/6748367.stmPublished: 2007/06/13 12:40:48 GMT
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Who has damaged politics more: Tony Blair or the media?
Posted at: 12:50
Tony Blair has launched a scathing attack on the British media, branding the press a “feral beast, just tearing people and reputations to bits,” while at the same time conceding that his Government had once spent too much time currying favour with journalists.
"We paid inordinate attention in the early days of New Labour to courting, assuaging, and persuading the media," the Prime Minister admitted, while arguing that it was hard to see any alternative after Labour's long years in opposition.
The deteriorating coverage of politics had "sapped the country's confidence and self-belief; it undermines its assessment of itself, its institutions and above all else it reduces our capacity to take the right decisions in the right spirit for our future," Mr Blair claimed.
Is he right? Or do he and his Government share the blame for the collapse of faith in our public life?
In one of his last speeches before he steps down as Prime Minister Mr Blair also took a swipe at new media such as blogs and online forums, saying: they "can be even more pernicious, less balanced, more intent on the latest conspiracy theory multiplied by five" than traditional titles. Do you agree?
Who has the worst bite: Mr Blair or the “feral beast”? Is there any way to restore confidence in the political process and credibility to the press?
To send a letter to the editor of The Daily Telegraph, email mailto:dtletters@telegraph.co.uk
>The sheer arrogance of Tony Blair beggars belief. He treats the media (who are not saints either) like democracy, it's great when it works for him but to be curbed, ignored or overruled when it does not. What should be done is to curb the 'kingmaking' powers of papers like the Sun but if it is at cost of the freedom of the press, one the few freedoms New Labour has not robbed us of then let things continue as they are, unsatisfactory though they may be.Posted by Peter Rutter on June 13, 2007 5:28 PMReport this comment
I agree with Blair about the media. I'm sure he was thinking of the way the press treated Sven-Goran Eriksson. An absolutely shambolic way to treat one of our best national coaches ever. Wouldn't be surprised if the unsettlement caused by the media's ridiculing of the coach was instrumental in the dissappointing exit from last year's World Cup.Posted by Nick, Kielce, Poland on June 13, 2007 5:21 PMReport this comment
Ah, the problems of living in a free society. If you can't take the heat, then you don't belong in Politics.Posted by Tony Martin on June 13, 2007 5:08 PMReport this comment
Small wonder so many people think this Blair joker is the anti- Christ.Posted by Thomas on June 13, 2007 4:45 PMReport this comment
Are we to believe that the press has damaged politics more than the antics of Blunkett,Prescott, Mandleson,Short etc, not to mention Blair himself? The lies, deceit, and blatent corruption has been staggering. Mind you they are the cute ones. The real mugs are the ones that kept these near criminals in luxury i.e. the electorate.You can`t fool all of the people all of the time! Yes you can when they are the British electorate.Posted by Kenneth Wheatley on June 13, 2007 4:27 PMReport this comment
i totaly agree with matt myers on his comment we need to do something herePosted by percific on June 13, 2007 4:09 PMReport this comment
Besides the bare-faced effrontery of this light-weight Prime Minister one of the reasons that people sense that UK politicians are just jobs- worths, who only go throught the motions of governing, is the knowledge that their role has been taken over by the decision makers in Brussels. It seems that the only role they now have in life is to create career paths for similar wasters who can then sponge on the rest of us and decide their own salary and pension levels. No wonder he wants to stop the press from spilling the beans. The next step is the censorship of emails and bloggers such as that enjoyed by the Chinese Republic.Posted by P. Hawkes on June 13, 2007 3:48 PMReport this comment
Sadly, it appears that both sides of this argument are right. NuLab as lead by Tony has sold out simultaneously to business AND political correctness, while the Press spits out rubbish about anything that moves (Paris Hilton, for example). Today there is a report that implies that Dubya was robbed of his cheap Timex wrist watch while shaking hands in Albania or somewhere. Is this meant to inform us of something important about Albania (like they are all pickpockets), Dubya (he is too cheap to wear a decent watch), the US secret service (they are getting sloppy) or what?Posted by Peter Smith Florida on June 13, 2007 3:44 PMReport this comment
I think that Mr Blair has raised an important issue here, however it may have been inadvertantly. The public have gone past caring about politicians & media cozy bedfellow relationships. Where I do believe that he has opened a positive debate is with respect to the media's responsibility in reporting to society at large. Witness the recent Woolmer death, McCann tragedy & on-going saga concerning the untimely death of Princess Diana. In all of these cases, a media melle for trying to be first to broadcast, have more information available, more 'opinion' has merely served to muddy the waters. I am not saying that with clear water these cases would have been resolved. What I am saying is that the inevitable press conferences that have been demanded to meet the insatiable desire for rolling networks to have something to fill 24/7 have resulted in losing focus on empirical facts, replaced instead with hearsay, rumour & innuendo. Ultimately, surely that responsibility has to rest with the media, insofar as they have the vehicle to provide the rest of us with meaningful, insightful analysis of what is happening in the world at large? If not them then who? All of you media outlets out there, pull your socks up, get a grip with what is happening in the world & give us a better informed deal here. Posted by Jeremy on June 13, 2007 3:37 PMReport this comment
Blair, just go. You created this shoddy, disfunctional system based on celebs and hype,spin and lies. I just pray it can be reversed. You did this! do not look to aportion blame anywhere else. If this was Japan I would expect you to kneel on your sword in a few weeks time. Goodbye, Good luck and always remember to duck!!Posted by Michael Campbell on June 13, 2007 3:22 PMReport this comment
Having read the above the general point seems to be that if Tony Blair does something bad then is ok for the media to be equally bad or even worse. Can you explian why having a body with teeth that checks that a newspapers facts are actually correct is a bad thing (as stated in your Editorial Comment on Page 21 of todays paper). This is from a Telegraph reader of over 25 yearsPosted by John Harvey on June 13, 2007 2:01 PMReport this comment
This really is laughable after 10 years of lunches with murdock releasing info to him before speaking to parliment, you blame the newspapers for the fact the country hates you. Let me help you here Tony it is because of all the many many lies you told us, I know you said they where spin but they were not they where outright lies. You ignored the will of the people (iraq war march) and before going to parliment to ask for war based on lies you had already promised GW you would blindly follow him. You destroyed our pensions, you neglect the old and infirm and have an open door imigration policies that favour the non-nationals and treats OAP services as something that can be continually cut back on, shame they did not know that when they were fighting for our freedom during the war. But with your PC brigade fighting for our freedoms in the past counts for absolutley nothing, nor does paying tax for a lifetime. Talking of freedoms you send us into an illegal war and then tell us our freedoms must be curbed. You give us a human rights act which only ever favours the criminals. You give minorites favourism over the nationals. Everywhere we look we see unaccountable goverment incompetence costing the country billions, tax credits, sell the gold reserve, NHS, IT projects, to name but a few and there are many. You told us you would listen and you did but you never took any notice of what we said. You have failed this country time and time again and put your own ego above what was best for the nation. You ruined our security with Iraq and you deveoped a goverment that treats us as customers that can be fined and monitored at every turn. There was only ever one person you tried to please and that was GW. These Tony are the reasons the press and population are turning on you. Ask about tony see how many labour supporters who voted for you in 1997 are pleased with your time in office. Posted by Phillip Harriss on June 13, 2007 1:54 PMReport this comment
Hypocrisy of the first order. And this coming from the man who has treated The Mother of all Parliaments with absolute contempt? The lies, deceit, abuses of privilege and incompetence which have prevailed throughout Blair's government have inevitably undermined the credibility of both Parliament and politicians. The sooner he leaves on his lecture tour of the United States - the better for all of us!Posted by camille on June 13, 2007 1:45 PMReport this comment
193 posts so far Only a handful have anything positive to say about Bliar. The people are finally waking up to what 10 years of lies, spin and manipulation can do to a country. The UK has become a decadent place. The truth behind all the really important issues is obscured by political manipulation and blatant lies. We are in danger of losing all our freedom and liberty. We are terrified into submission by a state apparatus that brainwashes the people into thinking only the state can protect us from the manufactured threat of islamic terrorism. We must kick NuLabour out of office immediately. Cameron is just another shill for the globalists. He shouldn't be allowed to run the UK either. We must get out of Iraq We must stop meddling in the middle east, We must restore our national sovergnity and get out of the European Union We must restore a sound currency system based on free market banking We must have much tighter controls over money supply. Our low inflation economy is a myth that will be cruelly exposed in the coming years.Posted by Matt Myers on June 13, 2007 1:30 PMReport this comment
@Crispin - Winston Churchill, November 10, 1942, after the British defeat of the German Afrika Korps in EgyptPosted by Ray on June 13, 2007 1:22 PMReport this comment
From Bliar to "Brown Balls" in one easy slide with "massage" as the message! What we actually need is an adjustment in the ballot rules - A "none of the above or below" box which if "winning" all candidates thrown out and the whole process started again with new contenders! Or failing that election via the lottery system a more democratic way to elect our Government - more people participate!Posted by Jim Golightly on June 13, 2007 1:20 PMReport this comment
Ladies and Gentlemen Shout from the rooftops and vent your spleens while you can - Blair has hinted that the deathknell of internet media free-speech has been struck. See if this time next year we are able to say anything anti-partisan without the thought police carrying us off for processing - rather than just watch us and take notes.Posted by The Rob on June 13, 2007 1:06 PMReport this comment
"Write in the comment section they said, leak and spin they said, destroy reputations with lies they said, there I was standing there with my pants on fire and would you believe it not on of them would help put the fire out," said the prisoner still trying to convince the warder that he was the Prime Minister.Posted by Ryszard Kaminski on June 13, 2007 1:03 PMReport this comment
Who was the 'feral beast' who drove David Kelly to his end? Own up TBlair.Posted by simon on June 13, 2007 12:56 PMReport this comment
Isn't it ironic that Bliar should take a swipe at blogs and internet forums when it was he, speaking at the Party Conference in September 2004, who said : "An expansion in the broadband network to give every household access to high-speed internet connections by 2008 will be in Labour's manifesto." Posted by Lickyalips on June 13, 2007 12:52 PMReport this comment
Tony Who !!Posted by Colin Crabtree on June 13, 2007 12:28 PMReport this comment
In answer to your question - the media. Blair created the 'spinwagon' and the media climbed aboard immediately and without hesitation. Since then The Telegraph, in my opinion, has lied and lied. It has lied directly, it has lied by omission, it has lied by inference and by shuffling facts. It should try to reverse this evil practice by telling the TRUTH about the myth that the inhalation of tobacco smoke actually kills. IT DOESN'T!!Posted by Ben Ellis on June 13, 2007 12:10 PMReport this comment
Can't help but admire the bare faced cheek, but then by all accounts, he has not changed since he was a schoolboy. He will miss the Guardianista worship from the BBC.Posted by Conkeyron on June 13, 2007 12:07 PMReport this comment
I think the media is too powerful and objective reporting is long dead. The cult of celebrity "journalists", biased "News analysts", journalist activists are bringing mainstream media down.Posted by michael on June 13, 2007 12:02 PMReport this comment
Contrary to Tony Blair's contention, [Blair calls for tougher curbs on 'feral media' - George Jones - 13/06/2007] all I see is mainstream media's perpetual lenience towards his actions and government. Just one of numerous obvious examples would be, usually consigned to short reports buried amongst trivial issues, the frequent horrors of mass civilian deaths in Iraq, now considered to number in excess 600,000. His government, who's lies had brought about our participation, would have been brought down long ago if each and every incident in Iraq was reported in detail. Perhaps he should be given what he asks for; strictly objective reporting. Let the reader decide the right or wrong of the matter. A week or two of children's limbless corpses and such on the front page each day could be just the farewell he is due. Posted by Richard Tobin on June 13, 2007 11:59 AMReport this comment
This attack on the ability & willingness of the populace to freely express opinions (& prejudices) is entirely predictable. Blair is the first PM to concentrate exclusively on image rather than on governing well. As his expensive non-performance became clear, he was forced to follow the U.S. Neo-Cons into exacerbating the global tensions between the Muslim and non-Muslim worlds. This enabled him to create the all pervasive atmosphere of fear & insecurity which justifies stripping civil liberty in Britain of all meaning, with little or no effective opposition, - thus making government simpler & easier! No-one with that kind of agenda and record likes to see what people really feel or think; they expect to control, or expect to appear to be in control of, published opinion. When that control is clearly lost, they will inevitably blame failure on the others' freedom to express opinion. Reference any 20thC Dictator &/or wannabe Dictator. Does this reflect the correct level of cynicism and disbelief that the Blair legacy deserves??Posted by Andrew on June 13, 2007 11:58 AMReport this comment
Phoney Blair was more than happy to coexist with the media's 'feral beasts' during his first few years as Prime Minister. He even kept one in Downing Street: Alistair Campbell. More recently the media have become unreliable and reluctant to swallow the scraps thrown by New Labour's spin-doctors and publicists without chewing first. The Coalition's loss of control in post-liberation Iraq, and the cabinet's evasive dodging and weaving is probably the catalyst for that. But he does have a point: the media is more powerful than it ever has been, and can be very destructive when presentation of news and opinion is determinedly negative. The clear and present danger that the media threatens us all with today is through the promotion of the left-wing cult of Political Correctness. The weird inversions and perversions of this morbid post-Marxist creed are commonly accepted at the BBC and throughout much of the rest of our media, and even sceptical newspapers become deferential when reporting the proclamations of such commissars of Political Correctness as Trevor Phillips (formally of the CRE) and Sami Chakrabarti (of the ironically named 'Liberty'). But of course this isn't the sort of media slant that Mr Blair is worries about, is it? Posted by Tom Hopkins on June 13, 2007 11:40 AMReport this comment
Bobby Smith, very well put!Posted by Lal on June 13, 2007 11:36 AMReport this comment
Does reading my blog make you feel uncomfortable, Mr Blair? Any colleagues of Mr Blair feel the same way? Would you like it censored or deleted? Go on Mr Bliar, just click on the link.Posted by No 6 on June 13, 2007 11:33 AMReport this comment
SO MANY GOOD POSTS SO FAR, Only one thing to add, Your Photo editor has picked a very good Shot. Posted by frank on June 13, 2007 11:26 AMReport this comment
If the millions put into the Health Service are improving things so much .How is it that I now have the third date to have a triple bypass op?The reason not enough bes in ICU and a few emergencies. This would be fine if I was at home ,but I am 8000 miles away from home in the Falkland Islands and have been living out of a suitcase since March!! The health care in the isalands is great but they have sent me up here for the op and now I am in the clutchs of the NHS.Do I not remember hearing that the NHS had 24 hours left? Or was that part of the same spin of"Education,Education,Education".Blair has used the media for his own purposes and nobody now believes anything you hear or read about the politics of the country.Posted by Peter Wakefield on June 13, 2007 11:04 AMReport this comment
Take "extraordinary renditions" by the CIA using British airports. Denied strenously by Foreign Secretary Jack Straw on numerable occasions. Fact: It more than likely happened judging by the latest EU investigations. So where is the credibility of the British government? Blair now wants the freedom of the press revoked. Why not arrest the leader of the opposition.... like EGYPT another American-sponsored friendly military dictatorship without any human rights. Lets have 180 days under arrest (without charge)...for our new SS-GB police state!Posted by manfred mann on June 13, 2007 10:53 AMReport this comment
Tony Blair has the affrontery to critisize the press and internet sites such as this why? Because he's been rumbled some time ago as a charlaton and popinjay and we've found a voice to express our minds despite the nanny state he has created. So we've rattled his cage and he's having a childish strop. Let that be a lesson for the clunking fist.Posted by Christina Wilkinson on June 13, 2007 10:38 AMReport this comment
Even before the Get-Go, Blair had signed up to an agenda that was not of the interests of the British people, some of it has unraveled as some people said it would, all the things the posters have vilified have come to pass, this is not the end, it is not even the beginning of the end, but it is the end of the beginning - who said that? Posted by Crispin on June 13, 2007 10:38 AMReport this comment
I would hate to think that one of these "feral beasts" would compose a CV for John Prescott! What he promised do to in the manifesto. What he was supposed to do as Deputy Prime Minister. What he actually acheived? That could indeed be an interesting read! Would that be “feral" reporting or the truth?Posted by Keith on June 13, 2007 10:35 AMReport this comment
Blair has a real cheek to lauch this particular attack. One wonders whether he has begun to lose the plot, because he is certainly suffering from a grand ego. The NuLab manipulation of the media was devised by Blair, Brown, Campbell and Mandelson as a means of ensuring that NuLab got all the kudos and that any negative news-story could be re-spun to a postive. This propagandising of politics occurred at the same time as 24 hours coverage and was an ideal opportunity for NuLab to remain on-message at all times and to provide the news, being pro-active rather than reactive, so as to monopolise the media. There has been a symbiotic relationship between NuLab and the media, they feed off each other, as to whom requires the other more is moot. But, B-Liars comments are a demonstration of just how far removed he has become from every day life and the realities of 2007. Methinks he doth protest tooooo much and needs to be removed. We also need to re-define the relationship between media and politics and politicians.Posted by George Hinton on June 13, 2007 10:25 AMReport this comment
I regret to say that it will not be possible to offer Gongs to these readers of the Telegraph - unless they have a fiver to spare.Posted by David on June 13, 2007 10:23 AMReport this comment
Blair and NuLabour have been the biggest spinners but don't like it when the press gets critical of them - so now they want to control the press. It is the newspapers that support NuLabour who have the worst imbalance - is he thinking of improving them ? Could this be a loosening-up exercise by Blair to introduce the idea of censorship. This dovetails very nicely into the EU's ideas about controls on free speech on the internet. Why else is Blair raising it at the end of his premiership ?Posted by Malcolm Edward on June 13, 2007 10:20 AMReport this comment
the media (alas) ...but more feckless than feralPosted by michael schrage on June 13, 2007 10:17 AMReport this comment
Blair's attack on the media is yet another demonstration that this man has become seriously delusional. The media were mistaken in believing that statements made in parliament by the prime minister would actually be true, and did allow themselves to be bullied by a loud mouthed Scot (Campbell), but in no way can the destruction of trust in government be in any way the media's fault. Blair's complete reliance on spin throughtout his time, his willingness to lie to us all to curry favour with a lunatic American president and his complete inability to admit the damage HE'S done to this country's global standing and security are all hallmarks of a man either in denial or in need of serious medical attention. He claims that throughout his time as prime minister he acted in 'good faith'. What this actually means, particularly in relation to the Iraq disaster, is that he took all of his decisions with reference to God. Both he and Bush have a deeply religious basis to them and both actually believe that all they've done is OK because God said it was OK. If you or I relied on the 'God' defence for the death and destruction of innocent lives we'd be locked up on the basis of mental instability. Lead a country and God's hand in events spares you blame! Tony Blair is a disturbed, and disturbing, human being who I believe should be committed at her majesty's pleasure for his and our protection.Posted by Bobby Smith on June 13, 2007 10:17 AMReport this comment
The whole speech is absurd. The Prime Minister complains about his dislike of the media use of extemes and superlatives to grab attention and mind share. He conveniently misses the point that this is how they describe themselves "more doctors, more schools, bettter education, etc, etc" He doesn't like it when the favour is returned "more spending, worse results, the fastest destruction of civil liberties in history, etc, etc..." It's terribly humble of him to remind us that he's going of his own volition but even this is one big lie; he's going because even his own party can't stand him anymore. Is there no end to his hubris? Of course not, this is just one of many speeches we shall here telling us how grateful we should be for his efforts. My biggest surprise is his inability to get on with Putin as they seem so very well matched. Posted by Robin on June 13, 2007 10:14 AMReport this comment
Here is how PR politics affects Britain. A policeman is stabbed to death. Within hours we know his name, but little or nothing is said about his murderer. Slowly news trickles out that he is an African illigal immigrant given leave to stay, by the Home Office (yet again). The police protecting political ineptitude, rather than the public. Reality check; that is now their priority. The same day the police shoot a woman dead. We are told that she was 'known to police', that a gun was recovered at the scene, a gun that fired 'ball bearings'. All language to set a picture in your mind. She was 'waving' this gun for nearly two hours before she was shot, so was she really presenting a danger? The gun, we later learn was actually a 'bb pistol', which fire plastic pellets. So a person is dead who presented no actual danger and the murderer of a policeman was subdued with a baton round and a stun gun. The police now get it wrong so many times, PR panicked and with little or no police experience. That is the corruption of our society and it didn't come from the media, Mr Blair.Posted by EyeSee on June 13, 2007 9:56 AMReport this comment
I personally blame the media. If the media had been more truthful rather than hanging onto every word coming out of Downing Street, Blair & Co would never have got away with the lies and manipulation of the facts. There have been one or two honest attempts to bring the truth, like the publication of the real inflation figures for pensioners instead of the Government's make belive RPI, but in general the media, and particularly the BBC, never seems to question any of the government "facts" about improving hospitals, schools. What about some real investigative journalism into things which matter to the average citizen? And of course the Tories are also to blame for not saying anything themseves about the situation, so presumably they find it quite acceptable.Posted by Brian E on June 13, 2007 9:50 AMReport this comment
without dought blair with all his spin and false promisesand now he's trying to get this consitution through the back door i fought world war 2 to get rid of dictators i'v been a labour voter for over 50 years but not for this tripe that's in nowPosted by edward smith on June 13, 2007 9:42 AMReport this comment
Oh sweet the irony, how complete the revenge; the biter bit. Let us savour this; Blair spends all his time in politics on presentational issues, to get to the top of his party, to convince the public to elect him. He spends ten years in government manipulating the media, using an obnoxious attack dog from the media to set his PR policies and priorities. People like Jo Moore make crass and insensitive statements because they are part of an organisation (the UK government) that tells them that's what it wants to hear. Moreover, Blair's time in office has seen metaphorical weedkiller sprayed indiscriminately across the land and destroyed everything it touches. So of course such a spectacular failure of a man, with an enormous ego, would seek to suggest the press are gutter snipes; he knows what's coming when he steps down. A review of his time as PM. And a rigorously honest review would still make the Devil think hard before owning up to knowing him. Posted by EyeSee on June 13, 2007 9:42 AMReport this comment
Blair has ruined Britain's reputation for honest dealing and fair play. At least Newspapers like yours and the Independent have tried (albeit in vain) to salvage something from the Blair mess.Posted by John Oxley on June 13, 2007 9:37 AMReport this comment
I stopped believing government and the media too many years ago. There stock is to perpetuate deceit and sophistry to the detriment of us all. Posted by bruce on June 13, 2007 9:33 AMReport this comment
Mr B Liar sorry Blair's latest whine about the press is risible. He and Campbell raised the use of SPIN and the press to their own despicable aims to an art form. How dare he now complain about their treatment of him and his useless and destructive time in power. Posted by clive stevens on June 13, 2007 9:27 AMReport this comment
This is typical, for years he had the best press of any PM I can remember. Then it was though the press and other media, with the exception of the BBC which still seems to think he walks on water, had the wool removed from their eyes and started to see what most of us already knew. B'liar and his liar in chief Campbell did more to undermine a free press and this country's democratic traditions than any one in history. And now he complains that he got a rough ride. Has he never heard the expression "as yea sow so shall yea reap? Wait until the full enormity of the damage becomes apparent and see what sort of press he gets then.Posted by FEF on June 13, 2007 9:05 AMReport this comment
It has gone to far to be corrected now. Blair/New labour have courted the media in a very deliberate manner, in cosying up to these headline hunters he has changed the relationship between the State/People. We now only get told what they want us to know, the media are handcuffed from telling us the truth as they will be cut out of the loop. In this Country news does not sell papers, sensationalism is what the papers believe sell. The biggest tragedy that as a nation we buy this drivel day in day out. Serious politics / politians, not in this Country, so I suppose you can blame Blair and his bunch of incompetants. Posted by Mike on June 13, 2007 8:43 AMReport this comment
The simple truth is that if politicians (of all persuasions) acted with honour and integrity there would be little for the feral beasts of either the MSM or the pyjamas brigade to write about. By his own admission, Mr Blair spent an inordinate amount of time and energy courting the press. He also spent a lot more of both "managing the message" (ie lying and spinning). The press and the public eventually cottoned on to this and Mr Blair is now suffering for it. But the fact remains, he and his party made this bed and now they must lie in it. One can only hope that future political leaders will learn from Mr Blair's errors. Lord knows British politicians need to regain the public's trust, and fast. Posted by The Remittance Man on June 13, 2007 8:31 AMReport this comment
The villification of Tony Blair by the press has been successful because he is now resigning in shame. The press has placed him squarely in front of the firing squad of public opinion. The reason is obvious. Blairs gang of four... Alaistair Campbell Jonathan Powell Lord Levy and Faulkner are without doubt guilty of abusing their power in a totally undemocratic fashion. Blair has been exposed as an imposter short on ethics or sincerity. Nothing functions in Britain because we are kept in the dark about everything. We are all pawns in their games. Cabinet politicians act like clowns on a string. Public sentiment is no longer important. Politicians are detached earning millions with company directorships. The BBC is a shadow of itself due to budget cuts after the Gilligan/Kelly affair. The press reflects the general mood of the country. Blairs legacy is already written.....he failed badly. The press had nothing to do with that fact.Posted by muggeridge on June 13, 2007 8:29 AMReport this comment
Bliar and the NeoCon shills in America control the mainstream media in the UK and the USA. The internet is the ONLY way to get the real news and find out what is going on in the world. I no longer trust our government, any of our politicians, the BBC or the people running the economy. We are witnessing the most sustained assault on our liberty and freedom ever witnessed. I think the NeoCons and Bliar are fascists and that they are secretly planning one world government, one world currency and the enslavement of mankind. The governmant ABSOLUTELY MUST NOT be allowed to control the internet. It is the last bastion of freedom.Posted by Matt Myers on June 13, 2007 8:07 AMReport this comment
The voice of the media is now the only one allowed to speak out against the government - the suggestion that the media be prevented from free speech for fear of damaging the government - at that point I leave this country, fast, before the iron curtain slams down because it will be coming. How stupid does New Labour think we are? Posted by Helen on June 13, 2007 8:06 AMReport this comment
Just listen to the Archers....I rest my case.Posted by Swilly Tisher , Loch Maree on June 13, 2007 8:05 AMReport this comment
I think these responses eliquently express the public outrage at what this man, almost single-handedly has done to this once proud country. But you have to hand it to him, for someone obsessed with his place in history, our children will look back at the Blair decade as one where he persuaded the nation and parliament to accept his decisions without question. Where Thatcher was responsible for destroying the manufacturing base of this country by closing the mines and shipyards and turning the North into an economic wasteland. Blair has destroyed the cultural fabric and morality, which is a far worser crime. `Things can only get better`? - I doubt it! Posted by John Tither on June 13, 2007 7:42 AMReport this comment
Pah! Politics has not been damaged. Politicians may be feeling rather more uncomfortable, though. Why? Because now they cannot court the media. Because WE ARE THE MEDIA. The Internet means that some blog or other stands next to august publications like the Telegraph and can have the same readership. All that seperates them is brand values and quality. And even then the rise in user generated content means the more traditional media brands now contain the views and perceptions of the GENERAL PUBLIC. Politicians should quake in fear of us. We have a voice and we're going to use it. Interestingly we have a vote too. They might not like it but that's the way it is. We're not satisfied and now we have the means to let them know. Isn't it great!?! Curb the media? That means shut US up. I'm not going to go quietly. And I doubt the rest of the "media" will either...Posted by Don Hughes on June 13, 2007 7:40 AMReport this comment
Spot on Paul Burgess 13th 1:17 a.m. - newspapers will write what ever they think will sell. If the truth doesn't sell, we will not read the truth. In this, Mr. Blair for once is correct.Posted by Charlie in the Castelnau on June 13, 2007 7:01 AMReport this comment
Blair's outburst is absolute proof of how much politicians, particularly senior ones hiding behind their sycophantic staffs, are out of touch with the general public who now quite rightly expect the truth as opposed to 10 years of spin(LIES!)Posted by Nick Kerr on June 13, 2007 6:34 AMReport this comment
The answer is obvious to all, I would add though that the media has been the only opposition to this bunch of devious incompetants, albeit not a very effective one (thanks to the counter attacks by Campbell),so it's no surprise that Blair thinks the media should be silenced (regulated). They managed to pull the teeth of the BBC by having their lies transmuted in truths by Hutton and now they are going after the press. Be afraid, be very afraid.Posted by Vandiemen on June 13, 2007 3:22 AMReport this comment
It is not surprising that Blair made this vitriolic rant at a press that exposed his deceit and lies and his never ending spin. Even Brown admitted that the sexed up dossier was "dodgy." No, it is the politicians who have damaged politics.Posted by Christopher Larmer on June 13, 2007 2:34 AMReport this comment
Another cynical move to divert the truth by liar Blair. His achievements? His laughable legacy? Education - dumbed down. Health - in chaos. Roads and transport - pathetic, like a third world country. Violent crime - up. Respect for police - destroyed. Individual freedoms - curtailed. Criminal's rights - improved. Victim's rights - reduced. Taxation - up. Cost of government - out of control and rising. Government borrowing - up. Cost of living - up. Pensions - wrecked. Political Correctness - out of control. Illegal immigration - out of control. Wars and killing - up. Honour and trust in government - NIL - personally destroyed by Blair. The United Kingdom - well on the way to fragmentation thanks to Blair's short sighted vote seeking. British Farmers - destroyed. He has disgraced the nation by his self serving manipulation of the press and his lies and spin. The sooner he and his spineless comrades are thrown out of office the better.Posted by Ndlovu on June 13, 2007 2:31 AMReport this comment
The man that felt the hand of history on the shoulder. He has also felt the hand of the old bill on his collar. He is just spinning to the end.Posted by Frank Leader on June 13, 2007 2:20 AMReport this comment
Blair tells the lies the media merely report them!Posted by Terence on June 13, 2007 1:36 AMReport this comment
5 million CCTV's, and Bliar still can't see what the people demand of their political servants.Posted by Sally on June 13, 2007 1:34 AMReport this comment
Without a doubt both have been complicite. However look at the first line of this piece..."a scathing attack" - Exactly what the Prime Minister said about Impact in his speech. I suppose the line, "Mr Blair shared his view of the media and an argument of its pros and cons in modern britain" would have no impact and therefore not be read. Posted by Paul Burgess on June 13, 2007 1:17 AMReport this comment
and this is a Prime Minister who made every decision on the basis of how it would appear in the following morning's Daily Mail ....Posted by Henri le Roi on June 13, 2007 1:03 AMReport this comment
The trouble is that the media now tells us what they think about a news item whereas Blair tells us what to think. On balance the distorted views and impressions of a variety of 'journalists' surely makes me miss the 'old days' when news reports were just that and the reader was able to arrive at his or her own conclusions. So I suppse that the media has damaged politics the most.Posted by GrahamB on June 13, 2007 12:44 AMReport this comment
It is clear that we all are on guard when we read the daily paper, we understand the one liner, 'if it bleeds it leads ' but the leader of the national Parliament does not usually have this reflexive response to his communications with us, don't know why Mr B does, but I truly believe that he does.Posted by wpo on June 13, 2007 12:06 AMReport this comment
I ued to be proud of being British!Posted by Ioan ap ioan on June 13, 2007 12:03 AMReport this comment
Just a feeble Parthian shot from the most hypocrytical and untrustworthy Prime Minister this nation has ever had. And now Brown is washing his dirty hands of the last 10 years of his own complicity in the spin, lies and deceit of the most dishonest Government since Harold Wilson's: 'Not me guv' will just not wash. I just hope the country won't fall for Brown's new self-branding. Posted by David Compton on June 13, 2007 12:01 AMReport this comment
They are both synonomous with the NEW BRITAIN - YUK !!!Posted by ExPat in Canada on June 12, 2007 11:56 PMReport this comment
And this from a man who said at the the time of the Good Friday agreement "This is not a time for soundbites, but I feel the hand of history on my shoulder" I have one word for Blair - Campbell. Posted by O Zangado on June 12, 2007 11:43 PMReport this comment
''if your not with us your agin us he said.'' Millions marched to protest so what does he do? Brings out legislation to stop protests etc Oh dear Tony, you're running out of steam, popularity, power and people to blame and no-one willing to whitewash for you any more? Give the nation a bit of credit for being more intelligent than you PLEASE. We don't want YOUR press censorship you've already tried that; what we want is proper politicians doing an honest days work running the country deomcratically, something you never did. If people didn't like the press in this country they wouldn't buy it, just like they didn't buy what's left of Labour after you've adulterated it.Posted by trish on June 12, 2007 11:32 PMReport this comment
Blair, The biggest liar ever to head the UK, complains about the media. ? Who has been complicit in the deaths of hundreds of thousands or Iraqi's Mr Blair, You or the media, which do you think has done the most damage. Who has destroyed all credibility in governments, ? Just go, and give the world a break by remaining silent.Posted by Once proud Pom. on June 12, 2007 11:26 PMReport this comment
Hmm, wasn't there something published in this august organ, not a day or three ago, about Amnesty International's fears about Internet censorship in China, and such censorship spreading? Ah, so, yes, here we are: link Well, well, well.Posted by R. Yeatley on June 12, 2007 11:15 PMReport this comment
Usual Nu-Labor hypocrisy.Posted by Castro Spendlove on June 12, 2007 11:12 PMReport this comment
We must do everything in our power to preserve the freedom of the Press, even though despairing of the recent appalling lowering of standards - including the Telegraph. The Press is now all we have left as a safeguard against the creeping totalitarianism of the state, manipulated by those dreadful politicians. Forget the brain-dead BBC - no help there. If restrictions were to be placed on the internet, then the last bit of democracy we have will disappear for ever. My feeling is that blair has been reading the blogs on "my View" and doesn't like what he sees. He is such a spoilt brat. Grow up, blair - just for once, there's a good boy; you are 54 years old. Posted by SeanL on June 12, 2007 11:08 PMReport this comment
The media don't need checking - the only regulator needed is a straight-jacket for Blair as he is utterly bonkers. I guess comments like this won't be allowed if he gets his way.Posted by SHERLOCK on June 12, 2007 10:59 PMReport this comment
Bliar. Without doubt!Posted by Nick Dickinson on June 12, 2007 10:44 PMReport this comment
Damn!!! I must have blinked. For a while I thought they were the same thing. Both the same side of a dud coin. Sincerely...John Tee.Posted by John Tee on June 12, 2007 10:32 PMReport this comment
There is a very easy answer to this question, Mr Blair and the new labour machine. Traditionally, we have had a political system where a regard for liberty has been at its epicentre. The Blair regime has embarked on a spiteful and vengeful crusade to destroy liberty in the UK, and frankly, they have been extraordinarily successful. The fact of the matter is that most members of parliament have chosen to abrogate their duties as M.P’s, and refuse to cry freedom. With a few honourable exceptions, the tories seem obsessed with emulation and adulation of Blair rather than opposition of him. The imperfections of the media I think can be overlooked as they are doing what parliament has so spinelessly failed to do, namely mount a real opposition. At present all that we have is a free press to do our bidding. Whilst new labour gorges itself on its obsession for power for its own sake, the tories say nothing. Blair seems to infer also that the public are unable to make their minds up about media content. I wonder if this speech would have been made at this time, had there been near universal praise for him. I doubt it. As usual he is being disingenuous. Socialism is founded on control. All he was doing was establishing a spurious pretext for launching a debate, when what he really seeks is the muzzling of the media and securing absolute control for his successors, like any good socialist/fascist. (They are both the same to me, both cheeks on the same a*se) Posted by Alta Blue on June 12, 2007 10:21 PMReport this comment
The best thing he can do is Shut UP and spend his next remaining two weeks keeping his promises at each election!He is the worst PM in my life time. Many times worst than Harold & Callaghan, they where Gentlemen.Posted by Rodger Hughes on June 12, 2007 10:20 PMReport this comment
Blair has had control over the BBC after the Dr Kelly affair, just the same as Putin of what НТВ says in Russia. He now wants the Government to be able to control the rest of the media and what his subjects are thinking on the internet. It is not surprising as he must be worried that some of us free thinking individuals will soon start rebelling about all the damage he has done to this country. Personally, I am fed up with too much Government interference in how I lead my life with so much excessive legislation and the prospect if ID cards.Posted by Adrian Smith on June 12, 2007 10:18 PMReport this comment
I welcome the opportunity of adding my comments to forums and blogs. It is pleasing to know Tony Blair reads them!Posted by Freddie on June 12, 2007 10:13 PMReport this comment
So not content with setting up and purging the BBC (with the Gilligan/Kelly episode and tragedy), Blair wants CENSORSHIP ... THROUGHOUT British media. This won't save you ... either ... Tony. Posted by Lou Coatney (1st Alamein) on June 12, 2007 10:09 PMReport this comment
Yes, much of the media is 'feral' - untruthful, sensationalist, prone to exaggeration, lacking respect for the individual, pontificating and hypocritical. Just like some politicians.Posted by MarkS on June 12, 2007 10:05 PMReport this comment
NOW I understand the expression "The truth hurts"Posted by John Martin on June 12, 2007 10:05 PMReport this comment
british democracy and our institutions are probably the envy of much of the world. The media do often come across as self rightous playground bullies,with a wine glass that is always half full, if not empty. PM Blair does have a point, and I think the media needs to do much soul searching about the way it tries to undermine democracy, what does freedom of the press mean.Posted by peter mace on June 12, 2007 9:46 PMReport this comment
Tony bliar has done more than anyone to manipulate the press. He and his fellow traitors should be treated as traitors, and shot!Posted by Ted Ray on June 12, 2007 9:39 PMReport this comment
The media and Blair are both products of the post-modern view that ideas are meaningless and image is everything. It is a view that says reason is useless, reality is whatever you pretend it to be, and there are no morals except for the moral superiority of barbaric cultures over western enlightenment. This post-modern agenda is pushed by almost all of the mainstream media, but the BBC is by far the worst offender, if only because its claims of impartiality are so blatantly untrue. Blair is a direct product of post-modernism, by his own admission spending half his time in office cravenly sucking up to the media, while the media ate it up. They deserve each other. Posted by Tim Sturm on June 12, 2007 9:19 PMReport this comment
Answer to question, Blair or the Press ? It's a tough call in any symbiotic relationship. Now the Blair Basking Shark (Tuscany, the Caribbean etc), has buggered off, can the Pilot Fish of the Press build a similar relationship with the one-eyed Monk Fish from Scotland and if so, do we even care ? Dunno, I don't care, the pair (Blair, Broown) have sold the lot of us down the river so, let's have a clean sweep and dump both them and their bottom licking buddies from the media today. If they want to have a "handbags at dawn" contest on Hampstead Heath one morning, let them because "Here Is the NEWS", we just don't care any more suckers !Posted by John Haynes on June 12, 2007 9:05 PMReport this comment
A few quotes from the Blair speech: 'I, like anyone else, have a right to speak' Just like the old chap ejected from the Labour Party conference? Like the two coach loads of women escorted back by police to london, not allowed to stop at rest areas? Like the two people arrested for reading out names of British war dead? 'It is in all our interests that the public is properly and accurately informed' As your government, Mr Blair, kept the public informed impartially during your ten years of power? When you admit the overuse of 'spin? When one of your ministers had to resign because she tried to bury bad news, ie 'hide' it from the public? 'But it (the Hutton Inquiry) was an example of being held to account' How, Mr. Blair, when you set the parameters under which that inquiry sat? 'What creates cyncism is not mistakes, it is allegations of misconduct' No, Mr. Blair, what creates cyncism is the proof of lying to the public. 'I do believe the relationship between public life and media is now damaged in a manner beyond repair' Why are you not surprised Mr. Blair when it is the actions of you and your government, all with their own 'media advisers' that have created that damage? Posted by David Phipps on June 12, 2007 8:56 PMReport this comment
I don't recall Blair complaining about the "feral beast, just tearing people and reputations to bits" when it was doing so to Major's Government. Blair and his government, until 2003, had an ever so easy ride from the media, ESPECIALLY the BBC. It was only after Campbell departed that some in the media "got some balls" and started to criticise his government. With this statement of Blair it shows the man has no shame. Also, to the end, he is showing the nannying-"nulabour" trait of if we don't like it legislate against it, as he seems to suggest with on-line journalism. Posted by K Monaghan on June 12, 2007 8:51 PMReport this comment
Tony Blair and his mentor, George Bush, have controlled a subservient media for far too long. It's about time that the truth be told and the spin doctors put out to pasture. The "dumbing down" of the average citizen has had its run, time to have politicians speak the truth for a change. A refreshing thought indeed! Posted by Brian Merritt on June 12, 2007 8:50 PMReport this comment
Blair seems to be the only person in Britain who does not understand. The reason everybody hates you Blair, is that you lied, lied and LIED, and continue to lie to the people of this country, and the rest of the world. It's not the press that destroyed your reputation but you!Posted by Richard M on June 12, 2007 8:49 PMReport this comment
Most of the blame for the public's cynicism of politicians can be laid fairly and squarely at Blair's door. True, there had always been a healthy contempt of MP's and their motives before Blair but with his arrival came the outright politicisation of the Civil Service. This body had previously been largely apolitical and was a useful conduit between government and media. Facts, statistics etc. could be, if not wholly believed, given a good degree of trust by the media and public. With New Labour's neutering and outright bypassing of this institution how could anyone give credence to figure on health, immigration, manufacturing etc. Until we again have an independent Civil Service why should we believe any MP's word?Posted by Steve on June 12, 2007 8:48 PMReport this comment
It's a bit thick that at present, Cavalier Tories have to don the spiritual accoutrements of Cromwell's New Model Army in defence of the manifold traditions of freedom of the press, England's rich cultural tradition, preservation of its educational legacy, and most tellingly, to preserve the provisions of the 1911 Insurance Act against...socialists! I'm a Yank, so please allow for my thickness, but isn't there something redolent of cognitive dissonance resonating here? Well, Mr. Prime Minister, I suppose then there is nothing for it but reintroduction of the "D" notice. This is how Bosnia and the Viet Nam conflict started, but I expect not much shall come of it until some kid gets picked up for the thought-crime of bringing a "Norton's Anthology of English Literature" to his English class in a British comprehensive. You'll have a Tory-driven Peterloo over this new InterNet and press regulatory authority before the dust settles. Actually, Modiin in Israel is a pretty nice spot for "Radio Free England Online." I've friends at link if the "Telegraph" and any other Crown-supporting Cavalier newpaper wishes help with the move. You won't have to explain anything if you do make the move there. Jews are very familiar with these sorts of government actions against the press, and take freedom of the press much more seriously, apparently, than does the UK. The substantiated literal descendants of the line of King David, the Dayyane family, would likewise be pleased to welcome Her Majesty if She cares to form the Government in Exile: the Mr. Carmel wines are quite good, and the Israel Symphony Orchestra is beyond compare. Out of the EU so England may be England again with neither fear nor favour from the mainland, where apparently they cannot even walk and eat a sandwich without a regulation scripting how it must be done..or zey vill ensure you vill be shot.Posted by Walt OBrien on June 12, 2007 8:45 PMReport this comment
Tony Blair complaining about the media is like John Prescott complaining about adulterers.Posted by John Hayes on June 12, 2007 8:45 PMReport this comment
This is a beauty - as Homer Simpson might say "It works on so many levels!" My view? Blair and the Media sooo totally deserve one another. And if anyone thinks that the wet blanket Cameron will be any better please arrange a brain scan. Also, what's thebetting this is 'censored' but then, you would never know, would you! Posted by Rhubarb on June 12, 2007 8:38 PMReport this comment
Now that Blair is blaming the media, the media should round on him and castigate and isolate him. The master of spin will get a taste of his own medicine. There is a sub-text to his speech. Once the money rolls in from the lecture curcuit, there will be more scrutiny about his behaviour and this will be reported and he will not like it a bit. He has to pay a price - his eventual down fall Posted by Anil Vadgama on June 12, 2007 8:34 PMReport this comment
When is this self serving clown going to go? Why is our system of government so wreaking of corruption? We need a society which sue the Government everytime they break the law which is often. Who is going to set one up? We can wring our hands all we like and they just keep laughing in our faces. Lets pull the rug from these criminal BLiar and the rest.Posted by Jane on June 12, 2007 8:31 PMReport this comment
Yony Blair remember Dr Kelly and the firing of Greg Dyke and Milligan for daring to speak the truth It's a good job we have a free press it is our only guardin from Labour/communisn dictatorship Posted by Sydney Hobson on June 12, 2007 8:28 PMReport this comment
It's interesting that when political parties are in opposition it seems the media can do little wrong. But as soon as they get into power...Posted by Ronni Curtis on June 12, 2007 8:24 PMReport this comment
No 6 on June 12, 2007 5:15 PM Well said, but: WHO IS NUMBER 1 ?? Posted by Ben Moss on June 12, 2007 8:18 PMReport this comment
Not since Berlin in the 30s has the World had such an orchestrated media as Britain under the Labour party. Now they want to take control of the bits that they have struggled to manipulate under the banner of 'reason'. The damage that this Government have done with their spin will take decades to unfold. Posted by Mark Holmes on June 12, 2007 8:18 PMReport this comment
Governments must never be allowed to censure the free press, otherwise democracy itself is threatened. The press do a vital and important job by holding our corrupt and sleazy politicians to account over the actions they would like to hide from us the public. Politicians have destroyed our faith in them, not journalists.Posted by Carl W. on June 12, 2007 8:12 PMReport this comment
Tony Blair is now feeling the effects of his own spin doctors losing their grip on the media. This appears to be his way of trying to blame the media for all the bad news he has been suffering.Posted by bill.knights@tiscasli.co.uk on June 12, 2007 7:55 PMReport this comment
Tony Blair doesn't seem to be a big fan of democracy. You have people being arrested in London for reading out the names of Britain's war dead; anti-communism protesters dragged out of the sight of the then Chinese president; the impending internal passports scheme (aka ID cards); detention without trial, and so on. The media is just about the only thing that ensures democracy in this country. Otherwise we just elect one gang or another gang every five years to do exactly as they please. And if they REALLY screw things up, there's always a Lord Hutton around to dig them out of it and prevent justice from being done. Blair is a disgrace from top to bottom. But at least he's consistent.Posted by Bismarck Malloy on June 12, 2007 7:52 PMReport this comment
"Welcome to the internet, comrade citizen. Please note that access to sites not approved by the Ministry Of Truth has been blocked, for the safety of you and your children. You will now be redirected to the BBC/Government website, which will provide you with all the truth you are considered to need." How long? 5 years?Posted by Ian on June 12, 2007 7:36 PMReport this comment
I cant wait for Mr Blair to depart and Labour face the next General election. I can see why Gordon Brown wants to be the Prime Minister he is party to all that has been put in place and agreed by all the cabinet. The press must speak out and any law to control the freedom of speech is just another step nearer to a police state.Posted by Graham Jesty on June 12, 2007 7:36 PMReport this comment
EVERYTHING that Blair and his Socialist comrades has done has caused the English to have no faith in the political system. Dave is not a lot better but at least we cannot accuse him of destroying England. Vote BNP/UKIP! Posted by David on June 12, 2007 7:34 PMReport this comment
How you think anyone can take anything you say seriously after taking us blindly into a muderous war in Iraq I will never know. The press have let you off lightly. Posted by jim on June 12, 2007 7:34 PMReport this comment
The sheer cheek of Bliar in blaming the “media” for “totally demoralising senior figures in public life ” is beyond compare. His government has caused more damage to civil liberties, in this part of the EU formally known as Great Britain, than Hitler and the mad baron managed together. He has done more than any British prime minister to make the description “politician” synonymous with liar. His use of professional liars (“spin-doctors”) in Downing Street has degraded the impact of the political message, probably beyond repair. The role of the media in exposing his government’s disingenuousness is vitally important, and long may it continue to call these arrogant politicians to heel. Posted by Chrisfrombrighton on June 12, 2007 7:31 PMReport this comment
Blair is right that the media is getting out of control, it is encouraging the public's cynicism to the point that it is damaging the country, but as long as politicians try to run so much of our lives and spend taxes so poorly then its hard to avoid. A private company which ran the whole of our health services and education so poorly and tried to tell us everything was great would be under similar criticism. The old arguments about Public v Private are outdated now, the public sector cannot meet the public's level of expectation in the modern media online age no matter how much money you spend or well-intentioned Posted by Adrian on June 12, 2007 7:18 PMReport this comment
Is it April 1st?Posted by Piers on June 12, 2007 7:14 PMReport this comment
I agree with Ann: "Tony. Just shut up and get out of our faces. Go!" He will find that his Eurograd pals will drop him like a hot potato as soon as he has no power left to deliver anything to the EUSSR. On the "Till him I'm in a meeting" list when he calls. Is he still on his Final Farewell Legacy World Tour that no one noticed, by the way?Posted by Verity on June 12, 2007 6:50 PMReport this comment
Attacking a free and democratic media...within hours of telling off Putin for his repression? Blair invented sleaze and spin, and now cries that he cannot control free comments...oh deary deary dear... Blair has done more to destroy liberty and freedom in this country than any home - grown leader since Cromwell. He wants to do more...in Brussels in a few days. The sooner this odious man is not PM the better (not that Brown will be any more trustworthy...he stole my pension, he might well steal my freedom too). Posted by R of M on June 12, 2007 6:46 PMReport this comment
Mr Blair probably has a point in his summary of the media but, as prime minister, he was in the best possible position to initiate change. Instead, he chose to play the game and now that things are so unfavourable, its toys out of the pram. Posted by Douglas on June 12, 2007 6:45 PMReport this comment
This really gave me a good belly laugh. If the "Media" had been fair, unbiased and honest, Blair would never have been PM. He, like the teletubbies, is a creation of the media. The sad thing is that much of that media has gone along with his 10 year charade. Maybe they deserve each other.Posted by John Ball on June 12, 2007 6:42 PMReport this comment
It would do Cameron good to read these blogs. We cannot all be 'delusional' ? Even Labour friends of mine would agree with much of what is written here about Blair. The failure of Cameron and Co to exploit this nationwide loathing is as wicked as Blair's manipulation of the media.Posted by Mikea on June 12, 2007 6:26 PMReport this comment
I admire Blair...he is going down kicking all the way! Nothing is his fault...all our fault. The guy is wonderful. If I had 2 salesmen like him working in my company (we sell universal tincture. It's a ointment that is a cure for everything!) I would be a multi-millionaire! By the way, have you heard the latest. High crime, violent crime - it's all down to us. We are the ones that are doing it, we are the ones that should just stop - thank you very much!!! Nothing to do with Labour's failure to do anything about it! Blair is great...what a guy, some nuts aye!Posted by Blairisgreat on June 12, 2007 6:22 PMReport this comment
Blair said, "The damage [by the media] saps the country's confidence and self-belief; it undermines its assessment of itself, its institutions; and above all, it reduces our capacity to take the right decisions, in the right spirit for our future." Such a hypocrite! How much truer if we say that of Blair and a decade of New Labour?!Posted by Rupert on June 12, 2007 6:22 PMReport this comment
What a sick joke! He has milked the press and media for all they are worth and then have the damned cheek to complain!Posted by Morris Hickey of Chigwell, Essex on June 12, 2007 6:20 PMReport this comment
I think this absolutely the single most amusing thing i've read all year. Tony crying because he has to give the ball back, oh dear Tony, would you like a hankey? To suggest that you know nothing of the manipulation of the media is like saying you know nothing about the legal system from which you graduated. Please. Grow up. Posted by N. Taylor on June 12, 2007 6:14 PMReport this comment
As a child my father sent me our local newsagent with instructions to say, "good morning my good man. May I please have a copy of The London Times and Gazetteer?" Nowadays, "Sport." My father is not alone. Most electors in the country should grow up, get information from reliable sources, and take responsibility for how they cast their votes. Posted by Tom Moore on June 12, 2007 6:14 PMReport this comment
Blair has damaged politics much more than the press - especially by his selfish manipulation of and low regard for our country's constitution. He is the master of sleeze. He and NULabour have always shown a contempt for this country's historical achievements, and they continually do their best to undermine British culture and traditions. Posted by Malcolm Edward on June 12, 2007 6:13 PMReport this comment
The reprobate who has the nerve to lambast the last bastions of free speech seems to conveniently forget the British public plus every other section of society, that has been suckered by his beligerance. Perhaps one restless night he may remember the illegal methods that infringed our rights, and those of the Muslim community, the immoral devastation of Iraq, and the numerous imperious activities he and his gang of six did spawn upon this society. He will be brouhgt to task, more probably sooner than later.Posted by John Bailey on June 12, 2007 6:09 PMReport this comment
Dear Mr. Blair, I took the trouble to read your speech from beginning to end and it was indeed a trouble. However, your appeal for balance in reporting has not fallen on deaf ears, so in the interest of impartiality I have thought long and hard in an effort to come up with something good to say about your disquisition. There is something good to say about it too; and it is that it does finally come to an end. This is something for which we should all be thankful; it is quite evident, after all, that you could have taxed the patience of the public with further circumlocutions around your wriggling need to suppress adverse comment on your appalling misbehaviour – a subject which could itself launch still more Ph. D. dissertations, to quote your phrase. Posted by Robert Upfold on June 12, 2007 6:08 PMReport this comment
Both, the same.Posted by Francis Tuttle on June 12, 2007 6:01 PMReport this comment
The biter bit ? Blair and Campbell manipulated the media to gain power. They destroyed John Major ( deservedly) using the media. Even the loathing of both Blairs by the 'Mail' has not worked. Who now believes anything that he says though ? The real falure has been the Conservative Party in all this. They have failed in the same decade to expose the manipulation that has been central to Blair's success. Posted by Mikea on June 12, 2007 6:00 PMReport this comment
Who has damaged politics more: Tony Blair or the media? Hmmm. This is a chicken and egg one. What did the first chicken hatch out of? And it wasn't a a chicken, presumably, that laid whatever it was. The answer is that the media created Tony Blair, not the other way round. He didn't want the media to do to him what they had been doing to politicians since the 1970s. Therefore the media damaged politics, since the politicians must dance to their tune to get elected. Mind you, there's not much to choose between them. But there is media and media. You have responsible newspapers like the Daily Telegraph, who behave rationally and generally separate news and comment (although you can still occasionally get an irritating unsolicited journalistic view in a Telegraph news item). Then there are less responsible newspapers. But television has long enjoyed poll position in the manipulation of public opinion. Those people who cannot or will not read can still watch television, and they can also vote, in huge numbers. That is why the BBC is full of activists - socialists, feminists, vegetarians, global warmers, and other busybodies with agendas, intent on pushing individual bonnet bees regardless of the harm they cause. The politicians are puppets in this environment, as evinced at the way David Cameron is having to divest himself of the policies beloved by his party, and don new wet liberal clothes, hoping that his party supporters will not decamp to UKIP et al. The clothes don't fit very well, but if he wants to gain power he must curry favour with the media, especially television, and especially the BBC. And the politicians wonder why we are cynical!Posted by Scott, East Anglia on June 12, 2007 5:58 PMReport this comment
How can the so called socialists of the party of the people, what a sick joke, although there are still many people in Wales and the North of England who still hold to this fallacy, allowing this man Blair to continue as its leader. This man is going to sell out more of our country to those European jackels, and no one has the guts to stop him. The main political parties are in cahoots with the corrupt EU political dictatorial sleasy regime, and only pretend to protest for the benefit of the plebs. Without the mainline national news papers, and publications like Open Europe, and Liberty News, we the masses, would have no one to tell us the truth, we not have a clue what our leaders are getting away with. The BBC gave up years ago,speaking for the people.Posted by Ken Douglas on June 12, 2007 5:55 PMReport this comment
What a self-serving piece of guff! The man is delusionry. Obfuscation and lying have been his mantra for at least 10 years. Now he is trying to salve his conscience whilst he still has a chance to be heard. Thank goodness for not much longer. His hypocracy has been blinding. His achievements have had such a negative effect on the self respect of the British. Now his inability to see that his activity in manipulating the press has been due to his actions and suggests that he thinks that critism of his actions are not justified. Why does he not realise this? This could of course be due to an overblown ego that has lead to other leaders that have forced themselves on gullible populations. Perhaps those that put Blair in power, for not one, two but three times should look to their conscience as they are partially culpable. Posted by JOHN on June 12, 2007 5:54 PMReport this comment
Will we ever again have politicians that have any idea of real life? Unfortunately i believe the answer is no. We will be governed, not by persons who are acting on our behalf, who have some understanding of what real life is all about, for the good of the people they are supposed to represent, but who are just using us for their own "educated"??? political (the filthiest word in the English language) endsPosted by Edward Polatajko on June 12, 2007 5:53 PMReport this comment
Internet News reporting is faster and harder for government to cover up and falls outside 'controlled media barons' influence. The last bastion of free speech has been recognised by the power hungry industrial military complex that their plans can be scuppered. The No1 UK puppet at the moment (Tony Blair) has no doubt been commanded to suggest more control of the media.Posted by roger on June 12, 2007 5:52 PMReport this comment
In 1997 Mr.Blair decided that Parliament was unfit for purpose and that only he knew the way forward. New Labour decided it would pay any price to remain in power and to their eternal shame, looked the other way. HM Opposition parties forgot how to oppose-difficult with so many parties all struggling to claim the middle ground, so an Autocracy was born. The Press alone took up the cudgels, so one Autocracy challenged another. How poorly our political system has served this country. Parliament,reassert yourself or step aside. At present you are unfit for purpose!And as for the Press,well,that's another agenda! Posted by Paul Stoner on June 12, 2007 5:50 PMReport this comment
What is really worrying is how many more people there are in the country who seriously share the view expressed today by Oracle of Knightsbridge. (5:10 PM.)Posted by Perry on June 12, 2007 5:45 PMReport this comment
oh just shut up Tony and just goPosted by Ann on June 12, 2007 5:44 PMReport this comment
Mr Blair has realised that the Internet media is read by largely anti-labour voters. There wouldn't be any other reason for targeting it and there isn't any doubt whatsoever that Blair, almost single handedly, (with just a little help from Brown), has degraded and devalued politics in Britain by attempting to manipulate the status quo with lies and litigation. The cynicism of the current electorate is 200% Bair's fault, there isn't any doubt about that. Blair would like to silence anyone who disagrees with him...he is a dangerous man. Posted by judy on June 12, 2007 5:42 PMReport this comment
Despite the damage done to us by years of a full-tilt government spinning machine we can now relax a bit as a normal young family man takes over as prime minister.Posted by Daphne. on June 12, 2007 5:41 PMReport this comment
If a clampdown is going to put the "Telegraph" team at risk of incarceration for not reporting the news "the Government's way," I cordially invite them to set up shop here in North America, either in Montreal or New York City. It would take about 72 hours to float the funds and provide a support staff for "Radio Free England Online." The only caveat is Sir Martin Gilbert and his precious archives need to come along, too, so the legacy is not lost. Posted by Walt OBrien on June 12, 2007 5:40 PMReport this comment
Honest Tony, the Arfur Daly of politics. "Honest geezer would I lie to you". Unfortunately most of the media fell for this sap. Posted by banachech on June 12, 2007 5:37 PMReport this comment
There are two people that have damaged British politics and they are Blair and Brown with their lies,deciet and constant spin. Blair cannot even be honest now he is leaving. He is still lying to us about the new EC costitution we he has decided to call a treaty in order to ingratiate himself with the EU political elite. This deception he hopes will put him in the running for the Presidents job. It also serves as his final punishment to the electorate for what he considers to be their disloyalty to him.Posted by S Reszczynski on June 12, 2007 5:35 PMReport this comment
The garrulous, effusive Blair obviously thinks the public should be as docile as parliament was when he led the UK into a disastrous, illegal and immoral war. But thanks to the internet the general public fully understands and can comment on vicious politicians like Blair whose ill-advised actions have led to over 650,000 deaths. We also note the stench of corruption at BAE and with cash for peerages. We even wonder how Bliar got such enormous mortgage loans many many many times his salary. And we say so using our freedom of speech. He may not like it but, if any politician deserves his reputation to be shredded, it is Blair. His killing will never be forgotten. Like millions, if not billions, around the world we hope to see him in the dock at the Hague. I guess Fox news reporters and the like are still his friends since they usually sit deep in the pockets of the right-wing media tycoons.Posted by Phil on June 12, 2007 5:34 PMReport this comment
The day after the infamous 45- minutes-from-disaster dossier appeared, I sent Sky news an email prophesying that it would destroy Blair's credibility. I never saw that view expressed anywhere in the press. They were not feral enough!Posted by Charles Southwood on June 12, 2007 5:30 PMReport this comment
PROPAGANDA PROPAGANDA PROPAGANDA Blair has got some neck complaining about the balance of fairness in from the press. From his monthly so called PM press briefings to the abuse of government information delivery mechanisms, this government has bombarded us with blatent Labour propaganda. Never in our history has government funds & the media been so overtly used & abused in order to convey and glorify this socialist Labour party and its aims & so called achievements. . Posted by Phil Kean on June 12, 2007 5:27 PMReport this comment
The media is the only reason a complete fraud like him could stay in power for 10 minutes. Seriously, he is an insult to the countryPosted by David Kelly Was Right on June 12, 2007 5:26 PMReport this comment
Blair has a cheek to have a go at the media now.I wonder what this slippery unprincipled cretin has to hide? Im sure he is trying to head off any future fiddling of his that is bubbling under the surface.Posted by ZORRO on June 12, 2007 5:26 PMReport this comment
the emperor has no clothes.bring on gordon brown.wilkes and liberty.Posted by phil seaton on June 12, 2007 5:25 PMReport this comment
The critics of New Media are usually those who don't understand it, are threatened by it and/or who can't find a way to control it. Mr. Blair would have been smarter to have kept his thoughts to himself (or "behind closed doors") on this subject as it only takes away from public perception, which seems to have been of greater importance to him than matters of substance. Very disappointed here. Posted by Henry Cave Devine on June 12, 2007 5:23 PMReport this comment
Blair rallies against anything the old control freak can't control - not so that he can divulge the truth but his own half-truths or worse. Unlike him, at least the media have been largely factual about him and his party - with a few exceptions such as Murdoch's sycophantic media.Posted by John on June 12, 2007 5:22 PMReport this comment
Who created the headlines "24 hours to save the NHS" or "45 minutes warning" or "weapons of mass destruction" or "the war on terror"....need I go on? Was it not the self-same PM on his sofa? How many surveillance camera are in place in his name; I can't move money from my account to my son's account without "proving my identity" and I won't even mention identity cards! Blair and his ill-starred project have set back the civil liberties in this great country of ours to about a fortnight before the Magna Carta was signed. Posted by mike m. england on June 12, 2007 5:21 PMReport this comment
Let freedom reign. The idea that Tony is remotely qualified to determine what reporting should consist of is laughable at best, pernicious at worst.Posted by Ivan on June 12, 2007 5:20 PMReport this comment
The biter has been bitten. Blair's problem with the media is that he kept getting found out.Posted by larry taylor on June 12, 2007 5:19 PMReport this comment
I volunteer to run the NuLabour Ministry of Truth. I've got the name for it. Also, if you recall the Richard Burton-John Hurt version, I also provide free dental work. I guess the message is, if politicians like what they hear, it's good news, and if they don't, it's time for censorship. And to balance this, to ensure nothing doubleplus ungood happens to me, there really DOES need to be differentiation between the following in explicit terms: A. Commentary and editorial pieces B. Chronicling of events, and C. Clarification of the specific agendae of the reporting organizations to validate (or not) the extent to which they ought to be taken seriously. For instance, the NUJ anti-Israel boycott has already cost the UK millions in lost trade. D. UK reporters in Israel have provided Jewish targeting data routinely to Islamist intelligence operatives (as well as UN observer teams). Have they been doing the same in Iraq and Afghanistan with British and US troops as the targets? Is this news reporting, do you think? And yes, I am a very biased reporter, have been since after the Dolphinarium blast. Couldn't be more so, thanks.Posted by Walt OBrien on June 12, 2007 5:19 PMReport this comment
Funny how it always seems to be someone else's fault, doesn't it Mr. Blair? Don't forget to close the door to No.10 on your way out and, hopefully, into oblivion.Posted by Chris Hayes on June 12, 2007 5:16 PMReport this comment
Oh,silly me ,I thought Rupert Murdoch controlled the UK media and helped the Labour party in to power. Very ungrateful tirade by the PM who just won't go away.Posted by Disgusted Dorothy on June 12, 2007 5:16 PMReport this comment
If the media is a feral beast, what are the pigs that run our farm? Its not ordinary pigs that run our Animal Farm. Blair, Brown and Prescott are more that. They are rampaging warthogs, destroying anything and anyone that gets in their path. Particularly Prescot, with his snout in the trough, and a non job, grunt grunt oink oink. Warthog Brown snapped an answer recently when asked about Iraq "We have democracy in Iraq, grunt grunt oink oink." If thats democracy, what does anarchy look like. Perhaps the Telegraph could get their cartoonist on the job. Real faces could be put on pig bodies, wth snouts added to the faces. They could show the rampaging trio, with a superfat Prescott, with their snouts gouging furrows in the mud. Everthing could be knocked over, or broken, representing those who have suffered because of them, Iraq, Pensions, etc. They could be drunk on whisky like the real pigs in Animal Farm. The ones in the depute chief pig contest could be shown in the background, fighting, drunk, jioning in the wrecking spree. Brown could be running amok with his snout cutting furrows in the mud, and a bag of Railtracks shareholders seized assets.Some of them, including me, have been "torn to bits" A book could be lying on the ground, "Nationalisation without compensation," and Brown could be charging over it. A sign could be on a wall, in Animal Farm fashion, "Iraq, a democracy." Other animals could be looking at this wondering what on Earth the pigs could be up to. Feral compusively lying warthogs run our Animal Farm. A double page spread would be needed for the cartoon. The feral beasts on the rampage could be a title. Posted by No 6 on June 12, 2007 5:15 PMReport this comment
Blair cannot damage politics and be elected three times. Unless you consider democracy a collateral damage of politics, that is. I wish Gordon Brown was half as good as he his.Posted by Oracle of Knightsbridge on June 12, 2007 5:10 PMReport this comment
A media lacking analytical depth (which is surely a function of the apathy of the public) suited Labour fine in the early days when they were all about grabbing headlines, burying bad news and shutting down dissent. It was easy, with an enormous coterie of spin doctors and a rather large majority, all on-message, to dominate the media and rarely to be torn apart in any meaningful way. Now, with a modest majority, a bored, disillusioned electorate and enough bad newsflow, TB decides that he doesn't like the media. Who the hell wants to listen to the self righteous rantings of a has-been, especially when his proposed solution is more regulation/legislation? When politicians attempt to secure more secrecy for their activities it isn't usually for honourable reasons. Would TB's version of balanced coverage (rather like his disingenuous calls for "a debate") involve the press being nicer to him? He really doesn't understand that a retiree can be criticised.Posted by AJ on June 12, 2007 5:09 PMReport this comment
When Blair placed his signature under the caveat to the dodgy dossier, he became yesterday’s man – already judged and condemned by his peers, his party and the populace at large – remaining only to be judged and hopefully condemned by history, if not the international courts… Thank goodness for the media, especially the independent internet media and blogger’s who don’t report by editorial dictat – of which there are many qualitative impartial sites. Posturing in this way at this late stage of the game really does leave one wondering how much further new labour intends to erode freedom of speech. Enough is enough. They have quite frankly taken enough liberties… Posted by slingshot on June 12, 2007 5:07 PMReport this comment
The freedom of the press is sacrosanct if you want to maintain a democracy. However Mr Hitler did not think so.Posted by Bernard Parke on June 12, 2007 4:57 PMReport this comment
Attacking the media is always a sign of weakness, never a sign of greatness. Posted by Dave Reynolds on June 12, 2007 4:29 PMReport this comment
The bigger the lie, the greatest the chances to be believed. None of Tony Blair's speeches have their origins in scientific observation, thinking or reasoning. They are all drafted on Sensualism, and attempting to "grow his own faith". As a successful salesman for the New World Order he soon was encountering thorny questions. Tony Blair knows very well when he is facing issues that require too much scrutiny, sparks fly! Thanks to the jackals of the New World Order (their job is to remove witnesses for prosecution) he is remarkably surviving. How long though? There are about 159 intelligence officers ready to testify providing their safety is guaranteed by the International Court for War Crimes, The Supreme Court, and The High Court. Posted by George Fondis on June 12, 2007 4:21 PMReport this comment
Can someone please explain what is happening to the country? The media is supposed to act as a watchdog - to keep political leaders in check and to act as a whistle blower. When the media does its job, the politicians want it to stop them. Posted by John on June 12, 2007 4:19 PMReport this comment
Until Bliar and his obnoxious cronies depart this mortal coil can't the media just censor this idiot and his family's name from the media. we have had 10 years of lies and deceit and i am heartily sick and tired of seeing his grinning face in papers and on the tv. the unfortunate thing is that the opposition are doing such a good job of making themselves unelectable that we've probably got another 10 years of an equal obnoxious person leering out at usPosted by geoff potter on June 12, 2007 4:18 PMReport this comment
This is yesterday's man, who should go gracefully rather than petulantly.Posted by Stuart Hamilton on June 12, 2007 4:13 PMReport this comment
Whatever gives Tony Blair the impression we are remotely interested in whatever it is he "believes" in today?Posted by Dr Doudelle Bangomosphere on June 12, 2007 4:09 PMReport this comment
Without question, the Press. They have the same advantage as opposition parties. They can say pretty much what they want without having to demonstrate that they could do a better job. It’s oh so easy to criticise when you don’t have to deliver. Undoubtedly the present government have sometimes misled (and even lied to) the public, but that is no different from every government that has gone before. Administration would be impossible it they had to please every member of the public. The fault of the press is in presenting everything as if government CAN please everyone. And, at the same time, the only news that is reported is negative, 'bad news’. Try reporting things that go right and are beneficial to the extent that they actually occur (or, put another way only report bad news in the same ratio to other news as its occurrence). That would be ‘balanced reporting’. But it’s never happened and I’m sure it never will because essentially the press are prurient and lazy. It’s much easier to whip up a lynch mob than it is to motivate people constructively Posted by Bob Finbow on June 12, 2007 4:05 PMReport this comment
The media. Thanks for asking.Posted by Andrew Pawley on June 12, 2007 4:03 PMReport this comment
Politicians and media are as bad as each other, perhaps over the last 10 years both have walked over the lines of acceptability of what was acceptable a decade ago. There is also the problem for media of the new technology of the internet, whilst the politicians have brought about a big brother society. Infringing press freedom will further create a risk of abuse of power, as media despite their faults keep politicans in check. Posted by Mabon Dane on June 12, 2007 4:02 PMReport this comment
Curbs on Journalism? Blair’s legacy, Tax it, Ban it, Monitor it. He would have got away with it if it hadn't been for those damn meddling newspapers. Seriously though I’m actually beginning to think Blair is loosing his grip on reality and the sooner he goes the better, Civil liberties, a free press such things are troublesome for a maniacal control freak such as Mr. Blair, astonishing really? A British PM arguing for restricting the free press, this from a man whose propaganda arm thought 9/11 was a “good day to bury bad news” .Posted by WS on June 12, 2007 4:01 PMReport this comment
Quote: "Mr Blair insisted that there was still a genuine desire for impartial news coverage among the public." In that case he should privatise the BBC and close down 'The Guardian', not worry about a few web bloggers. I've become increasingly worried at Labour's control freak tendencies, but for Blair to be openly calling for censorship of the Internet is a new and terrifying low. Does he really want the UK to become like Iran and China in terms of freedom of speech? I suspect that the answer to that question is a genuine 'yes', and that his sentiments are shared by Gordon Brown and most (if not all) of those who will form his cabinet. Just as the economy is teetering on the brink of collapse and Labour's political support has crumbled in England and is crumbling in Scotland and Wales, Labour announces plans to revive legislation that makes it a terrorist crime for more than 30 people to congregate in public without official permission, and is now openly calling for the censorship of political opinions expressed on the Internet. Yikes!Posted by Leo Enticknap on June 12, 2007 3:51 PMReport this comment
No wonder the public have no time for politicians when T.Bliar stands up and says the media is to blame for damaging politics.He and A.Campbell manipulated and spun every story to their advantage,then he has the nerve to say it is the medias fault. True the press has made some pretty awful errors and their constant dumb stories about celebs.etc are poor.Both sides have something to answer for. Posted by Nigel on June 12, 2007 3:48 PMReport this comment
This has to be a no brainer. The responsible media does not make up the news. We have had a regime in power for ten years which has cynically manipulated information to ensure it gets the best possible press, exploits 'bad news days' (until it got caught red handed) and so forth. Key to the election and re-election of Labour was highly skilled spin aka media manipulation - and it has been their watchword in government as they have failed and failed. In general the media reflects a certain ambience - that of the proprietors. There is a known and open editorial bias - but there is also honesty across the full spectrum of political reporting. Perhaps one area which has damaged the media is where organisations such as the BBC - which are assumed to be impartial - have clear positions on a number of political divides which have been widely registered as editorial bias. Politicians must work with, even woo, the media - but the relationship is more akin to one of those Soviet era leadership bearhugs which always looked an unnatural and uncomfortable embrace where each was trying to crush the life out of the other. The media loves a bit of humbug, a few personal foibles, a u-turn - that is in the nature of what attracts the punters. Politicians of course, no matter how they speak of openness - would dearly love to gag all but the party line - even in our western society. So the politicians and the media are not natural allies. The latter can set up and knock down the former. The former can hogtie the freedom of the latter via legislation. Each knows they are best served when an uneasy truce is maintained. A free press, which reports what it believes and makes plain its own politics is a healthy thing. The bottom line of that observation is that we could all do with a little more objectivity in political reportage - and a lot less of the recording of spin as fact.Posted by simon coulter on June 12, 2007 3:43 PMReport this comment
Politics and more exactly the government of the day IS the publics interest, as they are elected to represent US. It is Bliar and his cronies who have attempted (and are now failing) to shroud their activities in the darkness of spin. So the media are innocent of all charges!Posted by Hawkeye on June 12, 2007 3:36 PMReport this comment
I dare say he'll suggest banning it. Not all of it of course - where would he be without the great Socialist mouthpiece, the BBC?Posted by Clive Dane on June 12, 2007 3:23 PMReport this comment
Blair & Co have, by his own admission, brought government & politicians in to disrepute. Were it not for the media, & newspapers in particular the U.K. public would know even less than we do now.Sadly, Cameron & crew don't sound much better.We need to look for a comletely new party.Posted by Michael Owen on June 12, 2007 3:19 PMReport this comment
My God, what contempt he shows for both the truth and for the British public. One wonders how he would respond if the media took him at his word and simply stopped reporting anything he said? While he would - no doubt - be extremely unhappy, I guess that most of the rest of us would be absolutely delighted. Posted by grumpy on June 12, 2007 3:19 PMReport this comment
How people here excel in missing the point. Criticisms of Blair's policies and moaning about alleged bias in the BBC are completely irrelevant to what Blair is saying. He's saying that the way the media market works poisons the relationship between politicians and voters, no matter how honourable they might be, and obscures the real complexity of issues. In that, I'm pretty sure he's right. Politicians and the media are in an arms race that no-one can opt out of, one that inevitably confines political discourse to bland on-message utterances. "Straight talkers" are celebrated by the media, but at the same time are used to skewer parties by exposing "divisions". Voters dislike divided parties, so the straight talkers have to be reined in, to avoid political damage. Parties are then accused of manipulating the media, and have to engage in an elaborate game to pretend they're not. And so it goes on. He's especially right when he says that Watergate planted in people's minds the idea that all politicians lie and act in bad faith. This has now become a truism that is never subjected to any kind of objective test. Speculating about motives is lazy politics, because motives are often impossible to know. Better to stick to the what you know in judging policies. Unless you're a future historian, "Was Iraq a mistake?" is a better question than "Did Blair take us to war for the wrong reasons?". It's also the only one you can answer with facts rather than speculation. Posted by David Pritchard on June 12, 2007 3:14 PMReport this comment
The Media has every right, and still is the last bastion, of our Freedom of Speech. Anything which exposes the government is in the interest of the British public. If Labour weren't such a bunch of incompetents they wouldn't be whining so much and get on with their jobs doing it properly with honest intentions. The Media needs to keep their noses well focused in the wind.Posted by Dave Williams on June 12, 2007 3:11 PMReport this comment
My old dad used to say "Never trust a mouth-breather" - anyone seen Gordon Browm lately?Posted by r walker on June 12, 2007 3:07 PMReport this comment
"Tis great sport to see the engineer hoist with his own petard" ShakespearePosted by Nick R on June 12, 2007 3:06 PMReport this comment
I agree that the media is too aggressive, unbalanced and headline-seeking. There are too many channels and media outlets, all vying for an exclusive - no wonder that they overdo it. We need much tighter rules to constrain in accurate or 'imaginative' reporting. Having said that, Blair is by no means blameless, and fuelled this by his and Alistair Campbell's heavy handed approach.Posted by Bickley on June 12, 2007 3:05 PMReport this comment
Actually he's close to spot on with this. But he's just not in a position to make any demands whatsoever because he sold out any moral authority he might have had a very, very long time ago.Posted by P Williams on June 12, 2007 3:01 PMReport this comment
I love media : they often expose rancid politicians. I dslike self-seeking.moralising politicians which means 99% of them.The remaining 1% are not worth listening to.Posted by Dr. Abdul Jaleel on June 12, 2007 3:01 PMReport this comment
When Tony Blair and New labour unleashed a tiger called spin for want of a better word, like non accountability, it should come as no surprise that this feral beast has come back to bite his progenitor right where it hurts. For him to blame the media is hypocritical when you consider that they are both singing from the same song sheet.Posted by philip on June 12, 2007 2:56 PMReport this comment
Blair just cannot stand anyone that dissagrees with him. He has manipulated the truth like no other prime minister. The media must be as sick of him as the rest of us are.Posted by Johnny Norfolk on June 12, 2007 2:54 PMReport this comment
I agree totally with Tony Blair. I have not had a television for 10 years. I chose to get rid of it because of the dire newsreporting. I turned to BBC Radio 4 which is no better. I cannot believe a word they say. However, I am aware of the political views of most of the reporters. This hardly shows impartiality. News reporting is full of speculation and follows the tabloid agends in character assasinations. I now rely on the Telegraph. It is as unbiased as newsreporting is going to get most of the time, although, I was dismayed at the coverage the McCann case was given. Posted by Ruth Leith on June 12, 2007 2:53 PMReport this comment
Yes, I agree. I feel sometimes as if the media are waging a war against institutions. The coverage of the alleged BAE bribes is a case in point. Some journalists have seemed determined to uncover wrong-doing. It is as if we blind ourselves to the way the world is and invent our own version of what it should be. There is no single version of the truth, but some refuse, out of hand, the version offered by those in authority. This tendency to self-destruct is peculiarly British and cannot be in the national interest. Equally off-putting is the sheer bitchiness and cattiness of some sections of the hack sisterhood towards Cherie Blair. Posted by MDA on June 12, 2007 2:52 PMReport this comment
This trash coming from the politician who has done his utmost to destroy our freedoms is absolutely beyond belief. He has destroyed the credibility of the BBC, he was responsible for letting loose Alistair Campbell on our free press. I am not surprised he feels they answer back! I am eternally grateful that his namesake (Eric Arthur Blair -- aka Orwell) painted a picture of what big brother would do to us when freedoms are taken away so we can see the signs. Good riddance Mr Anthony Blair and take your control-freakery, spin and statism with you. And now I hope the free press sets about sorting out Gordon Brown.Posted by John, Enfield on June 12, 2007 2:43 PMReport this comment
Media always has its share, but this time Tony raced them all by his deeds..Posted by Viks on June 12, 2007 2:42 PMReport this comment
Do we really need to answer this question: Blair was only to happy to use the media in the first few year but when Blair showed his true colours the press, quite rightly, showed him for what he really was. Posted by Jon Clarke on June 12, 2007 2:40 PMReport this comment
Blair and Alastair Campbell happily created the 'feral beast' to attack the Tories but now things are becoming a little even handed he pouts. Posted by Ralph on June 12, 2007 2:40 PMReport this comment
I fail to see what the complaint is all about, the press can only print the facts and comment on them. Blair determines the facts, if he is unhappy with them he should not have created them in the first place!Posted by Kevin Sullivan on June 12, 2007 2:40 PMReport this comment
How right you are ... andy on June 12, 2007 2:11 PM Only trouble is the rot started with Atlee and every successive socialist government since WW2. Posted by adrian on June 12, 2007 2:39 PMReport this comment
This is the nearest you'll get to an apolgy from Blair for his abject failure in taking "the right decisions in the right spirit for our future". That is tantamount to an admission that for several years it was Alistair Campbell and not TB who ran the Government. But we knew this already Tony.Posted by Bill on June 12, 2007 2:30 PMReport this comment
Without a doubt the media…..Posted by Long Gone on June 12, 2007 2:28 PMReport this comment
You still here ? Go away Blair, no one cares what you think anymore.Posted by simon russell on June 12, 2007 2:25 PMReport this comment
Odd that Blair explodes like this precisely at the time the little business with Prince Bandar comes to the fore. Are they perhaps related? WHAT, precisely, is Blair actually threatening here, in relation to the "pernicious" media pushing "conspiracy theory" on the Internet, or wherever? Might there be plans afoot for another wave of "cleaning up" the media, the way the BBC was "cleaned up" (?!) after the Kelly Affair - an Affair that, I am not alone in thinking, is most definitely NOT cleared up. Do Blair's controllers intend to prevent us from gaining access to information by electronic black-walling - just as his Government now instructs us to "stop all unnecessary travel"? And stop all unnecessary thinking, perhaps? Posted by katharine kanter on June 12, 2007 2:23 PMReport this comment
It is a triangle of politicians, the press and the accepting public each feeding off the other. The public has become incredibly lazy, gullible and easy to manipulate; "spin" only works when the recipient allows it. The media writes a story that satisfies something the reader needs, be it entertainment, provocation, learning or whatever; the story does not need to constitute anything close to the truth, rigorous honesty or full disclosure but in its most effective form contains enough facts to make it appear to be the one or more of the aforementioned (think through that one closely, amigos); the media needs to re-set its standards toward truth and completeness without covering real information with excessive or superficial facts. Last but not least.... the politicians (prefer not to single out any one in particular on this matter) it has become a material lowering of standards for the most part; I am fed up with being told what I should want to hear; give me the good and the bad news, straightforward including statements of the issues and the solutions even if they aren't perfect; stop burdening me with sentimentality, social conscience and dewey mental images for the purposes of distorting reality and furthering individual and party political causes. And frankly if the government is going to take away from the rich and/or the poor call it for what it is; don't downgrade education, healthcare, transport, etc. as a way of obscuring the theft. (And privatizations and reorganizations during the past 10+ years have done almost nothing but enrich the wallets of a few of the already wealthy.) Give the news... and the theft... to us straight; don't enable yourselves and the public with these continuing half-truths and fairy tales. Stop buying my vote with fluff. Mr. Brown is going to wipe the floor with most of our leaders. He is brilliant and experienced. Just be aware of the paths and possible outcomes; he has an opportunity to be one of our greatest leaders... or one of our worst.Posted by Henry Cave Devine on June 12, 2007 2:22 PMReport this comment
I hate the media. I dont believe a single thing They ever say. Come to think of it, why am I writing this...on a stoopid Media page!Posted by Simon Falla on June 12, 2007 2:22 PMReport this comment
Blairs tirade is truly rich, given the support he has received from the Red Tops over the years: not to mention Sky News. For the first five to six years of his tenure - or reign - he benefited from either media support, or silence, despite the huge number of public and 'private' failings. However, it seems to me that what he is really afraid of is sites such as these, where the public can speak directly to itself and where commentators are less likely to pull punches in deference to editorial guidelines. Posted by Robert U on June 12, 2007 2:20 PMReport this comment
The sad thing is, that attacks on the media are so rare. The media do not attack each other. Imagine if an untrue media story were treated to the same media frenzy as a politician's lie. Much reporting can be found, either through simple net searches or through listening to the people involved directly, to be distorted or worse - but the media almost never take up on this. They are, uniquely, immune from criticism - and because of this they lack and destroy integrity..Posted by Chris Bore on June 12, 2007 2:15 PMReport this comment
Bliar - nuff said.Posted by Edward Green on June 12, 2007 2:14 PMReport this comment
God, how Blair sounds like every fading, unsuccessful politician. Especially those in America. They all turn on the press. Remember Nixon's: "You won't have Nixon to kick around any more." Feral beasts? Who did the killing in Iraq? Who has likely broken almost every fatuous promise he ever made? The fault, dear Tony, is not in the press.Posted by John Chuckman on June 12, 2007 2:13 PMReport this comment
For year before labour won our country was in a mess. Today we do have a better country than before. Yes we do have a war and yes because of the press winding the public up about how bad we were going to war has killed many soldiers. Yes labour has had there good and bad times but is that not life with every one. I for one would not liek to be the PM could you??????????????? Everyone is such an expert.Posted by andy on June 12, 2007 2:11 PMReport this comment
Tony Tony Tony. Deluded until the end. The man with the striking smile and bottomless pit of empty promises has now turned on the very institution that aided his election in the first place. A man who approved and then touted the concept of 'New Labour' to the country, via the press, cannot now start criticising it. Apart from the fact that he has! The poor fool! So, retreat to your large mortgages Tony, take stock of your situation and don't you ever, ever dare to appear in a newspaper, or on our TV screens again. However, we all know that Tony is a slippery little blighter. We also know that he'll soon be back, smiling that eminently strikeable smile and trying to get us to purchase his memoirs about how he really thought that Iraq were 45 minutes away from launching WMDs or something. Yawn yawn. After Chamberlain, you are only the second British Prime Minister in history to have been hoodwinked by a tyrant. Deal with it, try to leave with some semblance of dignity left and please stop your bleating. Posted by Mat on June 12, 2007 2:09 PMReport this comment
I agree with Tony, for once. How about - All text that is factual is printed in Black font. All text that is commentary is printed in Blue font.Posted by Mark on June 12, 2007 2:06 PMReport this comment
He who lives by the sword should die by the sword. Blair deserves everything he gets from the same media he has tried to exploit.Posted by Hamish on June 12, 2007 2:04 PMReport this comment
He presents himself a fabulous target. But as Blair's final act shifts from soap opera to high-camp pantomime, he continues to hog the agenda. Opposition, anyone? Judging from the PM's stated intolerance of the media, imagine how lively the House and our politics might have been all this time, if only there had been a vocal and combative opposition ... It's a pity the only dissent came from some of the media some of the time.Posted by Facchetti on June 12, 2007 2:04 PMReport this comment
Isn't it ironic that he blames the media for hindering his capacity to 'make the right decisions'? If he was honest he might just admit that it is he and his government who are running round like feral beasts. He courted the attention of the press and has ultimately become its victim. If all else fails - and he certainly has - blame the messenger. Posted by Lickyalips on June 12, 2007 2:01 PMReport this comment
Blair is merely trying to divert blame from his vacuity and for that of his 'New Labour' party. Campbell is often called the 'Master of Spin' but who appointed him and kept him there? Blair - the real spin master. Blair complains that the media machine wrecks political reputations but Blair is very guilty of the opposite - an obsession with spinning his image with words, posing and gestures far above substance. He had no real reputation to begin with (all spun,) and far from any achievements all he has done is to destroy (eg. our institutions, the Union, et al - as one would expect of a leader and party dealing in fantasy and image rather than reality) but if anyone wrecked his artificial one - it was no one but himself; ingratiating himself to the Americans after 9/11 like the shallow opportunist he has always been. Posted by Rupert on June 12, 2007 2:00 PMReport this comment
Hoist by his own petard...but either too cynical or worse to dim and holier than thou to recognise it. Remind me..have any of his ministers resigned for the collossal incompetance and wasting of money that his government has engaged in. Honesty must start with those elected to serve us and with this we require transparency and responsibility. Not a bunch of self serving lawyers and career politicians. Posted by simonjjackson@googlemail.com on June 12, 2007 1:51 PMReport this comment
Mr Blair used the media, in the initial 1997 campaign, and lots of 'spin' to get across the message that Labour had changed and had moved into the centre ground of politics in Britain pushing the Tories further to the right. However, the media pretty soon woke up, well some of the media did, to what was happening and began to question policy decisions and direction. When Mr Blair calls the media 'feral' what he really means is that he has spent too much time as an actor and showman appealing to the world's media, by using 'spin', in order to maintain a high profile and his place on the world stage as an international statesman. But, it now seems that his time on stage is almost at an end, apart from those people who will pay big money to listen to him. As Shakespeare suggested, "All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players; They have their exits and their entrances; And one man in his time plays many parts. His acts being seven ages." Just, As You Like It, Mr Blair.Posted by Kenneth Armitage on June 12, 2007 1:44 PMReport this comment
This is rich: Tony Blair complaining about the media is like the pope complaining about Catholics. Posted by Thorsten Krings on June 12, 2007 1:44 PMReport this comment
A lame excuse for gross incompetence from the lamest of governments. Oh how the mighty have fallen!Posted by Chris on June 12, 2007 1:42 PMReport this comment
Tony Blair and New Labour are responsible for the entire malaise of British politics and the media. It's very hard to see how, his having achieved the contempt of 80% of the population and the indifference of the rest, the reputation of government can be restored in less than a period of generations. Had Blair, or indeed his it is they reflect the attitude of the public that is their market.Posted by Joss Wynne Evans on June 12, 2007 1:38 PMReport this comment
What a laughable clown we have in Tony Blair. This is a man took us in to an illegal war with Iraq. This is the same man who promised the UK a referendum on Europe then does a complete U-Turn and is just about to hand over more of our dwindling sovereignty. Traitors deserve everything the get. The media have been spot on so far. Posted by NickJD on June 12, 2007 1:37 PMReport this comment
What, one wonders, is he trying to distract attention from this time? So many possibilities ... :)Posted by Douglas on June 12, 2007 1:37 PMReport this comment
Blair. and his thug-in-chief Alastair Campbell threatened, bullied and destroyed the traditional fearlessness of the British press so the British people were denied an opposing viewpoint. Blair is not going to have the glorious career he has been imagining for himself. Unlike John Major, he can't count on getting any congenial assistance from the Bush family.Posted by Verity on June 12, 2007 1:34 PMReport this comment
What blair fails to realise is that there are more sources of information than the "media" and secondly it is not that the gov/he are accused of wrong doing but that they are guilty of wrongdoing [if that is the right word]all that his rant proved is that he is trying to clear the slate of corruption/sleaze that him and new labour have built up over time so he can walk his next crooked mile with a clear concious. whining like a spoilt child is all I heard.Posted by stinky on June 12, 2007 1:33 PMReport this comment
It is latter-day politicians generally that have damaged politics (perhaps with the exception of Mrs T). Blair has simply raised public cynicism to an art form. Politicians that purport to represent us should pay heed to the public at large and the population of England in particular, not just to vociferous and fashionable minority interest groups or to party policy gurus concocting their own wild ideas. Short of riot or revolution, the only way that ordinary folk can bring home the point to our elected servants is by making a point of NOT voting for any of the three main parties at the next General and Euro elections. However, you must vote, whether by opting for any other candidate or by endorsing the ballot paper "None of the above". If you don't turn up at the polling booth, you have no right to complain about the outcome.Posted by Ken Stevens on June 12, 2007 1:30 PMReport this comment
The press are undoubtedly to blame for a lot of problems.. look at their past track record from the treasonable announcements by the BBC during the Falklands war to the hounding of Diana leading to her death. Sadly, the press is too often biased, for example at a national level, the BBC only ever promoting the EU or at a local level, regional newspapers that only ever prints pro-liberal views. However, as blair has emasculated the House of Lords and run from accountability in the House of Commons, it falls upon the press to try to act in defence of democracy. Certainly the liberals, labour and conservative parties are now totally indistinguishable and it falls upon the UK Independence Party to be the natural opposition party. Increasingly its a forlorn hope that democracy remains in the UK. One can only hope that UKIP will increase its popularity and redress the downwards spiral of British democracy. Posted by Adrian Jones on June 12, 2007 1:24 PMReport this comment
No comments:
Post a Comment