Murderer and the General Election...WHY bring him up?

[Tangled Metal]

Serious question. Does the Indy have any valid justification for bringing up that an infamous child murderer is hoping UKIP and SNP decimate Liberals, Labour and Conservatives in the upcoming Election?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/ian-brady-moors-murderer-announces-his-support-for-ukip-and-the-snp-10204872.html

PS I have not mentioned his name directly since I do not believe we should even do that in a public forum. Having said that it appears in the above link address, d'oh!

[661-Pete]

Ah. I've been steering clear of threads that deal with a certain upcoming event, but perhaps I'll answer this one.

The fact that this individual has suffered, and is still suffering, a severe personality disorder, is not in dispute, although it appears that experts disagree as to the exact nature of his disorder. At any rate, any opinions he expresses are hardly worth taking seriously.

Accordingly, my answer is "no" - i.e. I agree with your rhetorical question. In fact, I feel minded to shorten it:

Does the Indy have any valid justification?

[RogerThat]

I think this is necessarily a rhetorical question.!!

Should be the shortest thread ever

[Tangled Metal]

Not a rhetorical question at all but a question about newspapers and if they have any responsibility to fullfill the role within their name, i.e. make sure it is news that they put in their papers. Is there any reason why the ramblings of this guy count as news?

The general election is a serious matter IMHO that deserves being treated as a serious matter, at least by the so called respectable media (former broadsheets). I know papers these days have other interests in them but in the news sections it should be that IMO.

Perhaps I should have widened the thread out to include this idea that there should be standards in the newspaper's coverage of the GE.

[FarOeuf]

during the Indy Ref last year I was really surprised that both the Guardian and Independent ran, pretty much verbatim and unchallenged, the press releases and comments of the Better Together campaign. Even the wild apocolyptic predictions (usually from business leaders that cared only for profits) were reported without facts but During the Indy Ref there was only a single newspaper on the Yes side, and none on the 'objective' side. Every other news outlet was slanted/bent to the No side. It matters because it was impossible to believe anyone, and impossible to trust any 'facts' (regardless of the side or non-side you were on).

And here we are again, as you say this is a complete non-story unless it's designed to 'by implication' say something about people who will vote SNP/UKIP/not-LibLabCon. But then I guess this is just how the UK handles minorities, they are firmly outsiders and to be treated as a threat. To be honest, the way this GE campaign is going I feel a bit like I (being Scottish) should be slightly embarrassed to have some sort of representation in the UK government. But then I guess folk in Cornwall, Yorkshire, NI, Wales also want better representation at a UK level, and are also dismissed as slightly weird for wanting to have their say.

I read something ages ago that said Putin had hired some sort of abstract artist/thinker as his media guru. This guys idea was to created lots of conflicting news stories, the intention being to confuse everyone and have a situation where no-one knows what's happening and therefore can't make any judgement (good or bad) on the political state. I guess here we have that in the goverment departments that publish health advice, drink wine/drink no wine/drink one glass/drink beer/drink water/etc/etc.

[FarOeuf]

I'm not posting this because I necessarily think it's true, but because it describe a situation that might be happning here. I'm also not a conspiracy junky, but there's definitely something wrong with the degree of objectivity in our media. If you look for the guy Pomerantsev, you can find out more about what his views are.

" Since 2008, Pomerantsev argued, the Kremlin and military in Russia have adopted a body of thinking where information can be used as a tool to “confuse, demoralise, divide and conquer” and thus be used as a weapon. This comes from the Kremlin’s recognition that it cannot take on the West in a traditional military fashion and expect to win. Rather, over the years, Putin has talked about needing to be cleverer than the other side.

One of the Kremlin’s main strategies is to destroy people’s faith in journalism and the possibility of debate in media. Michael Weiss noted that this disinformation is most problematic when it is picked up by mainstream media organisations and circulated in the spirit of objectivity. The Putin regime, Weiss claimed, understands that Western institutions valuing transparency and objectivity can be exploited. “Even if you read through and see that a story is nonsense, the headline will still begin to penetrate”, he said. "

[ambodach]

What FarOuef says is really a version of the current situation so far as most of the media is concerned. Tell a lie often enough and people will come to regard it as true. Trouble is that in Scotland at least nearly everything which is said or printed regarding the current political event is regarded as a lie. This is what is causing the enormous panic and even more bizarre lies. The fact that an MP not controlled from London may have a voice is inconceivable.
It would seem that the original post simply highlighted more desperate smears. Yes I am probably getting paranoid!

[661-Pete]

during the Indy Ref last year I was really surprised that both the Guardian and Independent ran, pretty much verbatim and unchallenged, the press releases and comments of the Better Together campaign...... I (being Scottish) ....

Ah I see: so, newspapers shouldn't be publishing campaign statements that contradict your point of view, whatever it may be? Perhaps I should remind you that the campaign to which you allude won the referendum quite comprehensively. Sorry if it wasn't the result you were hoping for...

And as for the newspaper industry being biased one way, well, what's changed? You only need glance at the Daily Heil, the Torygraph, the Excess, the Scum, and their ilk...

But that isn't what the OP of this thread is about. It's about the ramblings of a seriously flawed and deranged individual. Most others are not likely to take up his cause.

[FarOeuf]

during the Indy Ref last year I was really surprised that both the Guardian and Independent ran, pretty much verbatim and unchallenged, the press releases and comments of the Better Together campaign...... I (being Scottish) ....

Ah I see: so, newspapers shouldn't be publishing campaign statements that contradict your point of view, whatever it may be? Perhaps I should remind you that the campaign to which you allude won the referendum quite comprehensively. Sorry if it wasn't the result you were hoping for...

you make a huge assumption about my preference, which you know nothing about and I didn't disclose. I didn't 'allude' to a campaign, I specified the indy ref campaign. Sounds like you're a lot more touchy about it than I am

EDIT: my point was that free and fair media/news is part of a functioning democracy. if we're to assume _all_ news sources in the UK are biased and that this particular story isn't really about that individuals views (but a 'by implication' story), then it's a pretty poor situation we're in. Because that means it's not possible for people to find out facts upon which they can make informed decisions.

[Ben@Forest]

I feel a bit like I (being Scottish) should be slightly embarrassed to have some sort of representation in the UK government. But then I guess folk in Cornwall, Yorkshire, NI, Wales also want better representation at a UK level, and are also dismissed as slightly weird for wanting to have their say.

I'm from Yorkshire and have no ambitions for secession, a regional assembly or any such move which would, frankly, cost more money we don't have. Scotland has always been represented in Parliament (or don't 59 MPs of whatever political colour count?). In fact during 13 years of the last Labour government Scotland was absolutely represented by the party it largely voted for. And we had two Scottish-born prime ministers.

I cycled with 5 other blokes on a club run yesterday and all of them thought the worst outcome was where the SNP could dictate policy in England which would not apply to Scotland. It is something which will cause a backlash - which I think is exactly what the SNP want.

[Bicycler]

I think the objection English people sometimes have is not that Scotland has its own devolved powers nor that it is represented in Westminster, nor even that England does not have similarly devolved powers, it is that many MPs representing Scottish constituencies feel no shame in voting on issues only affecting England or England and Wales. This is sometimes referred to as the West Lothian Question. Classic examples were the controversial introduction of foundation hospitals and of higher tuition fees in E+W, in each case carried through parliament by slim majorities made possible by the votes of Labour's MPs representing Scottish constituencies.

[blackbike]

But he hasn't got a vote though, has he?

There are people who think that prisoners should have the vote, and they usually think of themselves as enlightened liberals.

Here's the Guardian telling us why it thinks that some criminals at your local jail should have a say in the election.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... -prisoners

[Bicycler]

I reckon prisoners should have the vote, though postal votes in their home constituencies rather than all grouped together wherever they are serving at HM's pleasure. It would provide a theoretical protection against political imprisonment of voters and also ensure that minority groups could not be effectively silenced through imprisonment. Both scenarios are perhaps unlikely at the moment in the UK but I can't think of any powerful reason why the right to vote ought to be removed. It may be necessary for some human rights to be limited in prison (locked doors, lack of personal possessions etc.) but they should not be removed unless necessary

[ambodach]

The problem with Scottish MP s voting on English matters is irrelevant in some ways because they were only there anyway as voting fodder controlled by their masters in London. The current problem is that London will have no control over SNP members hence the vitriolic personal attacks. The referendum incidentally was not a comprehensive defeat for the Yes side it was really pretty close. The current argument is about the government of the whole of the UK ( of which we were told Scots were valued and essential members) for the benefit of the whole of the UK. The desperate attempts to create divisions by the westminster parties is purely to try to bolster their own failing influence

[Bicycler]

The problem with Scottish MP s voting on English matters is irrelevant in some ways because they were only there anyway as voting fodder controlled by their masters in London.

Irrelevant to Scottish voters, not irrelevant to those elsewhere. It ceases to be an irrelevance when it changes the outcome of a crucial vote as it has done in the past.

[/The current problem is that London will have no control over SNP members hence the vitriolic personal attacks. The referendum incidentally was not a comprehensive defeat for the Yes side it was really pretty close. The current argument is about the government of the whole of the UK ( of which we were told Scots were valued and essential members) for the benefit of the whole of the UK. The desperate attempts to create divisions by the westminster parties is purely to try to bolster their own failing influence

Depends how much influence the SNP eventually have at Westminster. If it is an influence in some way proportional to the percentage of UK voters they represent then there can be few complaints. If the influence extends way beyond that there is the potential for a party which has no interest in 92% of the UK population having a significant influence over how those other countries are run which would be the most extreme example of the flaws of FPTP that a UK general election has ever turned up.