How many times do we have to say this?

by Stephen Tall on October 12, 2007

A media lie when repeated often enough becomes the truth. Discuss.

I raise the point because the BBC is now peddling the same rubbish LDV criticised the Grauniad for just a few hours ago:

The Lib Dems’ conference week in Brighton was overshadowed by speculation – denied by all concerned – about possible leadership bids by environment spokesman Chris Huhne and home affairs spokesman Nick Clegg.

This is what is technically known as complete bollocks. The only people speculating about Ming’s future at conference were the media. Lib Dem conference delegates were too busy talking policies, some of which required an attention span – which was perhaps where we went wrong.

Enjoy reading this? Please like and share:

15 comments

Yes oh mouthpiece of Ming, we were discussing policies. Unfortunately the rest of the country was discussing Ming!

by mindstar on October 12, 2007 at 9:47 pm. Reply #

Stephen very, very disaponted in you!
Yes this is a open forum and anything said against the leader or party could leak out but come on to say that “The only people speculating about Ming’s future at conference were the media” that really is bollocks!!
You know my personal view and I have aired it even in front of TV cameras so that makes at least one person.
Trust me and you bloody well know it there were PLENTY more talking about how crap Minf is. You and others really need to get a grip, what do you care more about what people “may think” if we ditch Ming or what the DO think of Ming…let me give you a pointer it should be the later.
No matter how you spin it 11% has happened on Mings watch, that means he goes quick & quite would be good but he needs a push then I will be just one in a growing line…no amount of denial from you oe Mark will change that fact.

by Big Mak on October 12, 2007 at 10:16 pm. Reply #

Well I was at conference and most of the time the people I was chatting to were talking about campaingning.
Ming only cropped up in relation to what the media were saying about us.

I’ve said it before, it doesn’t matter who our leader is when the media just keep mentioning Lab & Con then our poll ratings will go down.

I note we do best when either Lab or Con are very unpopular. Con in the 90s to mid 00s (record nos of MPs) and Lab back in the 80s (record share of vote in ’83GE).

As for the 11% Mori poll. I understand it was mainly conducted on Wendnesday afternoon – so it dispoportionaly will have more unemployed & retired than working people. Not exactly representative of the population.

by lloyd on October 12, 2007 at 10:31 pm. Reply #

Lloyd we can all spin polls how we want, so lets not round & round on that but however you look at it 11% is appaling…I am sure if it was 24% and conducted on a Friday night you would not complain!
As for conference I was also there as I was for the last few and Ming did crop up and never in a positive way.
Does no one find it strange that NO ONE owns up to voting for Ming in the leadership contest…hmmm.

by Big Mak on October 12, 2007 at 10:36 pm. Reply #

Mak, I’ll own up. And also being at conference I didn’t hear anything about Ming needing to go, just why the media only wanted to run with that story.
For those who want Ming to go, do you really believe that the press won’t start the same stories with the new leader?

by Ryan Cullen on October 13, 2007 at 9:22 am. Reply #

I agree with Ryan. I went to the Independent fringe where Andrew Neill was door-stepping people asking them about the leadership – and getting short shrift. Then when not a single person asked about the leadership from the floor, Steve Richards, the chair, tacked it on to a different question about the party’s media coverage.
Then Andrew Neill was able to report that the issue was being debated on the fringe.
It’s a cyclical & cynical personality-based debate which insists on seeing the third party as being about positioning not policy.
Big Mak – there is nothing in this for us. Leave it.

by Bridget Fox on October 13, 2007 at 9:58 am. Reply #

Stephen, Lloyd, Ryan and Bridget are right.

I did hear *one* person talking about leadership at Conf – but that was Rab (Big Mak). But I think you were only in Brighton for one afternoon, Rab, weren’t you? 🙄

by Dominic on October 13, 2007 at 12:23 pm. Reply #

Ah so the people out for the dinner on Wednesday night(the one that Dom & Bridget could not make) that never came up…or did it?!
I think you will find that we talked about it at lunch Dom and then again at dinner and I was NOT the only person talking about it.
If you really think I was the only one at conference doinf so you really are a lost cause. I have heard of lotalty but even General Custer would have been taken aback by your utter lolayty to such an uninsperational, undynamic and just plain bad leader.
Tell you what guys you think what you must, the rest of us(in the real world) will just watch as you sink. Have fun, I heard people on the Titanix enjoyed it until they hit the iceberg!!

by Big Mak on October 13, 2007 at 12:46 pm. Reply #

I have no idea who this “Big Mak” person is but I suggest that this kind of ignorant and abusive posting is at the least put in the members only section of this site. If he is not a member of the party I suggest we should stop providing him with space for this kind of guttersnipe rubbish.

By the way I had lunch with a BBC journalist in the week before the conference and he told me then what the BBC were planning to run as the conference story. I suggested they should go and listen to wht people wre saying before reporting it and he shrugged his shoulders. “It does not work like that as you know”.

by Tony Greaves on October 13, 2007 at 7:01 pm. Reply #

Anybody who refers to the Liberal Democrats as “you” rather than “we” has already left the party, in spirit if not in actuality.

by Paul Griffiths on October 13, 2007 at 7:15 pm. Reply #

Tony please let me know what is “abusive or ignorent”???
Maybe in your eyes but nothing I read is “abisive” if you want abuse my frined let me know your email and we can really go for it.
As for ignorent is that as ignorent as dismissing what anyone says who disagrees with you Tony?
It seems on this site I as a lonf standing member who pays his fees and gives plenty or money and support to the party at local & national level I am entitled to my views.
It disgusts me and it should anyone else that I am abused myself and hounded just because some of you don’t like to hear the truth.
Trust me Tony you kick me off this open site and there will be a comeback, I promise you that. I have not ever been abusive to the extent when any of my thoughts should not be heard. You or others don’t like it don’t read it. If you think its all crap why the hell are you so worried? If Ming and the party are in such good shape how am I such a threat??
As for “guttersnipe rubbish” I direct you too all the posts by members about Ming The Great, and those “normal folk” who think je is a liblity at best and don’t have a clue who he is at worst.
I also suggest that if you have a real problem you drop me a line and we speak face to face, nothing like that to really get your thoughts out in the open Tony(or anyone else who may care to debate with me and others who think along the same line I do).

by Big Mak on October 13, 2007 at 7:18 pm. Reply #

I fear Paul you may be right and after so many years it hurts me to even think about it. However when the “bunker” mentality kicks in with a party(think Tories 97) then “we” have aleeady lost any hope of holding let alone pushing on.

by Big Mak on October 13, 2007 at 7:23 pm. Reply #

Mak: You were the only person I encountered at Conference (that I recall) talking about it. Admittedly I was stuck on the desks a lot of the time, but I did get out to a lot of fringe events and spent a lot of time in the bars and similar.

Yes, grumbling about direction, but not directly challenging him. Meh, you know my opinion on the subject, and you know why I don’t like discussing it too often. We’ll see.

by MatGB on October 13, 2007 at 8:16 pm. Reply #

Wait, rereading later comments, I’m not sure Mak is who I thought, because the person I thought it was is normally at least coherent in their attack-dog persona…

Mak, did you bring a friend who joined the party at conference with my assistance? If so, I know who you are, if not, I’m confused.

by MatGB on October 13, 2007 at 8:19 pm. Reply #

All of these pseudonyms are pretty silly really, can’t we just use our names?

by Rob Fenwick on October 14, 2007 at 10:26 am. Reply #

Leave your comment

Required.

Required. Not published.

If you have one.