Seems to be just the soft end of fleet Street, maybe not as blunt as the ones that started the spy story, but heading in the same direction.
what we’ve always known: that Corbyn’s lifelong distaste for US foreign policy, together with an apparent willingness to overlook the failings of regimes that are not the US, have led to him attracting the attentions of distinctly shady characters at times.
This is some sort of balance, newspapers may have lies but they may be proof of the same sort of thing we knew anyway.
Corbyn is accused of trying to get Facebook views, then this is equated with a culture war approach. who started this?
Writing soon after Corbyn was first elected as Labour leader, Gaby Hinslif wrote that the media did not hate Corbyn, it is more "complicated".
in retrospect we could have been more curious about why those who backed him did so; we should be asking even now whether and why they still feel the same. (For every shrill social media warrior there are dozens of perfectly nice, normal people who backed Corbyn. They’re a lot more fun to ask.)
So this issue with social media has been around for a while.
My impression is that the opposition to the newspaper smear attempt has been mostly from social media. The BBC did not repeat it but I would like help on a timeline. Andrew Neil on TV about a week in ( may be wrong about this ) one tweet from Nick Robinson.
Any help on this most welcome. There should be more to come.
bit of balance
If Corbyn simply meant that, in an age when the under-40s increasingly get their news from social media, the Mail and the Sun and the Telegraph are losing what little power to sway elections they once had, then he’s right. The tectonic plates are shifting, although worryingly the far right has benefited as much as the left from the new platforms opening up.
This is the actual news angle. Surely TV and radio could comment on this? Guardian too print based to consider it.
She then continues with the culture war bit as if only social media is hate fuel, the newspaper age was entirely civil or something.
No need for evidence of Russian bots to see the links Trump and Brexit. Mostly from UK newspapers. Corbyn not reported during referendum. See other posts, Fleet Street in Europe and cyberspace blog.
Robert Peston tweeted about TV "impartiality" so Corbyn should go on ITV to answer questions. Maybe he or someone from TV could help me with some questions I have mentioned a few times.
At end of referendum lots of blame Corbyn statements, well prepared. BBC reports two heckles, tweet world reports one connected to Portland and one to Lib Dems. Seems plausible to me. No counter statement as far as I know, but no BBC apology either.
During referendum Corbyn appears on Last Gasp but Channel 4 blocks him from putting full clip on his own YouTube channel. Why? He made a persuasive case pro EU.
If anyone wants to persuade Corbyn to make a more clear cut case pro EU, why not report what he actually said during referendum?
maybe off topic.
Main point. This smear attempt failed. Social media getting stronger. TV and radio have nothing to lose longterm from reporting facts about newspapers.