Hazel Blears has no grounds to pick a fight with bloggers
Dear Hazel Blears,
What on earth are you doing? I find it impossible to understand whether this was sheer stupidity or malicious scaremongering on your part, or both. For you to go on the record in a speech to the Hansard Society yesterday saying that political blogs are creating “a culture of cynicism and despair” is very unwise. To discuss the relative strength of the right-of-centre blogs is one thing, but to blame the growth in cynicism towards politicians and Westminster in general on the people who expose the behaviour that creates the cynicism and despair in the first place is astonishing.
According to your thoroughly ill-informed and biased self, you believe that too much political commentary is provided by a ’self-appointed political class’ who leave “ordinary people” excluded from debate. Somehow you have failed to grasp the idea that political commentary via blogs is now provided by the very ‘ordinary people’ who you claim are excluded from debate. In fact, for the first time in history the disgracefully closed circle of Westminster politics has been opened up by bloggers to a wider audience than ever before. To suggest that the mainstream media must adopt a “more responsible manner” is presumably a covert attack on bloggers, as you clearly believe that bloggers should not be mentioned or discussed in the news as they say things that you don’t like. Guido has rightly pointed out before that “in an age of near costless technological disintermediation “the news” is no longer what they say it is, we can make the news ourselves, unfiltered by the metropolitan media elite” and I think that’s bloody fantastic in terms of political engagement as it shows that people care about politics, even if they don’t agree with what you lot get up to. It is ironic that in your speech, which was supposedly about political disengagement, you stated that blogs are mostly written by “people with disdain for the political system and politicians” as if this was somehow a bad thing, that it should be discouraged or that we shouldn’t listen to bloggers because they dislike the corruption and unacceptable practices in politics and seek to expose it. Don’t you think that’s a little back-to-front? Ever heard of a little something that I like to call ‘accountability’?
Even though we may well be “witnessing a dangerous corrosion in our political culture”, you chose to blame this on the explosion of major political blogs instead of taking a closer look at the record of your beloved Labour Party. Don’t get me wrong, John Major’s government was hardly squeaky clean but at least people still had faith in the power of politics to change things. Sadly, the Labour Party (Eccelstone’s £1 million, cash for honours, abusing MP expenses beyond belief, Mandelson on three occasions etc etc) have corroded the trust that we once had in politics to represent the public and to take this country forward. You suggested that “the most popular blogs are rightwing, ranging from the considered Tory views of Iain Dale, to the vicious nihilism of Guido Fawkes. Perhaps this is simply anti-establishment. Blogs have only existed under a Labour government. Perhaps if there was a Tory government, all the leading blogs would be left-of-centre?” No doubt this is true and should the next election be won by the Conservatives, the left-of-centre blogs might become more vocal.
You went to say that “until political blogging ‘adds value’ to our political culture, by allowing new voices, ideas and legitimate protest and challenge, and until the mainstream media reports politics in a calmer, more responsible manner, it will continue to fuel a culture of cynicism and despair.” You are so wrong, so very wrong. Political blogging has added so much value already by exposing that which the mainstream media is either too scared or too cosy with politicians to point out. I guess you would define ‘adding value’ as agreeing more with Labour, as your speech would clearly never have existed if left-wing blogs were any good (which, with a few notable exceptions, they are not). Have blogs fuelled cynicism and despair? Perhaps, but if this has come about by exposing the disgraceful behaviour of politicians then I say well done to the blogs. The other suggestions in your speech are barely worth a passing mention. Allowing ‘communities’ (whoever they are) to draw up council budgets would unleash mayhem and anarchy across the UK as we would have even more stupid people wasting our council tax, and your attack on career politicians seems all the more poignant given the path taken by the likes of Tony Blair. You even suggested that politics needs “more people who know what it is to worry about the rent collector’s knock, or the fear of lay-off” which shouldn’t be difficult now that Labour have destroyed the British economy, resulting in mass lay-offs in every part of the country.
To cut a long story slightly shorter, your contempt for bloggers is unjustified. You despise bloggers because they watch everything that politicians say and do in a way that the mainstream media would never dare, seeing as they are nicely tucked up in bed with the very people that they are supposed to be holding to account. You and your fellow politicians have a clear choice in front of you: you can either clean up your act and rob bloggers of the ammunition that we thrive on (sleaze, corruption, incompetence, lies and deceit) or you can attack bloggers and join the government in trying to stifle them. In yet another display of contempt for democracy and freedom from the Labour government, you have evidently chosen the latter.
Yours sincerely,
A.Tory
Witanagemot Blogs
Where this becomes scary, rather than merely idiotic, is when you consider that Mandy is trying to grab control of Nominet:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/29/berr_nominet/
By controlling Top Level Domains ending in .uk (.co.uk, .org.uk etc), the government would have to capacity to switch off sites with these domains configured for them by removing them from the DNS used to look-up and connect to sites on the internet. Now, they can do this at the moment but it requires a public action and communication with Nominet and maybe a court order. If its all Government controlled, it can be done with a Whitehall Memo which is simpler for the Govt but much less accountable and you can easily see this happening in secret with any paperwork stifled under nebulous ‘national security’ grounds. The logical thing to do, therefore, is to register your site as a .com or with some other non-UK and arguable non EU state.
There is a stated desire on the part of a number of Labour figures to assert editorial control (censorship) over blogs and thanks to Hazel, we know *exactly* who they mean. I hope Guido sues for defamation over the ‘nihilism’ slur but really this is all sour grapes over the massive failure of the British left to make any kind of impact on the net, be it blogs, viral campaigns or social networking.
My personal view is that the British right (an American left) is more individualistic than the British left (and American right) who prefer monolithic collective action over individual action. The implications for blogging, where the most successful sites are one-man bands, are quite clear…
“You even suggested that politics needs “more people who know what it is to worry about the rent collector’s knock, or the fear of lay-off” which shouldn’t be difficult now that Labour have destroyed the British economy, resulting in mass lay-offs in every part of the country. “
Well said!
“The logical thing to do, therefore, is to register your site as a .com or with some other non-UK and arguable non EU state.”
Already preparing for that eventuality…
Question:
“Dear Hazel Blears,
What on earth are you doing?”
Answer:
Dancing to the Mandelson, Campbell, Draper tune of course.
Do wake up boy!
political blogs are creating “a culture of cynicism and despair”
Talk about shooting the messenger….
So “ordinary people” should not be excluded from debate. And how did an “ordinary person” such as, for example, myself, find a way to publish my own views? Err… by setting up a blog.
Did you catch Eddie Mair’s interview with her (and Iain Dale) on PM yesterday? On the issue of why most blogs were right-wing, he suggested that maybe “that’s because right-wingers are better at writing …. blogs”. For a brief moment as he paused, I had thought he was going to stop after “writing”…
Holding two contradictory views at the same time is nothing. To be a New Labour star (and bamboozle the weaker-minded beyond the party) you need to be able to express them in the same speech without flinching. (not enough ordinary people involved/those ordinary people who are trying to be involved should STFU)
Holding two contradictory views at the same time is … dialetheism.
Salford’s pocket Venus is just a nutcase.
Julia, good idea – in fact, I’ve already put it in motion so this blog will be moving very soon! Watch this space….
As many people have pointed out, the contradictions are almost farcical and the desire for control of the blogosphere is clearly alive and well, yet will ultimately prove futile. The more they try to stifle freedoms (blogs, 42 days, ID cards etc), the greater the backlash will be.
Holding two contradictory views at the same time is … doublethink
Well said that man.
The loving relationship between ‘doublethink’ and ‘Labour’ is getting very disturbing.
Naturally, there was no response from the Conservatives to this ridiculous speech by Hazel Blears, but I would have thought this would be a win-win situation: attack Blears and support freedom at the same time?
So Nick Hurd was also wrong in co-sponsoring the Sustainable Communities Act which Blears was promoting at this event?
Every time I have heard Blears talk about sustainable communities, she has spouted absolute rubbish. I attended a speech by her a few months back and she said that she wanted control of sports centres to be handed over to local people so that they can run it – even if they have no business or corporate experience whatsoever. Can you imagine the chaos that will ensue if sports centres are run by inexperienced locals or if local people get to spend council tax instead of council officials and elected councillors? It would be an absolute disaster and will derail the (very important) localist movement.
If Nick Hurd supports it, he’s just as naive as she is.
You should read the white paper as there’ is lot’s of good stuff in it. Do you want to save your local post office? well this act gives you some power to do so. Do you want to have some more say in how your local authority budget is spent? well this act gives you some power to do so.
Every blogger should know the contents of this bill if you want to relevant to your local community, as this bill essentially rewrites the rule of local government.
It doesn’t matter if you like it because it will affect your life, and it gives you means to control it.
The danger of that kind of blase localism, since we’re being distracted from the subject of Labour’s insidious disregard for bloggers, is that its very very easy for it to be taken over by nutters.
I remember in the late 70s when I lived with my parents in Islington how a small clique of Irish builders (known as the ‘Murphia’) took over the local labour party and maintained a prodigiously corrupt local MP (Corbyn’s predecessor) by bussing builders in to meetings, squashing the opposition with numbers and worse and so on. Very easy to do, very hard to resist.
Now imagine that local community centre hijacked by overt or covert BNP members. Imagine it becoming either a secure base/revenue stream/recruiting ground or a totemic example of state interference in the lives of the ‘little guy’. You can replace the BNP with any group of your choosing – Islamists, Radical greens, Trotskyites, whatever.
In a democracy its weight of numbers that keeps things honest. In self-selecting groups, such as those who will be involved in these things, there is no such pressure as most people ‘can’t be bothered’ to get involved. This will hand it over to people you’d really rather not have in charge of anything – cranks are usually horribly well motivated.
I don’t want to HAVE run my council or whatever out of fear of who’ll be in charge if I don’t and yet that’s the situation this proposal would inflict on me, and other right thinking members of society.
Well said Shaun. The BNP are very strong in some local areas but would clearly be banned from using these powers by Labour.
In addition, the white paper is utter trash. It includes the following proposals:
Councils to have prize draws to encourage people to vote (instead of actually addressing the reasons for low turnout e.g. people being sick and tired of corrupt politicians)
Spending my council tax on a programme to train adults about “how to be an active citizen” (oh, please)
Supporting community efforts to tackle climate change (good luck with that)
Making councils respond to more petitions (even though the council still retains all the decision-making power)
More discrimination against white people to get more black people involved in local councils (one word: meritocracy)
Need I say more? If Blears really cared about empowerment, she’d be concentrating on dismantling the quangos that destroy local accountability. The power over our NHS, police forces and so many other public services is in the hands of unelected, faceless bureaucrats.
Not only was Blears wrong about community empowerment, she was wrong about the damage caused by bloggers. It’s the damage caused by Labour that everyone is far more worried about.
(comment deleted for breaking the rules of this blog)
Are not the second, third, fourth and fifth proposals that you quote exactly the kind of thing that leads to the need for the first?
“…I would have thought this would be a win-win situation: attack Blears and support freedom at the same time?”
Rather worrying that Call-Me-Dave’s Conservative’s don’t seem to know which game they’re playing, never mind how to recognise a winning strategy…
“If Blears really cared about empowerment, she’d be concentrating on dismantling the quangos that destroy local accountability. “
She can’t do that! She’s going to need a job soon…
Wow, this issue is all over the UK political blogs. I bet Hazel didnt realise what a storm she’d be stirring up.
I didnt know about the Mandy/Nominet issue so thanks for the heads up.
“Councils to have prize draws to encourage people to vote “
That’s kind of grimly amusing. Anyone who would vote in order to enter a prize draw is the sort of person that I would prefer not to participate in making important decisions.
“Anyone who would vote in order to enter a prize draw is the sort of person that I would prefer not to participate in making important decisions.”
Its a great day for iPod-loving Monster Raving Loonies…
WhitDawg
Wow, this issue is all over the UK political blogs. I bet Hazel didnt realise what a storm she’d be stirring up.
Yes she did. The new message is “It’s your fault we are so bad. If you never mentioned it then no one would know and no one would worry.”
Letters..Monday’s letter..please list all the buried bad news released between now and Saturday, under the cover of Obama/interest rates.
Start with I.D cards please.
ID cards, you say?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7712275.stm
Apparently we can’t wait to be numbered, measured and catalogued by the Party. And nobody has any grounds to fear that these lists will be used for anything nefarious, just because the other places that drew up lists of people were Nazi Germany (for who IBM invented pre-computerised data-sorting technology, as an amusing aside), the Soviet Union and apartheid-era South Africa. They were different countries in different times so no comparisons can be made! Oh no.
And the really keen cool kids are volunteering for implanted RFID tags so the overarching beneficent parent that is the State can know where they are at all times.
Okay, I made that last bit up.
You forgot about Ed Balls’s attack on grammar schools being buried on 5th November, which I was sorely tempted to blog about:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/education/3380942/Ed-Balls-grammar-schools-create-education-failure.html
Then came the admission by ministers that eco-towns are in serious trouble:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7708149.stm
Then came Gordon Brown’s biggest ever backbench rebellion (albeit on a slightly dull issue):
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7710405.stm
Sorry Bill but my victim for tomorrow has already been selected and the letter-worthy news just never stops! I might reconsider if I see too much being buried, though….
You could do an overarching ‘good days to bury bad news’ post, highlighting how little has changed since that phrase came to light under Brown’s ‘illustrious’ predecessor!
I think this is what’s known as a ‘target-rich environment’ tbh!
I’ve just remembered this story about Hazel Blears:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6213445.stm
Where she joined a protest against hospital closures that she supported as a government minister.
And she wonders why there’s a “culture of cynicism”!
>The logical thing to do, therefore, is to register your site as a .com or with some other non-UK and arguable non EU state.
What you want is a .co.uk with a .com as a mirror and the ability to switch over almost instantly.
The way I am set up everything is with a non-UK webhost, with mattwardman.com as the main host and mattwardman.co.uk as a mirror using the Domain Mirror plugin.
You actually want your content on .co.uk because those are prioritised over .com’s in search engines from the UK (e.g., Google.co.uk handles 80% of Goog searches from UK traffic). Going on a .com will reduce your traffic. Mine are the wrong way round but I have 20k backlinks pointing to the .com, so I can’t take the hit .
I’d only recommend making the .com your primary domain if you really think the threat is going to happen very soon. Imo it is better to optimise for the bigger UK audience.
Matt, you are, of course, technically correct but I was trying to keep things simple! As for search engines, Google never met a government for whom it won’t roll over for (look at China) so that may be a tad misleading if our ‘representatives’ do choose to launch an assault on web freedom. Not to mention the scope of national-level ‘content’ filters.
As with our early nuke programme, Australia is the test bed…
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/11/05/aussie_internet/
Apparently we can’t wait to be numbered, measured and catalogued by the Party.
That’s what she thinks….!
Yeah, sorry, the hypnotic miasma of delusional Orwellian doublespeak had me all turned around there for a moment…
Well I enjoyed myself
http://bastardoldholborn.blogspot.com/2008/11/hazel-blears.html
I think the woman is a grade one twit.
“Councils to have prize draws to encourage people to vote” (Letters…)
Just change your name to ‘I’m only here for the prize’ and stand as an independent – easy seat!
Do you remember the blog Blears wrote in the run-up to the Labour party deputy leadership? It was dire and dreary and did not take comments. She is the last person who should be speaking on this subject.
“Do you remember the blog Blears wrote in the run-up to the Labour party deputy leadership? It was dire and dreary and did not take comments. She is the last person who should be speaking on this subject.”
Ellee // November 9, 2008 at 3:46 pm
Or she should just be honest and say ‘Labour prefers media where we can tell you whatever and your riposte is blocked by the TV screen or radio not being a transmitter.’