Are You Doing Your Bit?

[doulikefish]

I can assure you that it's entirely true. The alternative is to believe that it's a coincidence that the SNP seldom if ever gets into fights with media organisations that its leaders have actively courted, even though those orgs are far, far worse than the ones that they do target; a coincidence that its new supporters just happened to spontaneously and repeatedly gang together to demand reporting that they like better from the one media organisation that e.g. Alex Salmond personally attacked live on national television; another coincidence that this just happened to be the one media outlet that won't respond with poisonous vendettas; and yet another coincidence that they chose to protest the one org that the SNP have long despised most.

That's quite a lot of coincidences.

I pointed out a long list of similarities between two very different - yet somehow remarkably similar - groups, and have since been responding to the points that other people have made. Perhaps the focus is on the BBC protesting and journalist-harrassing because that's the area where commenters feel most safe, as opposed to the traitor-sniffing and bawbag-shouting.

Still, you think it's very different when your lot e.g. demand that Nick Robinson be fired than it is when Rangers fans want Jim Spence fired, or when Israel campaigners want Jeremy Bowen fired, or when Indians angrily complain about the BBC, or Palestinian groups, or mental Yank right-wingers, or when any number of other very angry and intolerant groups of political partisans do it.

I think it's painfully naive to suggest that it's radically different when you do it. Taken with your belief that the choice of the BBC as a target of massive directed anger is just spontaneous and wholly-coincidental, it starts to look a bit childish - oh, oor huge, very angry political movement attacks particular media outlets for very different reasons than all these other angry political movements attack the same media outlets.

"The establishment made me do it" is a new one on me but the general undertone - "We wuz robbed" - isn't new at all. It's the cry of every defeated political campaign in history and this one is no different to any other defeated political campaign, even if it is unusually spiteful and angry.

You might have mobilised a lot of people who weren't previously interested in politics into the Yes campaign, and well done for that, but seriously. Your opponents made things up and told porkies, and these were repeated by the press?

Incredible news, the kind of thing that happens in absolutely every campaign ever, and the kind of thing that the SNP do themselves on a daily basis.

I'll admit that it's unusual for campaigners to get quite as spectacularly butthurt at losing as this, and that the level of paranoia, bile and traitor-detection is unusually high and vociferous in the SNP at present. But you don't get a pass when your campaigners act like raging bawbags, just because you're convinced that "the establishment" is out to get you.

^^^^^

blah blah rule brittannia

[Scary Bear]

Where are the Sky Headquarters? Where are the Times Headquarters?

Not that it really matters, as they are different from the BBC. No-one has expectations of Sky or The Times. Personally, I expect these organisations to be biased towards the Tories (Times - actually it's the same as Sky these days) or whoever is most likely to win the the election (Sky).

I'm at a loss as to why the flyingrodent can't distinguish between the two situations.

I'm also at a loss as to why this specific act (campaigning outside the BBC) by a small group is so terrible. Unless I'm mistaken it was a peaceful protest.

The most worrying aspect of the recent referendum was the appearance of the nutty side of Rangers (which flying rodent equally despises) burning flags and beating people up in George Square. Imagine it had been a Yes vote. What would these supporters of the Union have been like then?

Maybe I should generalise and think that all supporters of the union are like those idiots in George Square. That's it, I'll never vote for a union supporting party again!

[I'm Brian]

You might have mobilised a lot of people who weren't previously interested in politics into the Yes campaign, and well done for that, but seriously. Your opponents made things up and told porkies, and these were repeated by the press?

Cough, cough

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/SNP/11514933/Nicola-Sturgeon-secretly-backs-David-Cameron.html

[Thumper]

"Why is it that nobody ever criticises the Sun, and instead criticises the BBC" is one of the most otherworldly things I've ever seen written on here.

[AUFC90]

"Why is it that nobody ever criticises the Sun, and instead criticises the BBC" is one of the most otherworldly things I've ever seen written on here.

Quite. He's lumped half the country in with right wing bigots because they both had a protest outside the BBC.

Comparing the Jim Spence thing to the Nick Robinson thing.

Jim Spence told the truth and spoke his mind.

Nick Robinson blatantly lied for 2 whole days during a referendum campaign.

He really is a tit and what makes it even more unbelievable is the fact that out of all football fans, old firm fans would've voted no in the highest numbers, especially Rangers.

Obsessed old firm fan should stay on the big thread I think.

[bob the tank]

Back on topic, I'm not a joiner of things, kind of like Groucho Marx, but I went down to the SNP office in Alloa this morning to volunteer for leafleting etc. The nice women told me that they had a lot of people in this morning to join and also just volunteer, most of them saying that yesterdays 'debate' had been the last straw for them, and they had decided that they had to do something. Willie Who?, ThePrefect and Shouty Jim - three strikes, you're out.....

[Granny Danger]

Back on topic, I'm not a joiner of things, kind of like Groucho Marx, but I went down to the SNP office in Alloa this morning to volunteer for leafleting etc. The nice women told me that they had a lot of people in this morning to join and also just volunteer, most of them saying that yesterdays 'debate' had been the last straw for them, and they had decided that they had to do something. Willie Who?, ThePrefect and Shouty Jim - three strikes, you're out.....

What about a sanity clause?

[bob the tank]

What about a sanity clause?

There ain't no sanity clause.....boom tish.......

[pandarilla]

Still, you think it's very different when your lot e.g. demand that Nick Robinson be fired than it is when Rangers fans want Jim Spence fired, or when Israel campaigners want Jeremy Bowen fired, or when Indians angrily complain about the BBC, or Palestinian groups, or mental Yank right-wingers, or when any number of other very angry and intolerant groups of political partisans do it.

I think it's painfully naive to suggest that it's radically different when you do it. Taken with your belief that the choice of the BBC as a target of massive directed anger is just spontaneous and wholly-coincidental, it starts to look a bit childish - oh, oor huge, very angry political movement attacks particular media outlets for very different reasons than all these other angry political movements attack the same media outlets.

"The establishment made me do it" is a new one on me but the general undertone - "We wuz robbed" - isn't new at all. It's the cry of every defeated political campaign in history and this one is no different to any other defeated political campaign, even if it is unusually spiteful and angry.

I'm sorry to keep it going but I can't let this go...

I do not think the difference between Yes protests against the BBC and every other group critical of the organisation is a coincidence. I think they are entirely different issues and should be examined separately. I also think the BBC was particularly pro-Israel during last year's (or the year before - its a bit of a blur) conflict.

How can you compare Nick Robinson and Jim Spence - that's just mental. Apples and spaceships.

And if you don't think there is such a thing as the British establishment then we'll just have to agree to differ. I think the mobilisation of forces in the last 10 days of the campaign was particularly eye-opening. The establishment doesn't give a f**k if Labour or the Tories win the election - it makes little difference, tinkering at best. But Scottish independence was is going to turn the country and its institutions upside down.

[sophia]

^

good guy

[git-intae-thum]

I can assure you that it's entirely true. The alternative is to believe that it's a coincidence that the SNP seldom if ever gets into fights with media organisations that its leaders have actively courted, even though those orgs are far, far worse than the ones that they do target; a coincidence that its new supporters just happened to spontaneously and repeatedly gang together to demand reporting that they like better from the one media organisation that e.g. Alex Salmond personally attacked live on national television; another coincidence that this just happened to be the one media outlet that won't respond with poisonous vendettas; and yet another coincidence that they chose to protest the one org that the SNP have long despised most.

That's quite a lot of coincidences.

I pointed out a long list of similarities between two very different - yet somehow remarkably similar - groups, and have since been responding to the points that other people have made. Perhaps the focus is on the BBC protesting and journalist-harrassing because that's the area where commenters feel most safe, as opposed to the traitor-sniffing and bawbag-shouting.

Still, you think it's very different when your lot e.g. demand that Nick Robinson be fired than it is when Rangers fans want Jim Spence fired, or when Israel campaigners want Jeremy Bowen fired, or when Indians angrily complain about the BBC, or Palestinian groups, or mental Yank right-wingers, or when any number of other very angry and intolerant groups of political partisans do it.

I think it's painfully naive to suggest that it's radically different when you do it. Taken with your belief that the choice of the BBC as a target of massive directed anger is just spontaneous and wholly-coincidental, it starts to look a bit childish - oh, oor huge, very angry political movement attacks particular media outlets for very different reasons than all these other angry political movements attack the same media outlets.

"The establishment made me do it" is a new one on me but the general undertone - "We wuz robbed" - isn't new at all. It's the cry of every defeated political campaign in history and this one is no different to any other defeated political campaign, even if it is unusually spiteful and angry.

You might have mobilised a lot of people who weren't previously interested in politics into the Yes campaign, and well done for that, but seriously. Your opponents made things up and told porkies, and these were repeated by the press?

Incredible news, the kind of thing that happens in absolutely every campaign ever, and the kind of thing that the SNP do themselves on a daily basis.

I'll admit that it's unusual for campaigners to get quite as spectacularly butthurt at losing as this, and that the level of paranoia, bile and traitor-detection is unusually high and vociferous in the SNP at present. But you don't get a pass when your campaigners act like raging bawbags, just because you're convinced that "the establishment" is out to get you.

Hope you are not sitting at work typing these inane imbecilic Britnat ramblings.

Absolute rocket material.

[MassiveFanDan]

I didn't hear about this one at the time though, so I may be wrong.

Here's a wee reminder, from the BBC themselves:

I'd still like an explanation of this policy. Can you explain it to me?

I remember BBC Scotland issued a statement saying that due to public concerns they would re-open the comments sections on "selected Scottish stories" during the referendum, so that the people could have their say.

We were then allowed to comment on a story about the High Hedges (Scotland) Bill 2013 coming into effect.

No other political stories were opened to comments for months subsequently.

[QPSAFalkirkFirm]

Just a thought, but maybe rather than locking in cyber combat with the likes of flyingrodent we could be out chapping doors, dropping leaflets and talking to people who might still have a mind to be made up.

Just a thought.....

[MassiveFanDan]

A good point well made.

[pandarilla]

Just a thought, but maybe rather than locking in cyber combat with the likes of flyingrodent we could be out chapping doors, dropping leaflets and talking to people who might still have a mind to be made up.

Just a thought.....

Whether it was intended as such I'm going to be arsey and take this as a dig at me.

Firstly, the growth in the pro-independence movement in the last few years has been, to a large extent, down to social media. Folk are debating the issues here and there may be others reading them who are not as clued up as others. For what its worth I think leafleting is a pretty archaic form of political engagement (I'm interested in this stuff and even I dump most leaflets straight in the bin - its propaganda after all) but I would certainly agree that face to face discussions on the doorstep are very important.

Secondly, I've got two kids (the eldest of which has not long turned two) and as a result my life is well and truly fucked right now. I'm on holiday at the moment so getting a bit more time to relax and bum about on Pie & Bovril.

So no, the door-chapping element of this historic journey will have to be carried out by others. I'll hang about here and engage in mindless and petty arguments with flyingrodent.

Mind and wear your cagoule - its a bit drizzly out there.

[The_Kincardine]

Secondly, I've got two kids (the eldest of which has not long turned two)

Teachers these days?

[QPSAFalkirkFirm]

Whether it was intended as such I'm going to be arsey and take this as a dig at me.

Firstly, the growth in the pro-independence movement in the last few years has been, to a large extent, down to social media. Folk are debating the issues here and there may be others reading them who are not as clued up as others. For what its worth I think leafleting is a pretty archaic form of political engagement (I'm interested in this stuff and even I dump most leaflets straight in the bin - its propaganda after all) but I would certainly agree that face to face discussions on the doorstep are very important.

Secondly, I've got two kids (the eldest of which has not long turned two) and as a result my life is well and truly fucked right now. I'm on holiday at the moment so getting a bit more time to relax and bum about on Pie & Bovril.

So no, the door-chapping element of this historic journey will have to be carried out by others. I'll hang about here and engage in mindless and petty arguments with flyingrodent.

Mind and wear your cagoule - its a bit drizzly out there.

No dig at anybody. You fire away. I think it needs all angles covered. Seem to recall the key demographic that lost us the Referendum was the very one that doesn't do social media. Cagoule's tucked up for the night - I'm away for Horlicks

[pandarilla]

Teachers these days?

I would like to publicly apologise for my poor grammar but at the same time blame the social changes that occurred in education after the 1970s. They stopped belting weans and so the weans stopped listening. I'm just a product of my upbringing.

I was similarly told off on my first ever teaching placement for saying 'youse' when addressing a group of pupils. The fact that the kids were actually responding to me as opposed to being in a zombie-like state was not mentioned. Dittery auld b*****d.

I'm not bitter tho.

[pandarilla]

No dig at anybody. You fire away. I think it needs all angles covered. Seem to recall the key demographic that lost us the Referendum was the very one that doesn't do social media. Cagoule's tucked up for the night - I'm away for Horlicks

Very true.

I see myself more as a thinker than a do-er. Don't get me wrong I'm not particularly intelligent but I like to think about shit rather than take action.

I think they call it laziness.

I'll get back to the subtle brainwashing of bairns when spring break is over.

[The_Kincardine]

I was similarly told off on my first ever teaching placement for saying 'youse' when addressing a group of pupils.

Apples and pears, chap. Nothing wrong with 'youse'. I'm pretty sure that the blokes from TFS will agree with me.