This is a great analysis. Instant subscribe and restack!
It is possible to edit serious policy, even quite controversial policy into concise communication though, cf Mamdani, Polanksi as a recent examples. What you need is
(a) great comms skills
(b) an actual clear policy that you can describe in a few words (Greens are severely lacking beyond the big headlines, Reform will never have this)
(c) message discipline and endless repetition
(d) fair media coverage, or at least a chance to get some coverage
As a lifelong dues-paying Labour supporter it is pretty irritating to see them sh*t the bed on this so consistently, but to be fair to Starmer he is forced by media to spend most of his time discussing various scandals or relationships. However a good communicator can leverage hostile or irrelevant lines of questioning to promote policy. It's actually great for progressive taxation that mainstream media find it triggering.
This is not to say that I don't heartily agree with you that we have lost something, and it's worth fighting to get back the long debate, the public event, the non-soundbite. What is so compelling about Greens and Democratic Socialists is they want more civil discourse and community action as well... but they are also delivering the most powerful social content.
How do we start? None of the main media, even the BBC, ever raise PR. It won't be a silver bullet, but at least it might reduce the amount of point scoring, and more collaboration might emerge.
It certainly is. I agree with Roger A's comment "Spot on. It's largely the result of the mainstream news media being owned by a small clutch of oligarchs."
Your analysis is correct. And it’s why we must not walk away from the culture of consultation. Before governments, both central and local, take decisions, we need effective ways to ensure an honest description of what -exactly - is proposed, and provide a fair and transparent opportunity for informed stakeholders to express their views.
The rigours of an effective consultation process are essential, and when politicians seek to weaken it ( a recent Ministerial press release misleadingly announced it would ‘rip-up’ the consultation culture), it’s a danger signal we should not ignore.
Subjecting the insurgent parties to greater scrutiny is absolutely essential. But it applies to ALL important decisions.
Good analysis. The big winners of a failure in serious policy debate are fossil fuel interests, who are of course funding Reform to undermine our democratic choice to proceed to Net Zero, and may attempt to close down US democracy completely to keep the oil and cash flowing. Correctives can be the introduction of PR and the introduction of proper funding for political parties, but Labour look to be caught flat footed and speechless in Reform's headlights.
"What is clear on polling day today is that Britain can’t go on like this. An open, pluralist and confident country depends on citizens being able to disagree constructively about difficult questions without treating opponents as existential enemies or moral contaminants."
Exactly . And this is the real freedom of speech issue - our collective inability to do this. Unfortunately, all the indicators are we are moving further away from this and if we carry on down the path America has, it'll get even worse.
Spot on. It's largely the result of the mainstream news media being owned by a small clutch of oligarchs.
Couldn't agree more.
Mic Wright had a good piece on this yesterday: https://brokenbottleboy.substack.com/p/polanski-is-painted-as-a-monster
This is a great analysis. Instant subscribe and restack!
It is possible to edit serious policy, even quite controversial policy into concise communication though, cf Mamdani, Polanksi as a recent examples. What you need is
(a) great comms skills
(b) an actual clear policy that you can describe in a few words (Greens are severely lacking beyond the big headlines, Reform will never have this)
(c) message discipline and endless repetition
(d) fair media coverage, or at least a chance to get some coverage
As a lifelong dues-paying Labour supporter it is pretty irritating to see them sh*t the bed on this so consistently, but to be fair to Starmer he is forced by media to spend most of his time discussing various scandals or relationships. However a good communicator can leverage hostile or irrelevant lines of questioning to promote policy. It's actually great for progressive taxation that mainstream media find it triggering.
This is not to say that I don't heartily agree with you that we have lost something, and it's worth fighting to get back the long debate, the public event, the non-soundbite. What is so compelling about Greens and Democratic Socialists is they want more civil discourse and community action as well... but they are also delivering the most powerful social content.
Might a truly and demonstrably independent BBC be an answer?
How do we start? None of the main media, even the BBC, ever raise PR. It won't be a silver bullet, but at least it might reduce the amount of point scoring, and more collaboration might emerge.
Jane Parsons
It certainly is. I agree with Roger A's comment "Spot on. It's largely the result of the mainstream news media being owned by a small clutch of oligarchs."
Many Thanks for the Like, Matt Gallagher.
Politicians and political parties are destroying political debate in this country.
Your analysis is correct. And it’s why we must not walk away from the culture of consultation. Before governments, both central and local, take decisions, we need effective ways to ensure an honest description of what -exactly - is proposed, and provide a fair and transparent opportunity for informed stakeholders to express their views.
The rigours of an effective consultation process are essential, and when politicians seek to weaken it ( a recent Ministerial press release misleadingly announced it would ‘rip-up’ the consultation culture), it’s a danger signal we should not ignore.
Subjecting the insurgent parties to greater scrutiny is absolutely essential. But it applies to ALL important decisions.
( see my Blogs at www.consultationguru.co.uk)
Good analysis. The big winners of a failure in serious policy debate are fossil fuel interests, who are of course funding Reform to undermine our democratic choice to proceed to Net Zero, and may attempt to close down US democracy completely to keep the oil and cash flowing. Correctives can be the introduction of PR and the introduction of proper funding for political parties, but Labour look to be caught flat footed and speechless in Reform's headlights.
"What is clear on polling day today is that Britain can’t go on like this. An open, pluralist and confident country depends on citizens being able to disagree constructively about difficult questions without treating opponents as existential enemies or moral contaminants."
Exactly . And this is the real freedom of speech issue - our collective inability to do this. Unfortunately, all the indicators are we are moving further away from this and if we carry on down the path America has, it'll get even worse.
You start by doing a better job yourselves. You guilt of getting personal rather than discussing politics and specifically govt actions
Wasn't aware that I got personal?