Merged The "Miliband loop" / 'Ed speaks human'?

commandlinegamer

Philosopher
commandlinegamer
Joined
Oct 3, 2009
Messages
9,695
Location
Mazes of Menace
Ed has been caught out using the same response to different questions in an "interview".

It's actually revealed a practice which has been going on for some time now. Politicians will provide a soundbite for use as a short clip which may be used on a number of different news/current affairs programmes on different networks, even if recorded by only one reporter.

A bit of spin, regardless of the questions asked, the interviewee will stick to one point, repeating essentially the same thing over and over (I thought they did that anyway).

But the main problem is that the media have allowed this to go on effectively unchallenged. If they don't take the soundbite, they might be accused of not wanting to the politician's response; not providing balance.

A good take on it here, from Krishnan Guru-Murthy, of Channel Four News:

http://blogs.channel4.com/gurublog/changing-the-rules-of-the-tv-interview/1472

The actual loop:

 
'Ed Speaks Human'?

That soundbite from his leadership campaign made as much sense as 'Stauss Kahn is celibate'.

Ed Miliband repeats same soundbite five times in two minutes.

Brooker has his own take:

It sounds like an interview with a satnav stuck on a roundabout. Or a novelty talking keyring with its most boring button held down. Or a character in a computer game with only one dialogue option. Or an Ed Miliband-shaped phone with an Ed Miliband-themed ringtone. Or George Osborne.
Click to expand...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jul/03/charlie-brooker-stop-ed-miliband

This is supposed to be the party of Attlee, remember. He's got to go.
 
I wish he'd stop shillyshallying around and just say if he thinks the strikes are wrong.
 
It's triangulation at it's most perverse worst, ending up pleasing no one.....

It's quite an achievement to be so bad....

Ed is a liability but would any of the others be doing any better? The problem is the spin-doctoring, the triangulation and the remorseless play for the centre right (as defined by the daily mail) that's the problem....and that's a labour problem rather than an ed problem.
 
Yeah, he hasn't learned the media lesson of "you can't court the right-wing press (without offering murdoch political concessions)."

I was hoping that he'd prove significantly left of blair and brown, but it appears I was wrong. I've lost patience for him. We need someone who actually believes in left-wing values like equality of opportunity, social liberalism, curtailing the excesses of big business etc. Pity Cruddas didn't want the job.
 
stokes234 said:
Yeah, he hasn't learned the media lesson of "you can't court the right-wing press (without offering murdoch political concessions)."

I was hoping that he'd prove significantly left of blair and brown, but it appears I was wrong. I've lost patience for him. We need someone who actually believes in left-wing values like equality of opportunity, social liberalism, curtailing the excesses of big business etc. Pity Cruddas didn't want the job.
Click to expand...

And what would you expect them to say?
 
geni said:
And what would you expect them to say?
Click to expand...

That the real problem is the government refusing to negotiate, and that trade union strikes are exactly what to expect from bad government negotiation. He doesn't have to come out in support, but he shouldn't have opposed them.
 
stokes234 said:
I was hoping that he'd prove significantly left of blair and brown, but it appears I was wrong. I've lost patience for him. We need someone who actually believes in left-wing values like equality of opportunity, social liberalism, curtailing the excesses of big business etc. Pity Cruddas didn't want the job.
Click to expand...

Cruddas? He's not to the left of Ed. Instead, he supported his brother for the leadership.
 
stokes234 said:
That the real problem is the government refusing to negotiate, and that trade union strikes are exactly what to expect from bad government negotiation.
Click to expand...

Negotiations are ongoing. Outright lying in your soundbyte is a kinda risky strategy.

He doesn't have to come out in support, but he shouldn't have opposed them.
Click to expand...

So your problem is he's not wishy-washy enough?
 
geni said:
Negotiations are ongoing. Outright lying in your soundbyte is a kinda risky strategy.



So your problem is he's not wishy-washy enough?
Click to expand...

Well, it depends how you define "negotiations". Laying down a series of demands and refusing to budge has never struck me as falling into the same category. It's more been a case of the government informing the unions of the pay and pension reductions that they will be recieving, and then inviting them to discuss them around a table.

"Wishy-washy"? My problem is that he shouldn't have opposed the unions and he shouldn't have ignored the significant concessions they have made before resorting to strike action.
 
stokes234 said:
Well, it depends how you define "negotiations". Laying down a series of demands and refusing to budge has never struck me as falling into the same category. It's more been a case of the government informing the unions of the pay and pension reductions that they will be recieving, and then inviting them to discuss them around a table.
Click to expand...

So you want Miliband to declare the negotiations are fake and the unions should pull out? Which would allow the touries to blame him for the following series of unpopular strikes.

"Wishy-washy"? My problem is that he shouldn't have opposed the unions
Click to expand...

Which ones? NASUWT weren't on stike and NUT are not labour affiliated.

and he shouldn't have ignored the significant concessions they have made before resorting to strike action.
Click to expand...

You have no idea if he ignored them or not. 15 second soundbyte see.

But face it not supporting or opposing can yes be played as "Wishy-washy".
 
Undesired Walrus said:
Cruddas? He's not to the left of Ed. Instead, he supported his brother for the leadership.
Click to expand...

Yeah, weird move i'll admit. He's not the perfect candidate, but he usually comes across as left of Ed, and cruddas does cite some reasonably left-wing things that d.mil was talking about as his reasons for backing him - low wages, poor public services, globalisation etc.

Frankly, it's hard to know what ed stands for nowadays. He mostly just seems to be sniping at the other parties.
 
geni said:
So you want Miliband to declare the negotiations are fake and the unions should pull out? Which would allow the touries to blame him for the following series of unpopular strikes."
Click to expand...

No, I want miliband to declare that the negotiations are rubbish and that the tories should expect the unions to pull out if they aren't offered genuine concessions. I don't suggest that he attempts to influence the unions himself, but I disagree with him actively opposing them.

geni said:
Which ones? NASUWT weren't on stike and NUT are not labour affiliated.
Click to expand...

Sure, they weren't all striking, but none of the other unions actually opposed the strikes.

geni said:
You have no idea if he ignored them or not. 15 second soundbyte see.
Click to expand...

Did he mention these concessions in the above clip?

geni said:
But face it not supporting or opposing can yes be played as "Wishy-washy".
Click to expand...

Ok, i'm facing it. My stance stays exactly the same, though.
 
stokes234 said:
No, I want miliband to declare that the negotiations are rubbish and that the tories should expect the unions to pull out if they aren't offered genuine concessions. I don't suggest that he attempts to influence the unions himself, but I disagree with him actively opposing them.
Click to expand...

Declaring that the negotiations are rubbish and that the tories should expect the unions to pull out is going to be viewed as an attempt to influence the unions.


Sure, they weren't all striking, but none of the other unions actually opposed the strikes.
Click to expand...

So he should have supported the unions striking and non striking? Because that is going to be one seriously wishy-washy soundbyte.

Did he mention these concessions in the above clip?
Click to expand...

I love the way you seem to think you can extract the totality of his views from the clip. Its thinking like that that resulted in the above clip in the first place.

Ok, i'm facing it. My stance stays exactly the same, though.
Click to expand...

You have a stance? So far you have a bunch of criticism.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom