Most distorted headline of the Week:

‘Britons back Lord McAlpine over Sally Bercow action’

As you might have guessed, it’s from the Maily Telegraph this morning. And it isn’t true. Less than half of the mainstream, younger Twitter users think McAlpine is in the right. 82% of respondents over 65 – most of whom think Twitter is a bird sanctuary in Devon – back McAlpine.

There are two things that make this sort of research rather pointless:

1. About 6 people out of 7 have no knowledge of the law whatsoever. You might just as well ask the cleaning lady whether she’s for or against the Hadron Collider.

2. So far, McAlpine’s ‘case’ has not been tested in Court. Now it will be. Afterwards, we may well see a change of opinion as to the rights and wrongs of this matter.

Speaking for myself, as a former market researcher I long ago lost any interest in what any ‘person in the street’ thinks about TV commercials, banking, science, brain surgery, Nick Clegg, or cynical books about Machiavelli. They don’t know anything worth recording, because 90% of them are ignorant, and two thirds are stupid.

This is merely another ruse to persuade the Torygraph voter that defending the indefensible is OK if the People approve. Read Lord McAlpine and Prince Machiavelli on the subject of the People. Complimentary they aren’t.

Hypocrisy, cant, distraction, distortion and deception. Like the poor and the paedophiles*, they will always be with us. And far too often, in the same bed.

*Morphing briefly into Eoin Clark mode for a few seconds here, The Slog would like to make it absolutely clear that he does not now nor ever did think Lord Alistair McAlpine was anything more than a crafty old humbug. He is quite obviously not a paedophile, and was only accused of same because the BBC’s employees these days couldn’t find an arse in the dark, even when it was their own. This is more than one could say for Alistair’s second cousin Jimmie McAlpine, who clearly had no trouble at all finding arses in the dark, no matter how small. I am still waiting for his Lordship to contest this assertion.

 

Related: Civil War in Caligula Britannica

 

45 thoughts on “Most distorted headline of the Week:

  1. Re: ‘person in the street’ don’t know anything worth recording, because 90% of them are ignorant, and two thirds are stupid.

    But they all can vote. That’s representational democracy in action. Our leaders will be those most approved of by the person in the street.

    You’ve got your work cut out persuading them to your point of view.

  2. ” I long ago lost any interest in what any ‘person in the street…’

    Well, I long ago lost any interest in what any person in politics of the media, the gatekeepers, said about anything. They’re not stupid, but they’re always party to a good cover-up.

  3. Bit like choosing between Hitler and Stalin. A plague on both their houses which is probably the sentiment of the man on the Clapham omnibus..

  4. Go Sally Go!
    My cleaning lady believes that the correlation of wave functions produced in the Large Hadron Collider is pointing to something very fundamental about how quarks and gluons are arranged spatially within a proton.

  5. How can the public form an opinion, when the muppett media only pushes one biased story? Leveson/Internet censorship will only continue to hide evidence and informative reporting. Get this information out to the public at large and let’s see if the un-informed public view Lord McAlpine in a different light.

    Parliamentary Paedophiles:
    A (fairly) comprehensive guide to government nonces.*Updated 1/11/12
    http://www.ccs-rochford.co.uk/spivey/?p=6757

  6. In what respect is Lord McAlpine defending the indefensible?

    He says he has been defamed. Some of those he says defamed him have paid him damages. Certainly on the evidence in the public arena, he was defamed. No other evidence has come to light.

    Sally the Alley is apparently to have proceedings issued against her; she says she will defend-good for her. If the case ever goes ahead, which is doubtful in the extreme, there may be a precedent set for what is or is not defamation on Twitter. But at the minute it is a poker game.

    Sally is a fame addict-so it suits her purpose. It also suits McAlpine’s lawyer because he also is getting good PR as standing up for his client. When either (or their lawyers) is actually risking real money, decisions will be made. Those decisions will be entirely commercial and not prove anything at all one way or the other.

    With regard to Sally, as she is such a supporter of free speech, presumably she will not agree with her Party’s line that the press should be subject to state regulation-otherwise she would be a hypocrite, wouldn’t she? Or would that damage her prospects in the Labour Party?

    • I always find it depressing when people approach every last issue from the viewpoint of a tribe. It’s rather like when marriages end: maximum anger and minimal analysis.
      It is indefensible that a twat like McAlpine is more concerned to deliberately create a precedent to shut up the opposition than do something about the disgusting behaviour of his fellow politicians towards vulnerable children.
      When he or others defend that near psychopathic view of relative importance, then they are in my humble and old fashioned opinion, defending the indefensible. How can anyone defend an illegal practice that has caused 27 suicides in Wales in the last eight years alone?
      I have given you my description of McAlpine: I think him a crafty, manipulative old humbug, and the evidence supports me, not some thick old fogeys in Surrey.
      As for Bercow and Carter-Fuck, of course they are dregs. But they are my enemy’s enemy chum, and this is no longer a fucking tickling contest.
      Sorry to unleash that on you Mick, but it’s been a bad day.
      JW

      • No prob JW. We all have bad days. Indeed some of them have been attacking me recently -fending them off can be trying to say the least.
        One point I would dispute -I do not think I have been tribal. I try merely to be analytical. I agree with the sentiment you express but have difficulty with there being no solid evidence.

  7. “They don’t know anything worth recording, because 90% of them are ignorant, and two thirds are stupid.”
    Are you referring to your readers here John. -I suppose if the cap fits!

    • I have to say that in my experience – stupid people rarely realise that they are stupid………… which could include myself !

      As to the ignorant, most people come here (though obviously not all) because they do not want to remain ignorant ! For myself, I find more of interest on this blog (and the comments) which take away from my ignorance, than almost any other………. but to have this work, one needs an open mind and not an ideological black hole into which reason and argument is sucked relentlessly, never to emerge………..

  8. I really believe whatever the rights and wrongs of this, and irrespective of the legalities of twittering/tweeting. that most people who respond to such a question would rapidly express support for McAlpine’s side simply to see the terminally irritating Mrs Bercow, hopefully along with her equally annoying mini-spouse get her/their just deserts.

    Whilst this might be an inexcusable trivialisation of the subject matter (child abuse, not McAlpine), so many will have a visceral knee-jerk reaction along the lines of “Bercow? Crap on ‘em both!”.

    • In my humble opinion there is an ongoing ‘elitist’ attempt to gain control and stifle unwanted opinion in the ‘ethernet’.

      Thus Berkow (odious as she is to many people including myself) issuing a successful challenge in the court would be a case of………… my enemys enemy being my friend.

      Once again we see how the moneyed power are using what I would deem to be ‘pretend victim status’ (when immediately his Lordship was given the ability to clear his name – and did so with commesurate ease) – the further push to ‘silence’ the ‘ether’ on behalf of the ‘elite’ is unacceptable. If people were still stating obvious untruths about his Lordship…….. I would support his case……….. so long as it was through the court and not for some demand for up front ‘compensation’ just in case you have defamed…..

      Demanding money with menaces is also a crime………. and the situation as set out (pay me or I’ll sue) is to my untrained legal mind exactly what has been allowed to occur. Sue by all means – but do it and get the payout if you win !

  9. No, he’s not referring to his readers perse, he’s referring to the general herd — the people who are so indoctrinated by MSM programming they look upon the likes of this blog as too radical and full of silly “conspiracies”.

    In reality this blog is so full of hard truths that I for one keep coming back as I find it a much needed antidote to mainstream propaganda programming.

    @Nhoj. If you feel the same as me, no he doesn’t mean you. If you find him too “radical” or “out there” yes he does. Get back to Sky News. If you want I’ll even contact them to get the ticker-tape slowed down for you…

    • “No, he’s not referring to his readers perse, he’s referring to the general herd — the people who are so indoctrinated by MSM programming they look upon the likes of this blog as too radical and full of silly “conspiracies”.”

      Don’t know where that leaves me. ‘Radical’ this site may be but probably only just enough and the one thing JW is always doing is putting clear water between himself and conspiracy theories, to the detriment of common sense I feel.

      As for SKY News and Ticker Tape. Ticker Tape I know about, SKY News, sorry, if I’ve seen it I haven’t ‘seen it’, if you see what I mean.

  10. This article is spot on. I too believe that many people – even those well educated have been taken in by this circus. I find that about 97% of people in the UK will know nothing of libel law. If you know nothing of libel law in theory and practice, I do not think an opinion of someone in the street is worth anything.

    Even more depressing, out of the 3% who know something of libel, only 10% know how it works in practice and are up to date with the current thinking in the courts. The other 90%, including many lawyers know the theory but still think in terms of all the onus being on the defendant. This is not true and is totally out of date.

    That explains why so many people have been taken in by the media circus around this. More worryingly, people are paying McAlpine’s lawyers to settle. Once this all unravels I suspect many people will be feeling very silly that they were taken in.

    I know three people who paid 20K between them to pay off one libel claimant in another set of litigation, involving dozens of people writing stuff on the internet. Those people were threatened and placed under pressure – just as we are seeing now. Those cases were literally laughed out of court and those who stood firm had the last laugh. Those who settled regret it to this day.

  11. “Speaking for myself, as a former market researcher I long ago lost any interest in what any ‘person in the street’ thinks about TV commercials, banking, science, brain surgery, Nick Clegg, or cynical books about Machiavelli. They don’t know anything worth recording, because 90% of them are ignorant, and two thirds are stupid.”

    But weren’t you also an Adman and if so does this not mean you have contempt for the people you weree targeting? Not a problem if you have, rather it would confirm what I have always thought about Admen.

    Just to clarify, I don’t disagree with you in any detail, I just think it needs to be stated that what this shows is how close to the *oldest profession in the world*, advertising is and those who indulge in it, are.

    By all means launch one at me as you have Mick C above if you can be bothered, we all I am sure have bad days.

    • ‘But weren’t you also an Adman and if so does this not mean you have contempt for the people you weree targeting?’
      Utter crap.

  12. Oh learned one, Sir,
    We are thankful that you do not exercise your judgement on individuals in any court of law and dump your unsupported prejudices so often on people who clearly have right on their side.

  13. Why isn’t there an investigation by the Police into the alleged offence attributed to McAlpine.
    They may uncover something that McAlpine is trying to hide by threatening Lawsuits at all and sundry who have commented on the alleged Paedophilic activity.

    The Police should be investigating the allegations and taken McAlpine in for questioning in regards to the alleged crimes of systematic Paedophilia by the Elite, Politicians, Judiciary, Police etc etc.

    In regards to the North wales incident which kicked all this off, the Police, we are told, had shown a photograph of McAlpine to the person who suffered sexual abuse by Elite, Wealthy and Powerful Paedophiles.
    He said that it wasn’t the same man.
    Now, if the Police have shown him an up-to-date photo of McAlpine then he would look nothing like he would have done in the 70s-80s.
    How about showing him photos of McAlpine from the 70s and 80s and see if he can recognise and name the individual.

    The witch hunt against dead Paedophiles and the arrests and only arrests of Celebrity Paedophiles is a smokescreen to hide the Powerful Elite Paedophiles within Britains Political Elite.
    You only have to look at the New Labour/Labour Party to show how endemic and prolific Paedophelia is amongst members of the New Labour/Labour Party –

    http://labour25.com/

    http://labour25.com/labour25/

    Harriet Harmen, along with many other serving MPsof New Labour/Labour party supported the lowering of the age of consent and were activists for P.I.E. THE PAEDOPHILE INFORMATION EXCHANGE, WHICH INCLUDES MANY MEMBERS OF THE UAF.

    PS,

    I hope you don’t mind JW if I put a link to your site on –
    http://wiganpatriot.blogspot.co.uk/

    Cheers,

    SK.

  14. According to the latest Census, 25% of the population have a degree, so I would suggest (and hope) that not everyone is a numbskull.
    I also believe there is a talent in very many of us, and even a stoopid man might be a skilled gardener or mechanic, or great with children.
    As I understand it, ignorance is due to lacking knowledge or being uninformed. The MSM have successfully managed to con most folk into trusting them….I mean, the BBC are the most revered on the planet…aren’t they? So the ignorance of a lot of folk is unintentional. Perhaps…..
    Like many on this blog, I imagine we have all explained our concerns and fears about what is happening around us, to apparently bright people, who then mock or call us barmy. That is wilful ignorance, and I now quote the ‘For bad men to succeed, all it needs is for good men to do nothing’ and walk away, in such a situation.
    I liken it to cancer. It’s a bloo*y scary thing, but once we have it, we need to know the unvarnished truth, in order to tackle it.

    JW, sorry you have had a trying day, go and look at some photos of your new grand daughter, she will surely gladden your heart.

    PS For anyone who lives near Newcastle under Lyme, I recommend you try the outdoor saturday market (which we did today whilst collecting daughter from uni). We got 4 brace of pheasants (8 birds if you don’t know what a brace is) for………£5 !!!! I can stomach the feathers for that price! :)

  15. Sadly there are a large number of Polls out there that, as JW rightly infers, can almost prove anything… I could start with 9 out of 10 cats prefer Whiskers….but hopefully you get the idea. If you are an energy company polling on pricing, of course 90% of us are as ‘appy as Larry with what it costs to heat the house….if you are a Green, of course we will all stick another grand a year on our fuel bills to ‘save the planet’. Polls prove whatever the questioner wants to ask. We need to take great care with the actual EU and Scottish Referendum questions.

    I have never tweeted in my life but tonight I’m gonna try and find out how and send Sally Bercow my support…..while not yet over 65, I am delighted to be in the minority…..in a former life I was probably the 10th cat who thought Whiskers tasted like the cheapest fish and meat offel that it probably was.

    • @ Richard
      I feed 2 street kittens and interestingly enough, while they love the white product cat pate I buy them, they left the Whiskas I bought in an emergency untouched after the first bite. It dried out and was scraped away by me the next day – even other passing cats didn’t touch it. And there was nothing wrong with it, it was within date and stored in a cool place.

  16. The analogy I often use in these kinds of situation is investing/trading in shares. 90% of share traders lose money because they never break away from the herd. They buy high and sell low.

    The best investors/traders are the minority who break away from the herd and buy when the sentiment is fear and sell when the sentiment is greed. Sentiment is crucial to timing. The best traders/investors always finally receive recognition. Warren Buffet was probably previously ridiculed and ignored but is now widely recognised and quoted.

    Perhaps another analogy might be another widely quoted gentleman – Winston Churchill, who was in a minority view in the 1930s. We know the eventual outcome there but perhaps I should not expand on this particular analogy in case I am accused of offending anybody.

    Likewise the folks here, who are according to the mainstream press in a minority will be proved right when this litigation ends up in the libel dustbin. That view is based on clear evidence and facts. And once that happens you can guarantee that the press and the herd will be playing quite a different tune.

  17. “The Paradox of Our Age

    We have taller buildings but shorter tempers; wider freeways but narrower viewpoints; we spend more but have less; we buy more but enjoy it less; we have bigger houses and smaller families; more conveniences, yet less time; we have more degrees but less sense; more knowledge but less judgement; more experts, yet more problems; we have more gadgets but less satisfaction; more medicine, yet less wellness; we take more vitamins but see fewer results. We drink too much; smoke too much; spend too recklessly; laugh too little; drive too fast; get too angry quickly; stay up too late; get up too tired; read too seldom; watch TV too much and pray too seldom.

    We have multiplied our possessions, but reduced our values; we fly in faster planes to arrive there quicker, to do less and return sooner; we sign more contracts only to realize fewer profits; we talk too much; love too seldom and lie too often. We’ve learned how to make a living, but not a life; we’ve added years to life, not life to years. We’ve been all the way to the moon and back, but have trouble crossing the street to meet the new neighbor. We’ve conquered outer space, but not inner space; we’ve done larger things, but not better things; we’ve cleaned up the air, but polluted the soul; we’ve split the atom, but not our prejudice; we write more, but learn less; plan more, but accomplish less; we make faster planes, but longer lines; we learned to rush, but not to wait; we have more weapons, but less peace; higher incomes, but lower morals; more parties, but less fun; more food, but less appeasement; more acquaintances, but fewer friends; more effort, but less success. We build more computers to hold more information, to produce more copies than ever, but have less communication; drive smaller cars that have bigger problems; build larger factories that produce less. We’ve become long on quantity, but short on quality.

    These are the times of fast foods and slow digestion; tall men, but short character; steep in profits, but shallow relationships. These are times of world peace, but domestic warfare; more leisure and less fun; higher postage, but slower mail; more kinds of food, but less nutrition. These are days of two incomes, but more divorces; these are times of fancier houses, but broken homes. These are days of quick trips, disposable diapers, cartridge living, thow-away morality, one-night stands, overweight bodies and pills that do everything from cheer, to prevent, quiet or kill. It is a time when there is much in the show window and nothing in the stock room. Indeed, these are the times!”
    ― Bob Moorehead, Words Aptly Spoken

  18. Lord McAlpine the non paedo who collects pictures and photos of young girls of low age who just happen to be naked and in strange poses. Pictures by an artist whp has been visited by the police and and busted on a frw occcasions. Ok i just want to be sure who we were talking about.

  19. I see his noble lords book ‘once a jolly bagman’ on amazon is selling for the remarkable sum of £00,01
    But opinions on this book differ. They range from ‘likeable chap’ with five star rating
    To ‘this guy is evil and known to the police’
    With only a one star rating.

    Funny old world.

  20. I found this on a forum with regard to er um Lord Wotsisname.

    “I met Allie- he didn’t come across as no pedo or weirdo to me.”

    Weirdo..where have i heard that word before?
    Oh yeah.,

  21. This latest attempt at media statistic number crunching brainwashing reminds me of the way Bob Woffinden Richard Webster and David Rose tried to discredit the Haut de la Garenne child abuse police investigation.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s