Samantha Brick is attractive - to the Mail Online

Journalist Samantha Brick wrote a piece for Daily Mail Online today claiming women hate her 'for being this beautiful'.

What another piece of genius from the Mail Online.

Complete and utter link-bait, in fact they can have another one here. 

The Mail Online differs from its print sister in that it focuses on a constant stream of celebrity stories-and very revealing photographs- that provide a quick gossip hit for (mainly) women across the UK but also in America where it is now frequently drawing traffic, to the extent that it is now bigger than the BBC news website.

It shares its DNA with old Sunday lifestyle magazines such as Femail, of course, and Fabulous and it puts entertainment at the top of its agenda. Its politics remains Conservative, a one stop shop to find Britain has gone to the dogs - yet it is executed in a way that this feels secondary to the mass of consumer friendly entertainment it produces on an hourly basis.

The left hate it but love to link to it. Its columnists find themselves trending because no publicity is bad publicity and advertisers flock to it. 

If you work in consumer PR you can't ignore the Mail Online is often the best place to break a story as it understands how integrated content can make a better online story, it offers the full package.

So here's to Samantha Brick and her latest round of 'is she for real' controversy. You've earned every penny of your French retreat -  I look forward to disagreeing with you sometime soon and providing more links to help the Mail's digital advertising rates.

Google+ for businesses and brands

I recently attended the Communicate Magazine discussion on Google+ for businesses and brands.

My interest in Google+ centers around its true impact on search and I have wondered if Google+ will go the way of Google Wave or whether it will be a sort of SEO blackmail which means it simply has to be adopted.

Speaking to early adopters and power users at the event the consensus was that G+ will succeed because of this but mainly as it is leading 'social search', the marriage of old SEO and social media.

For PR people this is a great opportunity as social search means we can improve the way we channel our content and the role this plays in ethical, organic search - especially the ability to claim clients' content via rich snippets, which is very important for brand building.

I also think, and there were some good examples of this from panelist Lee Smallwood, that the ripple effect of G+ will make evaluation of social campaigns easier and complement Google analytics well. The idea of seeing where your content has been shared and how influential these advocates are is simple but presented well.

Overall I left the talk enthused about getting to grips with Google+ and I've made a Google doc with my abridged notes if anyone wants to get a feel for the conversation.

Kenny Dalglish's gaffes show managers need PR people in the dug-out

Football isn't a game anymore, it's a business. A report from Deloitte this month showed that the world's top 20 football clubs had defied the economic downturn and had grown their revenues by 3 percent year on year.

As a fan, and supporter of cash-strapped Everton, I find this statistic appalling and yet more evidence that the game has, as the Judge at the Harry Redknapp trial mused last week, 'lost its way'.

Yet this post isn't from me as a fan, I'm giving my thoughts as a PR professional based in Manchester.

And my professional opinion is that it's time to safeguard managers for their own sake and have communication professionals advise them on how to respond to controversial incidents that occur during a game.

This season we've seen managers make damaging remark time and time again, culminating in the shambolic Kenny Dalglish Sky Sports interview following the Man Utd versus Liverpool Premier League match on Saturday.

This whole process, as I've stated from the start, has been a massive PR disaster for Liverpool FC but the climb-down by Kenny Dalglish and Luis Suarez has come too little and too late.

For man of Dalglish's standing at the football club to be continually fed to the media lions during an episode that he has not handled himself well in, is unfair on the manager and damaging for the global brand of Liverpool FC.

We live in an age of 24/7 social media, a competent PRO can spot a trend at any time on any issue using a smart phone. How can the manager not have been informed of his player's mistake and the appropriate response after the game?

Yet Dalglish was left to face the cameras and embarrass himself and his club, an incident his reputation may never recover from.

If this were a matter of diet, would the football club let Kenny cook the squad's pre-match meal? Would they have him file the accounts? No, they have professionals to that. Yet, in football, communications professionals do not advise the manager during match day on the touchline - the one place they need strong counsel the most. (This isn't conjecture, I have spoken to people within the game before writing this post.)

As I write this, I imagine the uproar of sports writers lambasting a PR man for trying to kill the integrity of reaction, the soul of the game. I agree, it shouldn't be the case.

Yet the media pressure on these men is not the same as it was in the 80's and these clubs are brands now in the same way Coca-Cola and McDonalds are, you can't hide from that fact.

Reactive comments can cause damage to a club's intangible assets or, as in the case with Roberto Mancini and Carlos Tevez, to the balance-sheet. Mancini could have been advised to hold fire on reacting to Tevez after the game and a deal could have been done behind closed doors which would have seen City sell the player without the manager losing face.

The minute the whole world knew he had allegedly refused to come on against Bayern Munich, however, the club had to back their manager and endure a public depreciation of a valuable asset - one they were unable to sell at the price they wanted in the January transfer window.

There are many other examples to reaffirm the need for comms to make a move from the marketing department to the match set-up, further fuelled by media offering managers quotes from their own players on Twitter (as in Alex McLeish's case).

A football manager should make the decisions for their club and be the master of their dug out, but they deserve the best advice. And, to me, the new media pressure means that managers need one more space on their subs bench in order to protect their reputations and that of their football clubs.

Teflon David Cameron

'Teflon' David Cameron has done it again - latest Ipsos Mori poll figures show his highest ratings for the best part of two years. This is in stark contrast to the floundering Ed Milliband, wounded by a Union backlash to the Opposition support for the public sector pay freeze.

It's intriguing that the Prime Minister can continue to do well in the polls at a time when the country has faced a remarkable period of civil unrest, Union protest and rising unemployment.

Does it mean that the protesters are not getting their message across, or are in the minority?

I don't think protest movements are failing to get their messages across. They have had mountains of press coverage and real cohesion on social media, ensuring strikes like the NUT one had record attendees this summer.

Rather, it shows Cameron's skill is picking his moment to surface, letting his lieutenants fight the fires while he picks the battles the Daily Mail will support.

As to who can engage the disconnected middle ground I think it's clear that the disconnect is between those affected by the public sector cuts and those who aren't. The language of the 'middle ground' isn't pro-Government or pro-anyone, it is the language of 'working through the recession and looking after number one'. Thus as much as the protest movements are doing a good job in making their voice loud, they struggle to have that voice listened to as the middle ground isn't receptive.

It's difficult for any interest group or political party to become champion of such a difficult to define middle ground but Cameron is clearly finding more drives hit the green then Labour is. And as much mud as Ed Milliband or the protesters throw at the Prime Minister, it's just not sticking to 'Dave'.

Luis Suarez, racism and Liverpool FC's reputation

Liverpool Football Club has made a huge PR gaffe in their handling of the Luis Suarez racism charge.

The FA has not charged Mr Suarez with being racist but for providing unreliable evidence and for 'damaging the image of English football around the world'.

The Kopites have obviously challenged it so vigorously as they believe it is one man's word against another and feel they are victims of an overly harsh ban issued with no concrete evidence. A clash of cultures, they say.

Here lies the problem. This defence, led by their manager Kenny Dalglish, is so preoccupied with the defence of the player's reputation that they've allowed the club's to suffer.

With a global following unparalleled by very few clubs in the world, Liverpool FC has a duty of care to uphold the highest standards in the game and act as ambassadors for the sport. They have won many awards for their work - including racism.

By attacking the FA for attempting to uphold the 'Kick It Out' campaign, they are in effect undermining efforts to stamp out racism.

What they should have done straight away, is held their hands up and issued an apology to the FA, to Patrice Evra and to their fans. They could have then explained the offence wasn't intentional but a clash of cultures. 

Perhaps Suarez could have met with Evra to launch a new programme to help foreign players coming to England understand the culture and here and educate them. This would have shown a level of contriteness by the club and the player and could have led to the ban being reduced.

Instead, they have ended up sounding very much like disciples of David Brent, stumbling around racism so tactlessly that they give the very impression they were trying to avoid.

The club should have received better PR advice. Put the club before the man and be contrite. Then you can salvage the player's reputation and turn the situation around.

Telegraph coverage of Student protests over tuition fees

The Telegraph 's coverage of today's latest student and Union protests was a multimedia masterclass.

Although the paper's politics clearly clash with that of the protest movement, the Telegraph reports and website team managed to produce a fairly balanced and innovative live blog featuring video, live images and Twitter reaction from across the political spectrum.

In terms of accessibility, comment and links to social media platforms I'd put the coverage ahead of the Guardian's, which came across static in comparison.

This seems to be borne out by the Tweet ratio to the pages: 207 to the Guardian's 17.

A good lesson in creating a live news blog that evolves with the story, even without any dramatic twists to report on.

EU referendum vote will merely alienate voters

Tonight's debate and vote in the Commons on holding an EU referendum was terrific fun, showing the first big rebellion of David Cameron's  leadership and causing Government aides to resign.

That is of course, however, if you belong to the chattering classes and enjoy the Commons as an intellectual Albert Square. Which makes me wonder who George Osborne would be - Ian Beale? - but I digress.

Most normal voters, the type belonging to families looking for work after unemployment figures reached a 17 year high, simply do not care about this parliamentary posturing over an issue which while always controversial, isn't a priority for them.

I don't need stats to back this up, it is something I hear listening to communities around Britain and from speaking to friends and relatives more distant to Westminster. I tweeted as such before and received lots of comments from people I don't know, passionate in their condemnation of the political arrogance of those daring to indulge in a five hour cock fight while the country collapses around them.

I completely take the point that the Eurozone crisis is the next big economic threat but as Britain isn't part of the Euro, acting all little Britain now just paints both sides of the debate as arrogant, no wonder the French are hacked off.

It's about time the Commons was as busy for a five hour debate on utility prices, jobs, inflation or something that really matters to everyday voters.

Otherwise politicians are simply spitting in the wind and wondering why they are wet in the polls.

Unions strike action in November

Unions have called for a day of action on 30 November in what will be a winter of discontent for David Cameron. Or Nick Clegg. No, in fact, David Milliband.

With UK economic growth stalling the coalition and opposition are caught in a balancing act where a lack of certainty over the path to growth means that being perceived to fail to negotiate with the Unions will lead to damaged credibility to David Cameron; yet bending to them will also cause a negative reaction with private sector voters who have also seen pensions and pay cut.

I'm more interested, however, in Ed Milliband's approach. He has already reiterated at TUC Conference that he is doesn't favour action but his leadership of his party may not survive another 'these strikes are wrong' moment.

If Ed does become red then he forgoes the 'squeezed middle' ground he has tried and failed to woo thus far.

Expect to see fiery rhetoric from Ed Balls and co to try and push the Coalition to a solution with the Unions which will spare Labour this no-win no-fee decision.

Guardian data shows Twitter didn't cause riots

Following on from my recent post, the Guardian has produced a rather useful interactive graph illustrating data of Tweets relating to the riots.

It is no surprise that early indications are that most Tweets were reactive and not pre-planning the next move of the rioters.

Hopefully this will inform Theresa May ahead of her meeting with key social networks and help prevent headline grabbing but ill thought out plans to shut down social networks during times of 'civil unrest'.

London riots caused by social media

Social media has caused the London riots. That's the implicit message in a much of the coverage on day three of the London riots.

This isn't true. Social media is merely a medium for trouble, a vehicle for organised chaos.The modern day pamphlets of the French revolution.

Yet the use of Blackbery Messenger in the London riots does show that technology is once again putting rioters and the lawless minority one step ahead of the Police and even the Prime Minister who is now cutting short his holiday but because of the speed and relentless nature of the London riots, this looks like a leader showing a distinct lack of leadership.

Social media hasn't caused the London riots, it has shown that the current system of law and order and summer political organisation is no longer working.

The Met would be well advised to appoint a new Chief Constable who realises this before it is too late.

David Cameron would likewise benefit from not misjudging the mood of a country in crisis and briefing stories such as how he returned to tip an Italian waitress when his country's capital is in meltdown. That, is bad PR advice.

George Osborne's Murdoch links exposed

Big news today that we're supposed to be shocked about the relationship between the Chancellor and News International.

This is, of course, nonsense. Under the communications direction of Alastair Campbell Labour went as far as the other side of the world to woo the proprietor and his family and just as with the MPs' expenses scandal it is just a case of who is sitting at the chair when the music stops and the hacking scandal was exposed.

What is more of interest is how the sharks are circling and jostling for influence, sensing a weakened News International grasp over the political classes.This has resulted in a more hostile 'right wing' press putting pressure on the Government, undoubtedly jockeying to replace the fallen king Rupert.

The Mail has steadily ramped up its anti-Government output in the past few weeks since the hacking story exploded. Today, the Chancellor felt its razor sharp bite and this is on the back of the 'where is the PM?' rhetoric of last week before PMQs and the statement to the House.

The Telegraph too has been quick to out pressure on the PM over the hacking scandal and BSkyB bid and this has meant that the Prime Minister has seen friends disappear faster than Rebekah Brooks in front of a select committee.

Of course, you can argue that Paul Dacre has been the quiet Kingmaker all along. Gordon Brown certainly thought so but with the Daily Mirror now launching its own hacking investigation the chances of the Mail being undisputed after twelve rounds grow stronger by the day.

But a day is a long time with this hacking story.

The Sunday Sun

The News of the World has closed and The Sunday Sun will replace it.

That's the prediction of Ken Clarke today and the feeling on Twitter at the moment.

So where does that leave the News of the World staff?

Many, as acknowledged by James Murdoch, had nothing to do with the old regime and are victims by association. For them, failure to re-house them would be a legally difficult issue and his statement seems to insinuate a re-branding will allow them to get on with their jobs without the stain of the News of the World hacking scandal.

I don't think, however, that this is going to be enough for campaigners. They will want blood i.e. someone to go down for this.

If that man is linked to the Government, then all of a sudden this will cast massive pressure on the Prime Minister.

Whatever happens, I hope that the honest staff at the News of the World are looked after. It would be hypocritical for a PR, a profession so happy to woo newspapers when it can, to say otherwise.

Interview with NUJ rep about the campaign to save local newspapers

Tomorrow sees the launch of the NUJ campaign to save local newspapers. It's starting in Enfield, where the 'Enfield nine' group of journalists recently went on strike over the quality of their newspapers.

This is an issue right at the heart of democracy in this country with most of the local and regional newspapers in the UK facing continued cost cutting measures or even closure.

To get a front line perspective on the key issues I spoke to the NUJ union rep at North London & Herts Newspapers (where the interviewee works as a Features Editor) about why the campaign is important, how social media has changed the media landscape and the relationship between PR and the media...

1) The North London and Herts strike seems to be more than about jobs. You refer to accountability and this fits in very much with the idea of Britain's media as the pluralistic fourth estate. What long term damage to local democracy will the death of local newspapers have? 


It's a sad fact but over the past few years one in four journalists on local newspapers have lost their jobs. As a consequence councils, courts and public bodies are no longer being properly scrutinised as reporters do not have time to leave their desks and are unable to cover a number of important stories and report them to the public. We have the figures that 64% of editors believe they are not adequately scrutinising local councils and 80% of judges believe courts are not subject to adequate scrutiny. If reporters are not sitting through inquests or badgering local bobbies, or holding those in authority to account or running campaigns we're missing a fundamental cog in our local democracy.


2) The (remaining) staff at the group seem under huge pressure but many of us won't understand to what extent. Just how tight have deadlines been and do you really just have two reporters producing all those editions? 


Yes. It's a crazy situation. We currently have two reporters and one news editor to cover nine editions of our paper. To give you some example of how much worse off we are now we used to have seven reporters and two news editors covering the same patch. So we have lost two thirds of the newsdesk. This means that from 9am to 5.30pm on most days the reporters are tied to their desks churning out a great mass of copy to fill these nine editions. Obviously, they don't have time to go out and meet contacts and hunt down original stories because they have a certain amount of pages to fill by a certain time of the week (Actually we have two deadlines because we have so many papers: 4pm on Tuesday and 4pm on Wednesday. The moment these are reached they start on filling the next week's papers. It's more and more becoming like a factory). They might also have a council meeting or a residents' association meeting or an event to attend in the evening so a lot of the time they take work home with them at weekends which is, frankly, unaccceptable.


3) Why do you feel more hasn't been done by the national media to support you? The Guardian and Indy have regularly covered the topic, but do you think it is editorial policy or apathy from the rest? 


Yes, we have been surprised by how little has been written about us in the national newspapers in relation to our recent strike and battle for quality papers. The trade press has been good but, bar the odd blog from the likes of Roy Greenslade in The Guardian, there doesn't seem to have been much put out there in the nationals. Why is this? I don't think it's apathy so much but perhaps other newspaper owners are wary of printing stories about strikes or the death of local newspapers in fear of unrest and unease spreading to their publications. That was certainly the case with our opposition papers who took a strong editorial line on not printing anything about our dispute. Interestingly, radio has been very responsive with items on local and regional channels while Jeremy Vine devoted a half hour segment to the death of local papers on his BBC 2 Radio show recently.


4) Has social media helped or hindered local journalism? 


I think social media can only be a good thing and local newspapers should adapt and embrace the new technology. In many respects it has helped as people tweet, blog, Facebook etc the moment they see an article they like and help spread the word. The problem is that most newspaper owners have been very slow to embrace social media and are still very suspicious of it so we are playing a big catch-up game. But they can certainly co-exist and help each other.


5) Do you think there is still room for local print media in the age of 'hyper local' websites and blogs? 


You can't beat mulling over a newspaper in a cafe or at home with a nice cup of tea. In terms of local print media there's a whole bunch of local information about what's happening in your community that isn't on the web. You can get national stuff online but rarely the kind of information about church fayres, court cases, about the opening times of your local dentist, or a review of a local play which you just can't get on the internet. Or, if you ever do track it down on the web, this information is scattered all over the place and it's not the same as having it all in one simple format of a proper newspaper. Also, it has to be said, these 'hyper-local' websites and blogs are often run by people who are not trained as journalists, who often miss essential facts or get things plain wrong which is very serious from a legal point of view. I would certainly trust my local paper over any of these numerous blogs.


6) How can local blogs and websites be accountable and is the danger that they can be partisan influencers? 

As trained journalists we take every care to remain neutral and non-partisan. If we show any bias then it undermines our relationship with our reader. You have to wonder about the bias of many of these blogs which are often an excuse for the writer to let rip with his very personal feelings about any number of issues. I am not saying I am anti-blog - I have my favourites - but the reader should take what they say with a large pinch of salt. In terms of accountability this is a pretty unregulated area and the only way to judge their trustworthiness is reading them over a period of time and making a decision for yourself based on the facts.


7) Who suffers most from a declining local press?   


The community. A lot of the time the local press is the only one to stick up for the man and the woman on the street. A weakened local press is symptomatic of a weak society. If you have a robust press then you have a passionate defender of those who might not normally have a voice. There is a reason why the first thing dictators do is to close down any independent press. Words have power.

8) I work in public relations. In your experience does the practice of media relations offer local media valuable opportunities or does it hinder journalism? 


In my experience good relations between press and PR can only help the journalist. Part of my job is a reviewer and I have to be careful about getting too close to PRs for obivous reasons as this might impact on my review but there is nothing wrong with maintaining a friendly relationship. In my experience I find the PR is much more forthcoming - sometimes leading to other stories or a different angle on that particular story - if we strike up a decent relationship. We can help each other.


9) Some local politicians have said that local media only wants to hear bad news and is therefore skewed. This is one justifications for council-run publications. What is your response to this? 


That argument is incredibly lazy and boorish. We report on the news and, unfortunately, the majority of that may be "bad". But if "bad" means writing about a hit and run and putting an appeal out to find the perpetrator then that surely is a good thing. If that means offering a fitting tribute to the young girl killed in the hit and run which might make her parents proud then that might be a positive. Council run publications are generally stuffed full of council propaganda - you will never find one of those rags criticising the council! - and I like to think readers are mature enough to know the difference and desire a publication that looks at the good and the bad without any political bias.

Mail Online overtakes BBC

So, it's finally happened! The Mail online has finally smashed the monthly traffic record for a UK website and has overtaken BBC online.

The Mail has been gunning for the Beeb for many years but this is a moment for anyone interested in online communications to sit back and applaud the strategy.

In reaching for an international audience, as pointed out by Asda's Dom Burch in a CIPR North West summer social event yesterday, the Mail has become the gossip and celebrity site of choice for web users on both sides of the Atlantic.

The publication clearly aims for a wider audience than its sister print channel and in PR circles, it is becoming widely seen as the place to launch a consumer or celebrity story; especially as many newspapers and news sites now unashamedly take the Mail online's content as their own.

While the Mail isn't a popular newspaper among the left, this web achievement is certainly something paying dividends for them and Mr Murdoch will no doubt be looking to address this soon.

Facebook makes another PR Fail

My wife is an interesting and talented woman, yet she has no time for marketing. She likes what she likes, she goes by her own instincts. So when, three weeks ago, I came in to see her deleting many of her Facebook albums, I was curious why this was?

Her response? "I don't trust it (Facebook), you don't know who is looking at them."

So it was with great interest that I digested the latest PR fail from Facebook which has seen the company on the defensive today over the use of facial recognition to tag photos, a feature they launched in the US last year but have now introduced globally.

I don't have a problem with big brands, I imagine working in PR would be a challenge otherwise. So for that reason I don't buy in to the 'Facebook bashing' which seems to be the preoccupation of many bloggers; yet the issue for Facebook is that there have been so many of these slip-ups that it's now a mainstream issue - my wife wouldn't be worried about it if it wasn't.

To put it another way, Facebook is becoming famous for having a poor privacy policy. If you put 'Facebook privacy' in to a news reader you will get between 450-700 recent articles from across the globe. That's a statistic which doesn't need to be analysed.

Privacy becomes even more important when one considers the growth of content curation (read @JamesCrawford at his blog for more on this) and the growth of the cloud consumer.

As discussed in this interesting Marketing Week article, the growth of social channels is being driven by cloud consumers who, typically, create 90 pieces of content a week on Facebook.

Now this content is why every brand is flocking to Facebook, they want this content to link to, endorse and interact with their brands. So the more data Facebook gives them, the more accurate this spend can be.

But here's the rub. For every brand page, Facebook still grew on the bread and butter of people sharing very personal information with their friends in a way never done before. My wife is, effectively, a cloud consumer in the rawest sense. She uses the technology and channels to live her life and take part in online communities, she uses it to keep friends and family up to date with the progress of our children. Clearly, however, Facebook's reputation has altered enough for this cloud to turn a shade of grey and the negative media coverage has affected her behaviour.

A personal example, yes, but not a one-off. It's an issue Facebook's reputation managers need to address as it reaches the heart of debate over privacy versus marketing and there's nothing to say that if the cloud consumers don't like what they here that they couldn't float away elsewhere.

Because behind every cloud is a competitor with some silver lining.

Ken Clarke defends rape comments

Ken Clarke was either brave or foolish to go on Question Time tonight. As it is, it was probably a wise move thanks to the shocking introduction of grown up debate from Jack Straw and Shami Chakrabarti amongst others.

Mr Clarke undoubtedly made a mistake but the feeding frenzy was sensationalist and the arguments deserved a better quality of debate. That would have done justice to the millions of victims and their families who deserve not only justice but an intelligent argument about how to improve the law, especially the often horrific trial process which I have read about.

That doesn't mean cutting sentences is right, that's not my point, the fact is that it's a serious issue and the news coverage was sensationalist, personality politics not befitting the severity of the topic.

Why the collective responsibility of ministers needs refreshing in a coalition

When I was a young whippersnapper, my favourite lesson of the week was politics. Mr Wood was the teacher, a portly chap with a touch of that famous chef detective. I digress, anyhow, he used to ensure all the boys and girls memorised parliamentary conventions and quotes, it was a truly throwback way of teaching but it did wonders for one's grasp of democracy.

Events this week have led me to delve the Commons' Library in search of developments on my favourite such convention, that of ministerial collective responsibility. It's a fascinating read and important to keep front of mind as the coalition cabinet looks to a new age of more diverse and challenging decision making.

The coalition looked to address this early on with 'agreements to differ' within its coalition agreement yet many policies, such as NHS reforms, were not included in this. So either the proposals by the health secretary were originally passed through cabinet and it was only negative stakeholder reaction which influenced the changes; or the Lib Dems kept their counsel because of the convention.

Either way, Nick Clegg needs to test the convention as as much as possible, starting with NHS reforms if he is to repair the damage inflicted on his party in the 'midterms' - although backtracking in the wake of election defeat is not the most sincere way of achieving this.

I think the convention needs redefining beyond the 'agreement to differ' convention in a modern, coalition government. For voters deserve the right to know the balance between Lib Dem/Conservative in to decision making, as the smokescreen of collective responsibility is simply leading to claim and counter-claim.

Granted, this is somewhat of a minor issue to most people, yet I can't help but wonder if modernising the convention for this unique time we live in would improve the quality of coalition cabinet decisions and transparency for voters.

N.B. I tried to find something else on the topic and stumbled across this opinion piece from Lib Dem voice. There wasn't much else out there but the sentiments expressed are similar.

AV campaigns falling on deaf ears

I have every admiration for some of the excellent reports on the AV referendum debate, such as the Guardian's but it's quite clear that this referendum isn't going to turn out well.

You can't blame Prince William and Kate Middleton for getting married but I'm sure 'yes' campaigners would appreciate it if they had decided not to. It's just one of a plethora of news stories smashing the AV debate out of mainstream news.

I don't mean it's not getting coverage, course it is. Yet today I read every tabloid and broadsheet and did some social media listening. All the debate is being generated through the core group of journalists, commentators, creatives and geeks who usually get excited about Westminster.

The man on the street is gearing up for Bank Holidays, the Royal Wedding, the FA Cup and so forth.

Now I realise this is always the case in politics yet this debate should be so much more. It should be more than a vote on AV, the miserable little compromise, it should have momentum, generate real debate outside of the political elite.

Alas, it is not. It hasn't captured the public's imagination and even the image of Nick Clegg weeping to Simply Red isn't going to salvage enough sympathy for the public to come out on his ticket, so he is left in the shadows.

It's therefore down to the wonderful couple that never was, 'Ed and Vince', to parade around and rally the 'yes' campaign - rally in the Tim Henman sense, over before it has started.

So what will this debate teach us about the future of British politics? Nothing, I guess. I'll estimate turnout at around 40% and first past the post will remain. This will be pretty rotten considering the protests, cuts and age of revolution we live in.

But that's the problem with this referendum. It's evolution when the people demand more. Or at least they would, if they were listening.

Ed Milliband's address to forget

#March26 will live long in the memory for many reasons - but Ed Milliband may well wish otherwise.

The Labour leader must have known he was taking a huge risk addressing a TUC rally that would see the largest protest in the capital since the anti-war movement of 2003.

What did Ed have to gain from it? Many in the crowd will have been sceptical of his role in the economic crisis anyhow and it wasn't as if he was marching, he wasn't.

His gamble backfired on live TV when anarchists picked that very moment to launch a series of violent attacks - meaning Sky News and the BBC both carries his words over images of violent outbreaks: http://www.economist.com/blogs/bagehot/2011/03/britain_and_public_spending_cuts

That was a mistake, and an avoidable; yet perhaps he didn't have a choice - the younger Milliband famously owes the Unions his leadership victory over his brother, David (http://www.spectator.co.uk/politics/all/6320223/ed-miliband-owes-his-victory-to-the-unions-and-whatever-pact-he-made-with-them-may-haunt-him.thtml)

If the Unions did force his hand then they can't be blamed for the speech itself which questionably linked the anti-cuts protest with the suffragettes and anti-apartheid movements. Unsurprisingly, this has caused consternation even in the left-leaning press: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/mar/27/tuc-march-ed-miliband-labour-rally

It caps off a poor week for Mr Milliband who has to handle the juxtaposition of a party poll lead and poor personal approval ratings.

I have previously said that 'Red Ed' needs a cause to make his own but until he has clearly made the case for the 'alternative' he speaks so passionately about, he will struggle to reach those voters beyond the Unions and leave himself open to allegations of hypocrisy.

David Cameron started his early years as leader riding huskies and hugging trees - how Ed Milliband must wish he had the time to dip his toe in such less contentious waters.

Budget 2011 predictions

The Sundays are full of 'predictions' and ''source' based info on this week's budget. Why on earth they just don't say 'The Treasury tells us' is another thing! A miss the good old days when Ministerial announcements weren't leaked in advance; although when those days were is another thing...

James Quinn in the Sunday Telegraph focuses on how George Osborne will attempt to convince big business to stay in Britain, whilst sending a message to the public that these same organisations must pay their way http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/budget/8392894/Budget-2011-Double-edge-to-George-Osbornes-Budget-for-growth.html.

This is the Catch 22 budget, Osborne is arguably damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. Either way, his 'enterprise' policies to promote growth in Britain and to send the army of enterprise (some of the metaphors being briefed are truly cringe-worthy) in to battle, need to hit the mark. The public will not tolerate spin over substance this time, any gloss will melt away rather quickly under scrutiny.

Can the Conservative Chancellor succeed in delivering a budget that pleases Joe Public, The City, small businesses and his Cabinet colleagues?

Of course not. It's who he chooses to prioritise which will define this budget.