Another wee reminder that the Corporate National is not entirely with us

Quite a few readers disagree with me on this. To my mind, no media outlet owned by a corporation can ever be trusted to tell the truth about radical constitutional change, which corporations, by their nature, dislike.

Here are some earlier signs:

Today’s story is, however, only the latest in signs of their own unconvincing performance. See these:

The limited commitment of the National:

The National and a Dundee prof’s dodgy statistics feed the Unionist press, Boris rants and that AngusTory MP on QT last night:

Should the National have denied the BMA the chance to spread anxiety about NHS Scotland?

Scotsman, Herald and National (!) contradicted as evidence shows Scottish Ambulance Service in ‘excellent condition’

EIS survey on Scottish teacher stress is stupidly covered in National then disappears before leading academic can mark it its ‘methods.’

Both BBC Scotland and the ‘pro-Independence’ Sunday National use unpublished or unreliable evidence to accuse Scottish schools of ‘unlawful’ actions

12 thoughts on “Another wee reminder that the Corporate National is not entirely with us

  1. Where half of the population (and most of the indigenous population) support Scotland being a self-governing country, not one single newspaper lends itself to that cause—not a single one!
    But they are mostly owned from outside our country, and have no affinity to us–only our money.

    “Scottish” media—Scotland’s Shame !

    Stop buying their propaganda !

    Liked by 2 people

  2. It’s definitely got limited commitment to Independence. And for many Yessers is just a pleasant read cf any other product of our press. It’s use as a recruiter for Indy is limited by declaring it’s political allegiance on the front page.
    The paper doesn’t allow folk such as Prof. John Robertson or The Rev. Stuart Campbell to contribute.
    I could go on. Perfect it ain’t and it’s probably getting worse since Calum Baird (editor) was put in charge of the Evening Times.
    However given Scotland is still in the UK, we are lucky to be allowed The National as it is. So for the mean time I’ll continue with the paper.
    Maybe if more of us let them know what we think of some of the articles they might change tack, a forlorn hope?

    Liked by 1 person

  3. It is very important that the executive is held to account by a free press,of which there has been an abject failure in England.
    In the UK,there is no such thing as either a free market or a free press which instead,represents the views of their wealthy owners or in the case of the broadcasters,the Westminster government of the day.
    All most of us asked from from the media was a fair hearing which for the most part has not been the case in Scotland,so we should be grateful for small mercies,for now.
    Thankfully,we have online media such as this blog to keep us informed.
    Thank you John.

    Liked by 2 people

  4. We are not well served in Scotland that’s for sure and looking at the decline in sales tells the story adequately enough but serious underfunding and defunding in MSM also tells us an important message of how ‘valued’ we are.

    It’s an important lesson to learn and I do hope going forward that we do.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. I think what appears in The National may depend on the journalistic standards of the owner put into effect by the editor.

    It is not every editor who has the prescience and good sense to find and recruit a writer like Flann O’Brien. Such an editor was Bertie Smyllie of the Irish Times.

    I do not entirely trust the journalism of The National. The thrust of the criticism by Professor Pollock and her co-author is right, I think. However, there are reasons why the Scottish government did follow the UK which are far from being “incomprehensible”.

    The first is that it makes sense to work in a similar and co-operative way, while delegating as much power out as possible.That is, when the scientific advice is good.It does not seem to have been good with regard to covid 19. From a political point of view it would not have been easy for any of the devolved governments to take a different path to the UK government. Dealing with emergencies is a reserved matter. Nor would widespread testing have been possible in any case. The materials – reagents – needed to do so were not available.

    The failure of all of the UK governments to plan adequately ffor a pandemic such as covid 19 goes back as far as 2005.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. When I was 19 I bought and read for the first time a copy of the Irish Times. I found in it a piece by Flann O’Brien, one of a number of nom de plumes used by Brian O’Nolan. It was a pseudo-serious piece that was very funny. It must have been near the end of O’Nolan’s contribution to the Irish Times, one that lasted over 25 years and involved a daily column for 6 days of the week. The tone and substance of his column reflected the ups and frequent downs of his life. They are probably unparalleled anywher in journalism.

    O’Brien was a reluctant journalist. He was a novelist though his novels sold little in his lifetime. He was also a senior civil servant until he got his jotters for insulting his Minister in a column. This job allowed him time, lots of it, for the long lunchtimes that were then a large part of journalism.

    As a student O’Brien and some chums began to invade the letters columns of the Irish Times. Letters, just sufficiently sane to be published, were sent. Once published the letter would come under scrutiny, criticism and, frequently, attacks, sometimes from the author of the initial letter. Eventually, word reached the editor Robert “Bertie” Smyllie about what might be going on. Smyllie found O’Brien, the ringleader, and offered him a job giving him scope and support to do pretty much what he wanted. His column is uniques and is unlikely to be repeated

    If you would like a little flavour of Flann you might find it in this little bit from Youtube. It is a part of a darkly comic novel, The Third Policeman. His first novel, At Swim Two Birds, was, apparently, edited down from over 800 pages.


    Liked by 1 person

      1. A favourite of mine, too. The journalism is remarkable. Have you read Cronin’s biography of Myles? His life was filled with frustration, I think.

        Thanks for the correction


  7. This from the Guardian is also relevant?

    “Experts have voiced growing frustration over the UK government’s claim that it is “following the science”, saying the refrain is being used to abdicate responsibility for political decisions.

    They also raised concerns that the views of public health experts were being overlooked, with disproportionate weight given to the views of modellers.

    “As a scientist, I hope I never again hear the phrase ‘based on the best science and evidence’ spoken by a politician,” Prof Devi Sridhar, chair of global public health at the University of Edinburgh, told the Guardian. “This phrase has become basically meaningless and used to explain anything and everything.”

    The government has repeatedly said it is being “led by the science” on decisions ranging from banning mass gatherings to closing schools, the use of face masks and, most recently, the prospects of lifting the lockdown.”

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.