Davis blogger causes trouble for his idol

Is there any value in newspaper endorsements?  Many people don't think that they matter much.  Leading articles aren't read widely, they contend.  What are read widely, however, are the newspages and since the Daily Mail endorsed David Cameron on Saturday it has been giving generous news coverage to the Tory frontrunner.  Yesterday's page two had a big story on Cameron acting against video nasties (covered one day earlier on this blog).  Today's page two has a 'Cameron to keep local bobbies' headline... all enough to quicken the pulse of every red-blooded Conservative.

Today's Ephraim Hardcastle diary in The Mail goes a little too far in serving its Editor's support of DC, however.  This is its lead entry:

"The 'David Davis for Leader' team tells supporters attending the regional hustings with party members, which are closed to the press: "'If you're asked on the way in by a reporter who you support, say "undecided". On the way out, find the same reporter and say "I was undecided, but now it's definitely Davis." And make your way round as many other reporters as possible with the same message.  If you feel confident, try the DC/DD conversion variant- "It was Cameron, but now it's definitely Davis."" Mr Davis says his leadership marks a departure from Labour spin.  Doesn't sound like it."

Readers are left with the clear impression that this is an official DD campaign operation.  It isn't.  It's the work of Wat Tyler, the independent and indefatigable blogger for Mr Davis, who calls his blog 'David Davis for Leader'.  It was a foolish post but deeply misleading of The Daily Mail to present it in the way it has.  Lord Tebbit has another source of bias to worry about.

 

Comments

[a-tracy]

Well thats a definate reader the Daily Mail have lost today, following on from Rosie 'whatever her name is' slant on Doreen Davis yesterday. I'll be looking around for a new daily from today.

I see from your post that they didn't pick up on the Sherbet Dab joke which was the best bit.

[michael]

a-tracy, I'm horrified to hear you read it in the first place.

[Ted]

so Ephraim is a reader of this blog is he ? Obviously read the discussion of Wat's posts yesterday.
Didn't help DD but must admit when I read it on Wats blog I was amused (Sherbet Dab) - did wonder how many of either side independently had same thoughts.
Dirty business politics

[Guido Fawkes]

Haven't I seen that story somewhere before?

[Andrew]

It's a moronic tabloid - what do you expect?

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

I used to enjoy reading Ephraim Hardcastle when I was a regular Daily Mail reader. Since those days though, it would appear he's suffered a serious sense of humour failure.

[Wat Tyler]

Well, it just goes to show doesn't it.

You're probably right Ed- "a foolish post". And we also know there's no upside if you complain about a "sense of humour failure", as DD did on Womans Hour.

But why would the DC campaign- 90%+ probability of winning according to the bookies- bother with the musings of some "death or glory" DD supporter hacking away in his pyjamas miles from the centre of power?

Naturally I'm flattered, but you know, I'm really not at all sure what to make of it.

I probably really am among the first for a show trial. Whoever wins.

[Peter]

I think Wat it just shows how worried the Cameron camp is because for all the spin they have done they still know that the contest is not finnished due to the fact they aren't coming up with prinicples and no one has ever become leader of either of the two main parties in that way.

[hayek's grandad]

I don't think it is the DC camp that should be worried about this. I think it's the hard working much maligned membership. The post will not have done serious damage to DD's campaign or even given him any of the trouble the Daily Mail suggests. What I do think is posts like this and the ones on AC's comments on another thread have the power to damage the party when used by our political and media opponents. Anything that damages the party is something we should all worry about.

I believe it's incumbent on both camps to make sure they do not damage the party in this or any other contest.

This contest should be a case of 'win, win' and not a case of 'win, lose' or worse still ‘win at any cost’.

[James Maskell]

This is the sort of stuff that makes us look stupid in front of the public. Sorry Wat Tyler, but its true.

It only takes something small to become something much bigger. Weve seen it happen before. I would never have thought that picture of the "friend" of Blunkett would end up leading to Blunketts second resignation. I just thought it was nothing.

It wont decide the election since its basically over, but this is the sort of stuff we want to avoid doing in future.

[Oberon Houston]

Does anyone know what % of the ballots are back in now?

[a-tracy]

I read the Guardian too Michael for a bit of balance! Stuck to my principle this morning and made a switch to... The Times (give me a break I grew up reading The Star or The Sun). I think I'll have to try a different paper each day next week it's hard to settle after breaking with a habit.

[wasp]

I don't think this is anything to do with David Cameron, it was just a stupid mistake by Wat that a journalist picked up on and exploited.

Thats what journalists do, which is why being a politician is so difficult.

[Stephen Alley]

Talking of members of the public tarnishing the image of the conservative party:

Who is Andre Walker of the Conservative Way Forward? And why is he invited on to Radio Five Live and in the past even Question Time, as a representative of conservative values?

I'm sorry to bring this up, but I've heard him twice in the past week on Radio Five Live, and every time his right-wing conservative social attitudes are putting off potential conservative voters.

[wasp]

Anyone can be on radio as a small c conservative, thats not the same as being a Conservative

[Stephen Alley]

Wasp, I know exactly what you mean.

However, I do think conservative messages can become a bit confused. I hadn't done any research, when I wrote my post. Conservative Way Forward is an action group, with Margaret Thatcher as President, Lord Tebbit and Eric Forth as Vice-Presidents, and Alan Duncan and the editor's very own Iain Duncan Smith as Council Members.

I was just really angered by his comments. On denying prisoners condoms, television, and other things. I just thought his aim was to provoke, rather than to bring people round. Yes, there is a very substantial right wing to the conservative party and they are entitled to speak their minds. Yes, this may also represent a small c conservative message, despite the affilations the group has with MPs. Anyway, I was just angry.

[Gareth]

Denying prisoners condoms?? That is just criminally insane. The hard right of our party so often combine loathesome views with criminal stupidity.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

I'm probably being frightfully naive here, but why do prisoners need condoms?

[Stephen Alley]

I have to admit I was a little confused myself, but it is primarily to prevent the spread of STIs for prisoners in same-sex relationships.

Let's hope you never find out daniel!

[Gareth]

Because a significant minority engage in homosexual sex whilst in prison. Combine that with a high incidence of intravenous drug use and you have a recipe for HIV disaster.

[Stephen Alley]

Gareth, I have to say I completely agree with you, but then I'm actually quite liberal when it comes to prisoner's rights. I know it is the opinion of the minority, but I sometimes find it hard to believe that prisoners are denied the vote. I just think it fosters a sense of civic reponsibilty. Whatever.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

Thanks for the info. Surely more stringent prison discipline would be the answer though?

[Gareth]

Save from having an officer permanently stationed in every cell, how do you stop prisoners having sex when the cell door closes?

Intravenous drug use is more dangerous. It will be a cold day in hell I suspect before the Prison Service provide clean needles though.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

Yes sorry that comment was with reference to intravenous drug use, not sex.