Comments on: Hazel Blears on cynical political blogs

By: Keir Hardie

Keir Hardie — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 21:03:02 +0000

I think the big issue that she missed is perspective – it’s a small minority of people that read blogs. And it’s a small minority of people that read blogs that read the sort of blogs she’s talking about. And I’d never heard of Guido Fawkes until some political journalists mentioned him a while back, and I saw him interviewed on something, and he seemed like a smug, self-important nobody, and I was annoyed that they gave him the oxygen of publicity and fed his ego. And now I’m annoyed that Hazel has done it too.

By: WhitDawg

WhitDawg — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 11:07:51 +0000

No matter what Hazel or anyone else thinks, bloggers are here to stay and the blogosphere continues to expand daily.
I say ‘get used to it’.

By: Chris Paul

Chris Paul — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 23:09:53 +0000

She’s slightly right. But not much. But at least she’s no longer holding the smoking Cluedo starting pistol in the WCM Library. Half of Guido’s stuff and 95% of his comments are nihilistic, corrosive stuff. And a goodly proportion of his “proper” stories aren’t really. But there is no future in critting political bloggers for investigating politicians. It’s just that Guido is illogical, unprofessional and vendetta driven.

By: Ian Shephard

Ian Shephard — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 16:51:19 +0000

Thats not a blog; its more of an online diary! looked for something to savage ferociously, but it was considerably more sleep inducing than rage inducing.

she hasn’t really got the ‘gist’ of it has she?

she seems to save all the shredworthy authoritarian stuff for speeches or TV appearances!

By: Paul Williams

Paul Williams — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 13:04:42 +0000

I partly agree with the comments regarding Guido, but I’m afraid Hazel’s speech comes across as someone who’s scared of genuine free speech in a format which New Labour can’t control i.e blogs are ‘off-message’.

If we want to talk about ‘dangerous corrosion in our political culture’ how about starting with the Labour Party who have made spin their middle name. For example: Jo ‘good day to bury bad news’ Moore, obsession with headlines, triangulation, focus groups, policies designed purely for partisan advantage i.e 10p tax row, empty promises designed to grab the day’s news but never implemented, the list goes on and on.

As voter I have never felt so remote from the political process or helpless as I do now.

Political blogs at least give me a chance to read what gets left out of the mainstream media (the EU Referendum blog is particularly invaluable) and the ability to comment and engage on issues that concern me.

I think this freedom of information and discussion is the real reason why New ‘spin’ Labour dislikes them so much.

By: Andrew Brown

Andrew Brown — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 18:46:53 +0000

You don't mean like this blog?

By: Ian Shephard

Ian Shephard — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 17:03:31 +0000

I’d love Hazel to get a blog; on a daily basis she’d be ‘fisked’ to within an inch of her life. There’s only Jacqui Smith that’d be more popular. I’m sure a cyberspace ‘queue’ would form ; with eager bloggers keen to share their ‘erm’ opinions on the political ‘nannying’ gushing outward from the pair of them…

By: Matt Wardman

Matt Wardman — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 15:55:13 +0000

Full text of Hazel Blears speech on mt site here:

http://tinyurl.com/hazelblears

Someone’s playing silly buggers with political blogs: she is nearly as rude about the Commentariat.

By: Stephen

Stephen — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 12:16:51 +0000

I’m cynical about our political process in this country. Certainly not because I’ve been reading cynical blogs though, although I like having an outlet for my own frustration.

Blogging actually provides quite the opposite, the chance to engage in a meaningful way with political views across the spectrum.

By: Tim Hood

Tim Hood — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 23:44:11 +0000

As Matt says, it’s difficult to comment without knowing what she said but from reading the Guardian article, I’d say she has a point about mainstream political blogs.

Many are simply aimed at reinforcing their audiences’ prejudices, just like the mainstream media they claim to replace. In this respect, they are no more or less ‘corrosive’, ‘nihilistic’, ‘partisan’ or ‘cynical’ than most traditional media commentators have been for many years. They just have fewer readers, thank goodness.

Hazel seems in danger of over generalising though and I think it’s time we had a new range of terms to replace the inadequate catch-all labels, ‘blogger’ and ‘blogosphere’.

There is little shared ground between the long, deliberately controversial but normally carefully crafted posts of some of the opposition bloggers on the one hand and the link + invitation for user comment that (for example!) busy ministers might post on the other.

We are looking at two utterly different publications with vastly differing aims and approaches (both totally valid) that just happen to use the same technology. Tabloids, broadsheets, books, leaflets, pamphlets: they are all publications that use the same technology -printed paper -but they have different aims and we have different words for them.

I think Hazel therefore, by criticising the blogosphere in this way, risks simplifying things and is in danger of tarring all people who use digital media to participate in the political process with the same broad brush.

That said, her other points warning about the disengagement from the political process of large sections of society are well made.