The story regarding Montague Burton and Universality of Cheese blog is now up on The Scotsman. The editor, Mark MacLachlan was Mike Russell's Office Manager.
I say was because Mark has resigned his post with the following apology:
"I deeply regret my actions and unreservedly apologise to all the people concerned, and to Mike Russell. In getting carried away with my comments, which were very wrong, I have let myself and my colleagues down, and of course I have resigned from my position in Dumfries."
I definitely feel for Mark. I met him at a Blogger's Breakfast at Spring Conference and briefly again at the Autumn Conference a few months ago. He came across as a thoroughly engaging and good-natured guy. In amongst hundreds of blog posts I guess it just takes one to fall wide of the mark before you can fall foul of journalists and/or opposing parties and lose your job. That's a very tough standard to set for oneself.
Tavish Scott has said the incident is Salmond's 'Damien McBride' moment which is surely far-fetched. The reverberations around someone in Gordon Brown's inner circle actively planning (albeit unknown to the PM) to smear the opposition is markedly different to an unsupervised, relatively junior employee running an anonymous blog.
However, it is desperatley regrettable timing with the white paper on an independence referendum due to be announced the day after this story hits the papers. Of course, with 24hour media this story could be all but forgotten by Monday afternoon.
No doubt there will be more blogger soul-searching and finger pointing which I hope is unnecessary and avoidable. My other fear is a purge of blogs from the SNP borne out of a belief that websites that could harm the party name and aren't achieving much for the cause are not worth the hassle.
My personal belief is, as mentioned in my previous post, blogs and new media are overall a good thing, potentially a great thing, and if you believe what you're writing is true, fair and can be backed up then go for it but if you're indulging in rants and venting untapped rage behind a pseudonym, then maybe you should think about another hobby.
Salmond vs Trump
4 minutes ago
72 comments:
I don't think it'd be too hyperbolic to say this is exactly what the SNP don't need in the run up to an election which Labour and the Tories are making an effort to take online.
Of course, it's hard to tell if 2010 will see the internet have the same importance in the election as it did last year in America.
But just in case, I do think the SNP needs improve the organisation of it's online communications. Support a few good bloggers, get more of the MSPs and MPs to engage online and so on. If nothing else, there needs to be some response to the rubbish that is spread about the SNP online.
I even sent an email saying such to the HQ the other day after having problems getting in touch with my new local branch, the website of which is rather outdated.
You Say:
"The reverberations around someone in Gordon Brown's inner circle actively planning (albeit unknown to the PM) to smear the opposition is markedly different to an unsupervised employee running an anonymous blog."
I beg to differ - A member of the Scottish Cabinet's OFFICE MANAGER being caught read handed doing this
http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/scottish/scottish_news/622949/Alex-Salmond-is-fuming-over-party-worker-Mark-MacLachlan-scandal.html
And McBride only talked about smearing people - this guy actually did, and lots of them
http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:56xxi8d9D9EJ:the-universality-of-cheese.blogspot.com/+euan+mccolm+universality+cheese&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk
I see that Montague Burton picks his fights recklessly.
Anonymous at post 2
Is opining that someone is a "Canute" smearing them?
The author of the Cheese blog reacted to what some have perceived as a heavy handed attack by a national newspaper on an independent blogger (Wardog) by calling the journalist some unpleasant names. Childish and distasteful perhaps but not so very different from John Major denouncing some of his cabinet as "bastards".
The author of the cheese blog was Mike Russels constituency worker - not his "Office Manager". While I understand that political opponents of the SNP will want to hype the importance of this, bit early for such spin?
mark maclachlan is down on the parly website as his constituency office manager. this was serious enough for alex salmond to order his dismissal. does anyone think that was the fm's treacheroud capitulation to the unionist establishment?
This is bad. It's not amazingly bad, but it's far from good.
I personally run a blog. My name is right up in the top-right. Whilst I often use some rather naughty language, I justify my opinions and always link to the facts if I'm stating something as a fact (rather than just my own opinion).
Anyone who doesn't, is an idiot.
Anyone who doesn't, who works for a party, is a colossal idiot.
Anyone who doesn't, who works for the governing party, in a tax-payer funded role, is an unemployed colossal idiot.
Newsflash: if you write it on the internet, people can read it, and trace it back to you.
Thankfully I'd imagine the furore will be dead soon and the white-paper will take the news-cycle back. But this is a really stupid blunder that no-one caught him out before.
One thing this guy is not is a martyr. The damage he has done to the SNP is huge. When Alex Salmond stands up at the white paper press conference on Monday, all anyone will be asking is whether he trusts Mike. That's not the News of the World's doing. It's Mark MacLachlan's.
This is pretty bad. It is unbelievable to see the SNP, which only a year ago were at the top of their game, reduced to a string of such incompetencies right now. This is what we've come to expect of Labour.
I'm sorry, but the SNP look tired at the moment. Policy wise, as well as tactically. This episode is purely a symptom of that wider malaise and decline. To a disinterested observer Scottish Labour actually look quite competent in comparison. And that is saying something.
Scotland's stock and reputation is at an all time low right now (something Unionists love). We desparately need the pro-Scotland SNP Government to get itself back on the rails before too long.
How is Montague Burton calling Euan McColm a cunt not so very different to John Major calling members of his cabinet bastards?
Are you serious?
@ Anon
"[...]When Alex Salmond stands up at the white paper press conference on Monday, all anyone will be asking is whether he trusts Mike.[...]"
Not least because Mike Russell has been an architect of independence since sometime in the 90s. He'd be a horrific loss to the SNP's PR machine just now. Big Eck seems to stand by his cabinet members though - he could have walked away from MacAskill a few months ago and didn't.
yes Hammer. People need to think about what they are doing.
This is not a unionist set up, as some will believe, it was an SNP guy stupidly, recklessly, and selfishly doing something that has hurt the party.
Mark MacLachlan was sacked on Alex Salmond's orders because he had behaved indefensibly. What an arse.
I despair. They're at it on the Scotland on Sunday site now. What is wrong with these people?
Meant to say to Hammer, I've been talking about this for the past few months.
If you're in Inverclyde, come on down to the branch meetings, we're moving forward on the whole internet thing (if I can ever convince everyone that is :D ).
The SNP have a pretty good usage of the net as a campaign tool, the phone-canvassing tools in particular are exceptional.
What we need to do, as a party, is have a web-strategy. I've been writing one for the local Branch, but we need to move on this, tie in all the Branches into the HQ site, update that and have forums, video-addresses from Alex, Nicola and others, explain what the party is doing a lot better, engage using twitter, facebook and other methods.
This scandal will not help. Not only does it make us look amateurish and stupid, not to mention extremists, it will also play to those in the party who don't trust these computer thingies…
@Math
I have to agree. My old branch in Maryhill has a website which is often updated by the local MSPs, a regular newsletter via email and updates every so often from Bob Doris. All the activism was organised online. When I changed my address on the party's main website, I even got an Email from them to make sure I was actually moving. All very friendly and efficient.
I'm in Edinburgh now and I've not heard a peep apart from the usual party mailshots. It's been 2 months or so now.
It was also good getting Tweets from the SNPOfficial account on Twitter during Glasgow NE, but those have dropped off completely I think.
HAMMER SNP HQ Tweet on GNE - "We got stuffed"
so, practically, what can those of us who oppose these extreme cybernats do to persuade others of our position? Obviously, with Mark MacLachlan facing legal action, that might be a persuasive - if unsettling - argument.
The fact is that, if you are identified, you can be sued for defamation. God help you if a newspaper journalist or a politician (with their company's or party's legal might) comes after you.
Does someone have to lose their house in the courts for people to get a grip?
MATH CAMPBELL SAYS IT ALL
"I personally run a blog. My name is right up in the top-right. Whilst I often use some rather naughty language, I justify my opinions and always link to the facts if I'm stating something as a fact (rather than just my own opinion).
Anyone who doesn't, is an idiot.
Anyone who doesn't, who works for a party, is a colossal idiot.
Anyone who doesn't, who works for the governing party, in a tax-payer funded role, is an unemployed colossal idiot."
No conspracies here nats. Just stupidy of the highest order by one of your very own. A party member, Mike Russell's Office manager: Is that close enough - or would it have to be Moira Salmond, before any of you see how directly damaging this is? How it's you own fault, nobody else's?
YAWN>>>>>>
Pales into insignificance compared with the Labour lie campaigns relating to the illegal war in Iraq, amongst other things. Unless I am missing something, no-one died as a result of this blog.....unlike Dr David Kelly, a whole load of our troops and christ knows how many Iraqis.
General note - now we see how dirty the election campaign will be. Desperate times, desperate measures for Labour.
Keep the faith - this is actually good news. They are badly rattled.
CC
CC - By no stretch of the imagination is this good news.
Labour are rattled though.
Hence why I read on the BBC today "Plea for SNP to drop independence".
The Unionists are actually pleading with us to drop independence, using every argument under the sun.
I'm not for one moment suggesting that MacLachlan's not a complete moron for thinking you can right something on the net without leaving a traceback, nor am I exonerating Mike Russel's office for not checking up on his staff's extra-curricular blogging.
But for this to come out on the eve of the white paper is clearly collusion. That's the way the game is played, but it still stinks and I think most people will see that the NoTW have been sitting on this for quite some time now with the mess over wardog etc.
Labour *are* rattled, they need something to distract from the white-paper because at the next Scottish GE, it's going to be "why did you stop us having a say?" and the Lib-Dems are vulnerable on that score as well. No one cares about the Tories, but you can bet the Lib-Dems and Labour are pulling every possible favour they have with the tabloids for anything damaging about the SNP now.
A second-rate rant-blog that didn't really say anything hugely controversial is hardly Watergate, is it? About the only thing scandalous about it is the writer worked for an Minister, and tried to stay anonymous.
If it had just been open (and slightly less defamatory) they'd not have run it.
"General note - now we see how dirty the election campaign will be. Desperate times, desperate measures for Labour."
I think you made a mistake there. Did you mean to say "Desperate times, desperate measures for the SNP."?
Seriously though, I hope this will show the cybernats how much harm they are doing to the SNP and convince them that their current manner is going to get us precisely nowhere.
POLL ALERT
New poll in Sunday Times Scotland. Unfortunately I'm getting a 404 Error so no details, but according to the headline support for independence is down.
Anon, I think it's 25% for a poll, 20% supporting independence.
I read lots of blogs. I have read the UOCheese blog in the past. I do not expect the standard of blogs to be as high as that of say the Times. I don't believe much of what I read. I try to find statistics when theres a need for facts ( though wikipedia is my first port of call, and I KNOW thats not 100% ). I can hardly expect the random musings of an untrained citizen to be fully researched factual pieces which would hold up in court. I read them primarily for laughs.
These attacks on bloggers are an effort to stifle any opposition to the media domination of the big 3. Labour in particular are very well represented in the traditional media. Its clear they are rattled by the little bit they don't control. Newspapers with collapsing sales obviously have their own agenda.
I have had direct knowledge of about 6 or so stories I can recall over the years. Not one has ever been reported accurately nor truthfully on TV nor in newspapers. The phrase about pots and kettles springs to mind.
This politics is a dirty game. I hope you bloggers keep it up. You are not here to report the news. But you've got the c@nts rattled. More power to you!
I don't recall the person behind the 'leaky chanter' ever being hung out to dry like this.
It's no excuse but parity is surely a minimum requirement.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article6136099.ece
Observer and others
This is sad, but you completely miss the point here about "montague burton" posting as an individual, etc
Whatever he posted as, he posted about individuals. And, just because someone invented blogging does not mean ( thankfully), you have a free hand to libel individuals, call people "cunts", liars, sexual predators and worse in the name of individual freedomor personal expression.
For example, if i got a photo of you posted it on my blog and called you a "cunt" and fradster or worse under it , how would you feel? What would you do? Try to do?My "right to personal expression?"
And this is exactly what monty did - but in his case he did it about the political editor of the News of The World!
And he did it last Sunday in direct response to the news of the world outing of Wardgog ( for calling Jim Murhy a "cunt") . So the following Sunday he is outed. Just what did he expect? No great labour/unionist/NOTW conspiracy here. All timed for the publication of the SNP's White Paper?
No, just imense stupidy by a blogger. And one the just happens to be a paid employee of Mike Russell. Christmas come early for the News of the World - and handed on a plate for free!
You could not make this up. The Unionists could not make it up. But Observer, you are - and without a thread of evidence, other than "the unioinists are rattled". Not from where Im reading - indeed the unionists are getting cocky as the SNP and support for independence slides.
So focus on this, the real issue, rather than invent - and I mean invent - conspiracies.
And one reason , but only a small one, the SNP is slidding in the polls is the distateefull and self defeating activities of SOME "cybernats"
I write as a nationalist, i write as a blogger. I write as someone who has in the past posted some stupid, indeed harmful stuff on the web. But at least I've learned from my mistakes.
And my conclusion? You are responsible for what you write and its consequences. It's called independence.
There is a simple rule that bloggers could follow which would solve this problem in a onner. Discuss issues and steer away from personalities and backstage gossip.
I suspect for some people however policies and issues come second. We would not lose anything if such people stop blogging.
"Invent conspiracies"
Here's the Herald version of the Colin Smyth story that Montague posted on.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/top-labour-official-faces-censure-after-rowdy-debate-1.987186
Subtitle: Labour’s top official north of the Border has been reprimanded over alleged “boorish” behaviour as a councillor, the Sunday Herald can reveal.
Mark MacLachlan sealed his fate with his personal attack on the News of the World's political editor last week.
Of course he was going to draw McColm's attention - the man's a journalist, ffs.
So, no collusion. Just stupidity from Mark. He knows the truth. Maybe he'll turn up somewhere and explain it.
I want to know how calling the Scottish Political Editor of the News of the Screws and the Scottish Secretary a 'cunt' is a smear? Or reporting the ejection of Labour's General Secretary in Scotland from a council meeting.
If you read the SoS article, there's a clear attempt to imply Colin Smyth was the target of a sexual smear campaign, which is demonstrably not the case. From what I remember reading the blog previously, and what's left in Google cache, there's nothing in it that isn't either verifiable fact or obvious opinion.
Observer's right, this and Wardog-gate are the product of a Stalinist mindset. Criticise the wee boys' journo-political network and we'll get you.
Here's a thought. If the media is really part of massive conspiracy, is it sensible to attack individual journalists online?
The simple truth here is that Mark MacLachlan is entirely to blame here.
By the way, I see no conspiracy. I see the SNP - the party I support - dragged into a Damian McBride style scandal by a man working for Mike Russell, paid by the taxpayer.
This is bad for us. Very bad.
All Bundy
No. it's simpler: Call people cunts rather than engage in political debate and there are consequences. And in the case of Wardog and now Monty big one
We could discuss forever - or just stop calling political opponents and journalists cunts etc
Then if they shut us all down we'd have a point
Anyone else noticed that comments have been disabled on Tom Peterkin's SoS story? Before 8 this morning, there were already about 160 comments on it, and loads of them were from foaming cybernats of the Universality of Cheese-monger's ilk. They just don't get it.
Here are som facts:
Sale of the News of the World in Scotland, circa 300,000.
Sales of Scotland on Sunday, circa 60,000.
Sales of the Sunday Herald, circa 40,000.
So, total sales of around 400,000. That would translate as a potential readership of almost a million.
Some - many - of these people have to be SNP voters. But others - ALL the others - are people we want to persuade of the argument for independence.
Do we not want their votes now? Because if we screw up and create big, damaging stories like this, we're not going to get them.
The political battle for independence is being reduced to a historical battle re-enactment on a dreich Sunday in Aberfeldy.
News of the World in Scotland, circa 300,000 readers
Scotland on Sunday, circa 60,000 readers
Sunday Herald, circa 40,000 readers
Obscure Political Blogs, circa 50 readers
Yes, probably best to sweep this all under the carpet, nothing to see here people, go back to your blogging.
al bundy
If you opened up a blog and called murphy and others a "cunt" etc yes you would be "fair game".
If there is one plus out of these two incidents maybe now "cybernats" will just now stop and concentrate instead on some political debate that might actually win people over rather than just act as a vent for personal frustration.
You want to call Jimbo and co cunts? Fine - go find a room in your house and shout it as loud and as often as you want. But put it on the internet for literally the entire world to read and dont be surprised or indeed complain if the target of you abuse objects - they are "cunts" after all. Or your employer investigates even - particularly if they are a Government Minister or a publicly funded university.
And Salmond insisted Mark Mclauglin be sacked, RGU did not in the case iof Wardgog - he resigned. Does this make Alex more of a tyrant than RGU? Or just both of them put in imposssible positions by the foul mouthed public rantings of their employees?
Twas ever thus. Not sure where you work. But try going to work tomorrow and stand on the front door shouting "Jim Murphy is a cunt" and see how long you would last - even if your employer is the Scottish Council for Civil Liberties.
Tip for the cybernats still holding out against reason here: try to label this "Cuntgate". That way the Yoonionisht Conshpirashy won't ever be able to refer to it in their Zanu Liebore propaganda rags.
Alternatively, grow up.
@ James McKenzie
Lets be fair here - it's not just the SNP followers who engage in these tactics. I can name half a dozen Tory and Labour blogs which do exactly the same thing as WarDog and Cheese, but don't get tarred and feathered for it. Some of them even seem to get quiet support from MPs.
I'm also disappointed to see more and more right-wing blogs accusing pro-environment blog of using the same tactics. I tend to feel that this is more of a persecution complex on the part of the anti-climate change blogger's part.
Sorry Observer, that's absolute nonsense.
Wardog and Monty went looking for a fight and got what they deserved.
If they were so confident of their assertions then why did both bloggers close down their websites and make unreserved apologies?
I don't know if you've read the post where 'Montague Burton' slags off a certain journalist in the midst of the Wardog story but no right thinking person would have written such a piece without expecting severe and justified retribution.
A purge? Rubbish. It's a welcome, overdue Spring cleaning for the Scottish blogosphere.
Journalists have little to fear from bloggers; indeed my impression is that they have largely welcomed the increase buzz and energy (and leads) that blogs bring.
obserer - no. This is not what they did.
Of course the web is full of bad language and interperate comment. But wardog's offending Post was, not just a throwaway expletive - it was titled "Jim Murphy is A Cunt". It was the main point of his post - this plus he added a probably liablous comment about Ricard Baker on a train. It was just about personal abuse of political opponents.
And the heading of Montys post: "Euan McColm is a cunt" - a "self loathing" one, along with dictionary definitions. Monty even had found and then posted two pictures of the journo plus lots of other expletives.
When there was so much that could have been legitimately said to challenge Euan McColm reporting of the Wardog story, defend Wardog, all we got from Monty was abuse. These was even an extensive debate in his blog's comments section toi which he actively contributed where moaty was asked repeatedly to take the post down, not leats because Euan McColm's daughter was in hopsital that very dayy. But he didnt, indeed compounded it all by effectvely egging on the mostly ananymous but clearly well placed labourite commentators with "bring it on"bravado"
I know all this, because I took part in the initial discussion until it all just became too much, too abusive.
So all this was done eyes wide open against the labour capitalist media machine - "the cunts"
I now just find it 110% astonishing to find this was done - "brought on", by a paid employee of the constitutional affairs mninister in the week of the SNPs white paper launch
Sacking? - too good for him.
Here's a conspiracy theory for you: Monty was a long term unionist plant put into Mike Russells office years ago for this very mooment! As credible as your conspiracy theories - indeed more credible as at least it would make sense.
But Im only joking - you appear to be serious
I'm staggered at the stupidity of "Montague", to be honest, and have little sympathy for him. If you're that close to the SNP you should at least be using your real name on the web. Needless to say, his was a blog I would occasionally visit but can remember little about. Wardog, on the other hand, I genuinely feel sorry for, although he did go way too far at the end (the accusations of council tax evasion and passenger abuse, I mean, rather than the swearing, which was just an opinion). The words "over" and "excitable" spring to mind.
Anyway, the moral of the story most certainly appears to be: it's perfectly fine to work for a political party and smear rival politicians (and wannabe ones) on your blog, just so long as the people you're attacking are shady separatist Muslims.
I'm off to visit Kezia Dugdale and Tom Harris's civilised blog's now. Ta-ta!
Dear All
There are dangers blogging, I have previously asked on my little blog are the scottish media targeting SNP bloggers.
It seems I was right.
So, what persuaded the mainstream media all at the same time to do this?
I don't think this is coincidence, which prompted me to ask, are the Labour Party behind this?
It seems a reasonable assumption to make.
NOTW, Sunday Herald and the Scotland on Sunday are three Labour supporting newspapers.
I never met Mark MacLachlan but I did pop in and look at his blog as I am sure other bloggers do to see what is going the rounds.
So, what advice would I give SNP bloggers, first, use your real name, tell the truth and when it comes time to stand up and be counted, don't sit down.
If you are not prepared to stand by it then don't write it.
Mark MacLachlan has lost his job; I feel sorry for him and Bruce Newland may lose his post at RGU too.
They have something in common; the newspapers targeted their employers to try and get them sacked, adding to their story.
I am sure that the NOTW, Sunday Herald and Scotland on Sunday wouldn't have cast a second thought even if these bloggers had kids in doing what they did to destroy their lives.
As Juan Kerr a blogger recently wrote to me, be careful.
So, what would I do if they came for me.
Would I close my blog.
No, I wouldn't and I wouldn't alter the way I write or who I write about.
It seems to me that there is a campaign to shutdown SNP Bloggers, the next instalment maybe next Sunday.
And if you blog then it may be you they target, it's cheap, requires little investigative thought and they get to destroy lives.
Seems the press and some bloggers have more in common than they think.
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
George,
Did the bloggers think whether the journalists had kids? Have you ever met any of these journalists?
I have and they're all human beings.
Anonymous,
I have met a great many humans in my time on this fair planet. I believe that many of them have children. However, the presence or absence of children is seldom likely to influence my opinion of any given person.
On a related note, I am certain that the journalists smearing Dr David Nutt were aware he had kids, yet they continued their persecution of him. I am certain of this fact, because the Sun used his kids as a weapon against him.
So lets be under no misapprehension that the press play by Marquis of Queensbury rules.
More,
Who do you think is to blame for Mark MacLachlan's current predicament?
Anonymous,
I would suggest the blame lies both with the press and with Mr McLaughlin. He shouldn't have gone out on such a weak limb given his job (after all, I'm sure Mike Russell would have loved a more serious blog associated with him), but the toys are being thrown out of the pram by journalists who should know better.
George Laird, OK, the Scottish press generally do the SNP no favours - although it has to be underlined that the SNP are the Scottish Government, and the newspapers will always tend to go after the incumbents - but I refuse to believe that they wouldn't do much the same to a Labour or other Unionist blogger.
After all, did they fail to mention the Damian McBride affair or even the Leaky Chanter blog (and whatever happened to that?)
I suspect that the general rule is that the journalists' main concern is to sell newspapers - after all, it's their living - and if there's a juicy story then they'll go for it.
And if the boot was to be on the other foot, precisely which Labourite/Unionist bloggers do you think the press should go for if they were to take off their blinkers?
More,
How can the blame lie with both the press and Mark.
If Mark must accept some blame, that is for behaving in a way which would create today's shocking headlines.
And if that is the case, how can the press be blamed for doing their job?
We need to apply some intellectual rigour to this debate.
Dear Stuart
I agree the press do the SNP Government no favours.
As to McBride, Guido Fawkes deserves a lot of the credit and it is a good story that sells papers.
My point on the MacLachlan story is that this isn't a single newspaper but three MSM ones.
I don't believe this is a coincidence, do you?
As to who I think the MSM should target from the Labourites, no one.
In politics, it is fair to have a pop but taking a person's job off them, doesn't sit well with me.
In the Mike Watson case; him going back to the House of Lords; I attracted a lot of flak because I defend him, SNP supporting people attacked me for it.
He paid his debt and I don't believe in the concept of continually punishing someone.
People should stand or fall on their own merits.
In this case Mark MacLachlan was unwise but then if people want to take offence they will.
I wonder who will be next?
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
I refuse to believe that they wouldn't do much the same to a Labour or other Unionist blogger.
Oh, really? Well, I can show you at least a dozen (no, more than a dozen) blogs that refer to Alex Salmond as a c*nt. I can show you dozens of blogs that refer to all nationalists as sewer scum.
Do you see the unionist press going after ANY of them? I wonder why not.
George, you're surely not saying that because a story's in three different papers then that's indicative of a conspiracy of some kind?
From what I can gather the NotW did the legwork and the others ran the story as well - after all, they all have qoutes from Goldie, Scott et al, thus the story had clearly broken well before the presses rolled last night, so they weren't necessarily in cahoots about it.
The Sunday Herald and SoS were hardly likely to ignore a story breaking on Saturday about a tartan McBride, surely (or a MacMcBride!!)
As for the employment aspect, it wasn't the papers who did the sacking, that was down to either the employers or the employees if they resigned.
I hardly think Mark's position was at all tenable in view of his actions? To an extent he was plotting against the SNP line behind the party's back, possibly using party time and equipment, and maybe funded by the taxpayer to boot.
Wardog's case is unfortunate and it's easier to be sympathetic about his post at RGU, but at the end of the day there was nothing to stop their employment relationship continuing if both parties so wished, but clearly that wasn't the case.
But both Mark and Wardog knew that politics is a ruthless game, so if they chose to live by the sword...
But what of Mr Griffin? He is subject to horrendous press. He is routinely character assassinated by people of all political persuasion and yet he is elected. Membership of his party is being used as a legitimate excuse for denying employment. I find that a dangerous and objectionable thing.
I was composing a piece here about Muslims convicted over what they read or wrote on the internet, but deleted it because I am afraid that what I write may be used against me. And they told me at school this was a free country. I have commented on other blogs about the danger of jailing people however objectionable, for thought crime.
Britain is becoming a very oppressive state. Irrespective of the rights or wrongs of what some obscure blogger says, it is for a court to decide their punishment, not their employer. We have libel laws.
I am reminded of a certain Mr Alexander Dubcek who found work as a gardener for wanting his country to be free. Perhaps instead of blogging you should all keep chickens or plant tomatoes. Eggs and tomatoes being ideal for pelting rogues at least.
Freedom is such a precious thing so easily snuffed out.
Oh, and colourful language is only regarded as foul mouthed by elderly ladies. Real men hear it every day from babies mouths and builders too. Hardly a crisis. Words. How dangerous they are in the wrong hands.
Jeanne, perhaps I don't read the same blogs as you, but I would say that the blogs you refer to must be pretty low profile, thus maybe that's why they've not been targetted.
Could you provide examples of the blogs you refer to?
And I don't think it was the language per se that was the problem - it was the defamatory aspect and the fact that both Monty and Wardog had positions in the public eye.
If they'd discovered that Monty had been a spotty schoolboy beavering away in his bedroom then it would probably have never made the press.
Both Monty and Mark were adults in responsible jobs and their actions were ultimately their own, and no one elses. They chose to blog as they did, and Wardog chose to reveal his ID.
Monty clearly thought he could remain anonymous, but in view of his duplicity it's surely in the public interest to out him?
The SNP certainly seem to view his actions dimly, so why shouldn't the public generally?
Of course, the press are hardly beyond reproach, but there's a bit too much shooting the messenger here IMO.
Stuart
neither Monty nor Wardog had positions in the public eye.
Wardog is a private individual. "Monty" ran a comedic, surreal blog - for goodness sake, check the name "Universality of Cheese". He became public today.
I don't condone ad hominem attacks. I don't think the SNP will advance an ambitious vision for Scotland by anything other than unremitting positivity about our conutry and by anything other than by raising the terms of debate about our country's economics, international representation and domestic agenda, raising terms of debate above Unionist "too poor, too small, £5000 tax bill" fears and smears. Monty's blog and similar agressive abuse is a side show, unhelpful and irrelevant to the cause of Scottish independence.
However, let us all stop stomaching the disgusting hypocrisy from the Unionists on this.
Monty ran a personal blog no one read - his terms of reference on it were a reflection of that. Unacceptable, in hindsight, to use terms he used.
But he used no terms that don't appear in Alastair Campbell's diaries - Blair using the "f" and "c" words about various people, Brown "f-ing" blinding and denoucing opponents right, left and centre. Helen Liddel denouncing John Reid as a "patronising bast*rd". 9/11 used by Labour spin doctors to "bury bad news". Dr David kelly hounded to his death with "Walter Mitty character" ringing in his ears, an epithet from the UK's most senior spin doctor.
Get off the back foot. Day in, day out, unionist cyber posters use terms of supposititious racism and xenophobia to attack the SNP - "anti-English", "pro-Islam", "pro Sinn Fein".
Nationalists have become so over sensitised to invented charges about the SNP we now accept the hypocrisy of Labour and Tory in their comments on "Monty"
No one thinks Monty's blog was acceptable, in the way it has now been painted. Questionable if that was the way the author intended it - a Damien McBride spin operation it was not. No one advocates it as acceptable political debate. The Labour party find distorting intelligence reports and smearing scientists acceptable. The blog-o-sphere is filled with horrid comments day in day out about Salmond.
Lets agree Monty went too far, distastefully. Lets agree we have a serious debate to be had. But do not let Labour and the Tories away with breath taking hypocrisy on this.
Ayrshire Scot said:
"neither Monty nor Wardog had positions in the public eye."
"Wardog is a private individual. "Monty" ran a comedic, surreal blog - for goodness sake, check the name "Universality of Cheese". He became public today."
Wardog put his real name and occupation on his blog, and a blog is usually for public consumption unless it's configured otherwise.
Monty's blog may have had a comedic element, but clearly much of it was intended for serious consumption, and I can't see what his previous public profile had to do with it. As I said, if he was a spotty schoolboy then the story wouldn't have run, but clearly the story had a public interest element - and can you really see any SNP bigwigs arguing otherwise.
As for the language used, I don't think that per se was the problem, but it did help draw attention to them - if people want to shock by using bad language in a public forum then they can't complain when it bites them on the bum.
Lurid language makes for lurid headlines.
Stuart
thanks, nothing in your obvious post i would disagree with.
Bad language by Monty. Agreed. Similar language as used by Brown and Blair.
Should everyone in the SNP put on a hair shirt? The week we are told New London Labour lied about intelligence 4 days before invading Iraq? An invasion the WHO estimates killed 800,000 non combatants?
Get some perspective and stop playing their game.
Ms Goldie today said that the SNP leadership will be judged by "company they keep" referring to bloggers.
Check Scottish Tory Boy and holocaust pics.
I look forward to ms Goldie tomorrow
Dear Christina,
Recently I was sent this link to your blog, the sender of said link was laughing at your defence of Sandra White
Tory Bear has just posted that two public figures are having an affair.
This is an unproven smear and the Conservative Party should take immediate action against this rogue member.
Aye We Can
I just want to make clear I am in no justifying McLaughlin or Wardog's attitudes to personal abuse. I don't see it as smearing, which is my objection to how it's been presented. The SNP got stitched up, and they handed the needle and thread to the hacks concerned.
But it does seem like double standards on the part of the same hacks. I have 3 other blogs open the now, one is the notorious Cllr Terry Kelly (Wendy's election agent) who can't type the word Salmond without 'spiv' after it and who regularly puts his foot in it big style, personal abuse and all. One is Guido, whose top headline is currently "Prezza Descended from “Incestuous Inbreds” Shock". And the other is Tory Bear, who in a post from Thursday draws parallels between climate change sceptics and Jews in Nazi Germany.
I'm not alleging conspiracies or the dead hand of Labour at work. I'm asking why the boys' club are hammering the Nats' numpties and leaving other numpties to their anti-social niche - indeed Guido's is now Westminster hacks' blogging goto.
(and yes, I know Kelly's been in bother with the press before, but not 2 Sunday front pages)
Dear Stuart
"George, you're surely not saying that because a story's in three different papers then that's indicative of a conspiracy of some kind?"
I think it would be reasonable to ask the question given what happened to Wardog.
From what I understand McColm and Gordon contact him before they went to print.
I wonder who is next.
I have been visited by News International three times on my site.
I suppose that could be another one of just those things.
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
So they find some obvious outliers, take them out, see how the community reacts.
I think the machine now knows all it needs to know about how to deal with the nationalists only free communication channel.
And if you think that an organised SNP presence online is any kind of substitute for a heterogenous online community you are going backwards.
Al Bundy
There is a difference between Wardog and Monty. Wardgog was unlucky, set upon for an unfortunate post, highlighted by labourites and picked on by the media. Inversely Monty picked his own fight with the media and got fried.
I did follow this closely saw it all unfold. I am genuinely astonished now to find out who Monty is. How stupid can someone get? Media conspiracy? They could not make this up - they aint that imaginative, dont think the nats are that stupid.
On a purely practical point on the "media conspiracy" alleged by many (and from someone who once worked in it) this was 100% a News of the World Story. The other two outlets only reported it cause the News of The World told them - to boost their story and with it their reach and credibility.
But, with today's story in particular who would fail to report it? Journalistically, so astonishingly good it is difficult to believe. You would have to be a pretty blinkered nat not to see this.
Nicola Sturgeon made great play about the SNP fighting a clean campaign in Glasgow North East, to the extent that Gordon Wilson suggested that the SNP need to fight more dirtily.
A week is a long time in politics...
It is easy to fight clean when you have hangers-on doing the dirty work for you. But if you are paying someone to do it (whether with or without your knowledge, or by turning a blind eye) then it is very, very serious.
From the cache of his blog it is easily possible to see that he was posting information during working hours: of course I can't say if he was getting paid then.
How many more of the cybernat army will be uncovered as employees of the SNP or their parliamentarians? Has the whole cybernat phenomena been based on paid employees? I really hope not.
Aye We can, how do you know McColm's daughter was in hospital?
Do you have copy writer for so good articles? If so please give me contacts, because this really rocks! :)
The effects are gradual and the result will vary for each user.(vimax pills) However, further review show that most users experience benefits within the first week. In the first month you can expect erections that stay longer than usual and your penile may even start to become wider. penis enlargement pills - http://www.cucumaerot.com
Post a Comment