The Tory press hopes to shove the Labour party to the Right
Not content with telling people how to vote in the election, the Tory press is now looking to ensure the Labour party chooses a candidate it likes.
Thus we’ve seen positive coverage of so-called Blairite contenders such as Liz Kendall and Chuka Umunna (who has dropped out of the race and endorsed Kendall) and hostile coverage of the supposedly ‘Left’ contenders such as Andy Burnham.
The Times and the Telegraph ran cheerful profiles about the ‘refreshing’ Ms Kendall. Even the Sun gave the ‘bold’ MP for Leicester the sort of warm coverage usually reserved for the Conservatives, as she ‘trashed most of Ed Miliband’s policies’ and backed free schools and more defence spending.
Meanwhile, shadow health secretary Andy Burnham, who has secured the backing of more Labour MPs, is bloodied in the familiar style of the general election coverage.
Today’s Sun is an exaggerated form of the general trope:
“Andy Burnham today makes a desperate bid to prove he is not a union puppet.”
That’s not from an editorial column. It’s the first line of a news story.
Despite the facts being much the same – criticism of Ed Miliband and Labour’s past, pro-business talk – the contrast with the Kendall coverage is striking. The paper pulls Burnham apart for ‘aiming to woo business’ after ‘speculation Mr Burnham is Unite union chief Len McCluskey‘s choice as leader’.
The Sun says column lays it out:
“The hasty U-turn by top Labour MPs since their election disaster is jaw-dropping.
Who knows now what Andy Burnham actually stands for? One minute he’s Ed Miliband’s class-war henchman. The next he claims ‘the entrepreneur will be as much our hero as the nurse’ and admits Labour DID spend too much.
Pull the other one. And let’s see him say it to Red Len McCluskey’s face.”
(The U-turn point is interesting. If MPs had stuck to their previous positions, the same papers would be saying they are ignoring the verdict of the electorate, and had learned nothing from past mistakes.)
The piece goes on to praise Caroline Flint, who is running for deputy leader:
“Caroline Flint was another Miliband front-bencher. But there’s a difference between her and Burnham when she says she wants to appeal to Sun readers. She sounds genuine.”
What has Caroline Flint done to please the Sun? Under the Burnham news story, a piece on Ms Flint begins:
“Labour needs to start attacking benefits scroungers as much as bankers if it wants to regain power, says shadow energy secretary Caroline Flint.
The party’s deputy-leader hopeful said it must speak to Sun readers and aspirational voters once more.
She added the party should be comfortable giving a ‘kick up the backside’ to those choosing to live on benefits.”
Note the contrast here. Flint is praised for sounding ‘genuinely’ more conservative than Burnham.
Meanwhile, I’ve not seen any coverage of another ‘deputy leader hopeful’: the high profile Walthamstow MP Stella Creasy, who received an increased majority on a joint Labour and Co-operative Party ticket in the general election.
Ms Creasy is thought to be on the Left of the party, and is probably best known for taking on payday loan scammers Wonga.
She ‘sounds genuine’ too, though I won’t hold my breath about Sun coverage.
Because what we see is the right-wing press hoping to move the Labour party to the right, and influence the terms not just of the leadership election debate but of future general elections.
Adam Barnett is a staff writer at Left Foot Forward. Follow MediaWatch on Twitter
Read more:
The Sun wants to scrap the Human Rights Act…after using it to defend its reporters
Daily Mail says Syrian refugees turn Greek holiday town into ‘disgusting hellhole’
62 Responses to “Never mind the unions. What about the Sun’s influence on the Labour leadership contest?”
Torybushhug
The left wing press and intelligencia provide a healthy crop of distortions, lies and naivety on a daily basis.
Torybushhug
If the left wants to win (and they very rarely do in this country; Blair being a rare exception by posing as a centrist) they are going to have grow up a bit and get beyond the stage of stamping their feet and claiming the public are too stupid to understand their righteousness. The left are todays Puritan preachers, a sect the common sense public reject.
Undoubtedly there are some on the right who do seem to lack compassion but it is fatuous to claim this is true of the majority who either voted Conservative or were complicit in their victory.
The left seem bemused by the fact that they believe they are the ideology of decency and compassion and yet the public keep rejecting them.
The reality is that their ideology may appeal to the young, who still idealistically believe that anyone in bad circumstances is there purely due to bad fortune, but most of us with more life experience who have actually seen the reality know this not true. Most of us know someone on benefits and see for ourselves how the state has turned them into self pitying jellyfish on a tide.
Of course we want to help those less fortunate. But it is clear from reading the Guardian and listening to the left that this is a tiny proportion of their ideology and is submerged by ideological crap.
Most leftism is about promoting the interests of special interest groups (often at the expense of the less privileged) and reinforcing irresponsibility by blurring the line between the unfortunate and the feckless.
We can help those in difficulty but still make it clear that they are not blameless victims, but in the main agents capable of responsible behaviour and sacrificing for tomorrow.
Labours crowning achievement was doubling the number of folk dependant on the state. Far form being progressive, this is a toxic outcome especially for children growing up in long term dependency (Labour doubled the number of households where no one has ever worked).
The left can childishly dismiss all their opponents as evil but then they will continue to lose again and again. Stop preaching, start listening and understanding.
Patrick Lilley
It seems the innuendo against Chuka is alive and well in the party echoing the “where is the wife” angle in the Daily Mail. Alan with friends like you Labour don’t need enemies! Labelling people is puerile. I suspect Liz Kendall is already setting the agenda. Andy and Yvette are no doubt competent potenital ministers but neither will win at a general election. They were part of the problem at the least election. Neither left a mark on the Tories. What are these 1997 solutions? If you read the Kendall pamphlet from months ago she is offering original thougths to make public services better. And its the poor and underprivileged who suffer most is NHS or Schools fail. She sounds sincerely interested in seeking to make them better. Anyway we have a few months to go but as they say the smart money is going to Kendall.I think Burnham will turn out to be the David Davies of this election.
Patrick Lilley
Alan 1997 solutions included: Human Rights Act, LGBT equality laws (I noted your homophobic innuendo so there is more work to do on this topic); the MInimum Wage – that really Red Tory isnt it? Building more schools and hospitals… devolution with proportional systems for Scotland and Wales (again opposed by the Tories). Trying to say Kendall is back to 1997 she was not even an MP in 2005 let alone 1997. Mandleson, Brown, Blair and Cambell made Labour electable (three times) and provided the longest running consistent period of economic growth in history. Is that Pink Tory or Blue Labour? Just primary colours for a primare school analysis..
Patrick Lilley
Saw him at a hustings and he didnt come across especially well. He is very clever. He does care. But he also didnt like to give a straight answer to a key local question: will you vote agains Hs2 or not? He went on and on and on but never actually answered the question. Why not? He is “not persuded” by Hs2? Well most of Camden hates it. So why not go against the party line and oppose it. He needs to be sharper.