This betrayal of the reading public shows how the economic consensus is created and maintained
Today’s right-wing newspapers commit sins both of commission and omission. What they do and don’t say about economics today is very revealing.
First, the omission. As Left Foot Forward reported yesterday, along with the Guardian, the Economist and others, the International Monetary Fund has published a report arguing that focus on cutting national debt rather than investment can do more harm than good. It said a bit of debt won’t actually hurt your economy, and will naturally be swallowed up by investment-led growth.
Predictably, since this strikes to the root of the Tory government’s rationale for its economic policies over the past five years, (and for the five to come), the paper has been ignored by today’s right-wing print newspapers.
Whereas, if the IMF paper had endorsed government policy, you can bet it would have been covered. We don’t need to speculate. In 2011 the Telegraph’s reported: ‘IMF backs Osborne’s deficit reduction plan‘.)
Failure to cover the IMF report today is a real betrayal of the reading public. This is how the pro-austerity consensus on the economy is maintained, and used to justify government spending cuts.
So to the sins of commission. What today’s press did do is cheer on chancellor George Osborne’s announced £3billion of ‘savings’, which include massive cuts to to health, education, local government, justice, welfare, and the home office.
The Express said: “Mr Osborne is displaying the zeal and commitment to slash public sector waste…”
The Mail called the cuts ‘a first-class start’ to ‘clearing up Labour’s awesome financial mess’.
The Telegraph’s economics editor said ‘Osborne is right to be cutting public spending further and faster‘, adding:
“Those angrily complaining about the supposed scale of this latest round of austerity should relax.”
In fact, the only cut the papers seem to be upset about is the £500m cut to the defence budget.
The Sun called the move ‘totally unacceptable’ and a blow to troop morale, while the Telegraph said ‘cutting defence spending could be a terrible mistake‘. The Express called the decision ‘disappointing’ and ‘crazy’ while foreign aid was increasing.
The Sun didn’t even mention most of the cuts, reporting only £500m from defence, £450m from ‘non-school’ education and £200m from transport.
Taken together, these two decisions by the Tory press involve the suppression of information of public interest, the promotion of one economic view above others, and a tight group think across most of the print media, with a view to controlling and influencing public opinion.
Adam Barnett is a staff writer at Left Foot Forward. Follow MediaWatch on Twitter
Read more:
The Sun accuses Unison of ‘cashing in’ by saying nurses should get a pay rise too
The Times weeps for ex-Murdoch employee Andy Coulson and buries his hacking conviction
Sign up for our weekly email by clicking here.
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
9 Responses to “Tory press cheers on £3bn cuts… but ignores anti-austerity IMF report”
Riversideboy
Why spending? This is the same old Tory bunkum, you mean of course borrowing. The answer is to make, compel by law, the paying of taxes on massive profits hidden by cheating big corporations defrauding Britain of up to £100 billion a year. Impose a Robin Hood Tax on city transactions and then “invest” in new industry. Return rail to national ownership and plough the profits into the country, not shareholders pockets, ” invest” in taking it back. Bring in a law as America did after the last great bank robbery in 1929 to stop banks ever doing what they did again. This was destroyed by Thatcher and Reagan and the outcome was the banking crash of 2007.
Jacko
Adam Barnet, this is misleading and you know it.
Printed in bold lettering in a box on page 1 of the report is the following paragraph:
DISCLAIMER: This Staff Discussion Note represents the views of the authors and does not
necessarily represent IMF views or IMF policy. The views expressed herein should be attributed to
the authors and not to the IMF, its Executive Board, or its management. Staff Discussion Notes
are published to elicit comments and to further debate.
You are trying to imply that this is the official IMF view. It isn’t, and you know it. It’s a discussion paper written by two individuals.
Don’t just delete this comment, answer it. What have you got to say for yourself?
Cole
Let’s keep repeating it. The recession was caused by bankers, not by the Labour government. If it was caused by the Labour government, why did much of the rest of the world have a recession too?
Patrick Nelson
If people haven’t got any money they can’t spend anything and when people don’t spend anything the economy contracts. It doesn’t take a genius who did a doctorate focused upon the ideas of Keynes and their successful application in the New Deal to work that one out.
Stuff the Tory press they are duplicitous propagandists supporting economic policies that seemingly exist purely to enrich the richest and take away from the poorest, when will there be other than a Tory press? A few magazines, the mirror and the morning star is hardly going to create a tidal wave of popular political understanding large enough to wash away three decades of all pervasive Neoliberal propaganda and finally reach people’s minds in a way that can change the zeitgeist.