(click photos to enlarge)
ConservativeHome
picked up on a pretty significant point raised in the CF
FT article
-
So what did Tory Bear think?Essentially this was a positive piece and dare it be said, an accurate portrayal of the how things are going in the CF world at the moment - there is a still a small old school possie and it's inevitable that this would get a nod. Let us not forget that this is the FT we are talking about- for the last few years it has been resolutely anti-Conservative and is the most pro-European of the Fleet Street rags. A couple of cheap shots aside, (plus the odd factual inaccuracy... A little harsh to describe the "sound" faction of the FCS as the ones with "eye-watering" extreme policy. That would have been the authoritarians surely?) it could have been a lot worse!
CF comes of pretty well - bar a few extraordinary clangers and the justified attack by Blackhurst on the usual cringefully obvious careerism that is the dark-side of CF. Unsurprisingly this is directed at one member and TB will leave you to work out who, lets just say had they had been born ten years earlier...
There is a definite element of gentle piss-taking involved-
TB wishes he remembered Thatcher!
We should take pieces like this and learn from them. Next time CFers are in the presence of journos maybe keep the snuff in the jacket pocket, maybe not talk about getting naked and for fuck sake make your photos private on Facebook to avoid the likes of "Their social networking pages show pictures of an England of Pimm's, polo and county shows."
Michael was absolutely bang on with his description of the average member and comes of very well in the piece. Up until the very end (with the final paragraph reeking of editorial influence,) the piece does not go on a full out attack.
The member of the NME who threatened to resign over this is worrying too much... at the end of the day very few people read the FT weekend magazine!
Given what TB has heard of the drunken evenings spent with Rob Blackhurst from the FT this could have been a much worse piece, but TB believes it to be fair.
"...they can smell victory - and they want it very badly"
Posts
14 comments:
"We should take pieces like this and learn from them. Next time CFers are in the presence of journos maybe keep the snuff in the jacket pocket, maybe not talk about getting naked and for fuck sake make your photos private on Facebook"
TB - I couldn't agree more.
I know a lot of what was printed has been taken out of context, but I did feel disapointed with Rob Blackhurst. I met him in Crewe and although he told me he "wasn't sympathetic to the Tories" I still thought he would write a balanced article. I heard plenty of CF members having sensible conversations about policy and political beliefs with him, however, he chose to focus on silly little things such as ABB's haircut or Liza's nails. The very sensible and sound comments made by Rock are reduced to one paragraph.
I actually asked my mum to read it, thinking that maybe I was being overly negative because I felt like he'd let us down. But she, impartially and without prompting, said that it came across quite negative and she felt like he was taking the piss somewhat.
The final paragraph is totally unjustified.
This could have been a lot worse - some bits are quite good. It proves, however, that in front of the press you can't afford to be flippant or sarcastic - they will print what you said with no context. They will print half a statement (what ABB actually said is "I remember Thatcher BEING ON TV!")and they will happily draw conclusions that bear no resemblance to their research, and its the last paragraph of an article that sticks in the memory of the reader.
Sorry for the long comment!
ADx
p.s. It wasn't me who threatened to resign!!!
Any time you engage with a journalist and it is not live, they simply write or broadcast whatever they want based on selective editing of material gathered to fit their own narrative.
Why does CF never seem to learn this. Why do we feel the need to indulge jouranlists? Has it EVER ended well? Why did we think it would be different this time?
Schoolboy errors.
I have to agree with Andy Peterkin.
Time and time CF have tried to court the media with limited but mainly no success.
The only reason I can see for articles still appearing is complete naivity or egos wanting to get in Nat Press. Not sure which is worse, but the outcome is the same.
Hope that next years NME candidates make manifesto pledges to keep CF OUT of the press!!
it's interesting to see that the two guys in the piece who have both had extensive YBF training in dealing with the media came across so much better than the two amateur girls who have not.
I disagree Becky, we shouldnt avoid the press but we should be prepared for them properly instead. A CCHQ Press Officer should have overseen all aspects of the interviews and should have been there to pick up the pieces. I severely doubt this was approved by Coulson.
While the structure of the nme is under scrutiny it is time to accept that we really do need an official media spokesperson as well as a chairman. someone who can be taken under the wing of the press office, given proper training, looks the part and won't say anything stupid.
There are countless candidates for this job that immediatly come to mind - Hilley, Cole, Howlett, George, Greer to name but a few
I thought Liza Chantelle came across terribly. Her remark about being 'very intelligent' and having to hide it are laughable. Anyone who has met Liza or read her "writings" know that she certainly hides it very well. Watching her youtube conference speech is pretty cringeworthy... someone make a transcript of it and put it on a blog... we can really inject some humour into CF then!
Michael Rock came across as the sort of Conservative the public want to hear about: aspirational, rational and not a careerist toff. Well done Michael.
However - this is CF! We aren't the main party and we won't win or lose an election for the party.
All such articles are destined to failure…
The journalist will inevitably seek to measure young conservatives by the inappropriate actions of their predecessors. The journalist will make sweeping statements about the actions of the FCS and the YC despite the fact both organisations have never been empirically studied (until I bothered to do it). This article is not as bad as some of the others previously published (the O’Sullivan article referenced earlier is a classic…), but its hardly the sort of thing that will make the disengaged masses suddenly start joining CF en-masse.
More amusingly however, who decided those photographs in the doors were a good idea? Patrick, Anastasia and Liza look like they are touting for business! :-)
All such articles are destined to failure…
The journalist will inevitably seek to measure young conservatives by the inappropriate actions of their predecessors. The journalist will make sweeping statements about the actions of the FCS and the YC despite the fact both organisations have never been empirically studied (until I bothered to do it). This article is not as bad as some of the others previously published (the O’Sullivan article referenced earlier is a classic…), but its hardly the sort of thing that will make the disengaged masses suddenly start joining CF en-masse.
More amusingly however, who decided those photographs in the doors were a good idea? Patrick, Anastasia and Liza look like they are touting for business! :-)
People can be so ungrateful. At least we have activists involved. The article came off as best as it could considering the masses of other CF activists that could have been chosen instead. I shall not name names... And shall leave it to your imagination... it could have been so, oh so much worse. So. Hard. Not. To. Mention. Names.
Name them!
Name them!
The FT naturally has a relatively low circulation. Of those people that read of it regularly, I would suggest far fewer pick it up at the weekend (since a large portion of FT's circulation is to institutional subscribers rather than individuals). Of those people, I'd be amazed if even a handful had the slightest interest in CF.
I'd bet that many more people read the article through Tory blogs than actually bothered to read it in the paper itself. It's the nature of the thing - FT readers just aren't interested in (forgive me) politics for beginners.
I'm no media expert though so perhaps I'm missing something. What was this article supposed to achieve?
Think you've got this one wrong TB. The only person who comes off particularly badly is Sullivan. I'm surprised they managed to find him actually leafleting though, as far as I can tell he spent the entire time in both Crewe and Henley either (a) sat in the pub with his mates or (b) poncing around the campaign centre with his "national campaigns director" polo shirt, pissing off all the people who were actually directing the campaign. Waste of space.
Here here Anonymous (05 August 11:26)
Historically, whenever cf puts people forward for interviews, they end up making a fool of themselves or leaving the party soon afterwards.
So, which one will defect to ukip first?