The failed challenge by Hoon/Hewitt to Gordon Brown’s leadership is perhaps the first serious political coup that has ever been played out within a normal day’s news cycle. Thanks to texting, 24 hour news and the blogs this story was begun and ended between one conventional newspaper deadline and the next. This morning we wake up to headlines about something that was over by yesterday’s Newsnight. Truly, a political media snow squall rather than a big freeze.
The timeline actually stretches back to blogger Guido Fawkes giving a strong hint that something was afoot on Tuesday night. But the following lunchtime, while the BBC’s Political Editor was rubbishing that rumour, the actual story broke as the plotters emailed and texted fellow MPs.
What followed was a feeding frenzy by the 24 hour TV news channels but also by the online editions of the newspapers. Most set up rolling commentaries including the Guardian’s Andrew Sparrow ,who as far as I can judge, was the first to have the story. [Although there are other candidates for that honour]And then, of course, there was Twitter and the various blogs and political websites.
It was interesting, for example, to see how well LabourList has recovered both credibility and relevance with this story. I suspect it will be at least as important as ConservativeHome in understanding Party mood and machinations in the future.
Of course, the critical factor in this story as it broke was how quickly Brown’s supporters would react and most importantly, how the potentially rebellious ministers would react. The world waited for the texts from the Milibands and the rest.
During the afternoon, political correspondents were measuring loyalty to Brown by how long it took politicians to feed the 24 hour news beast. By the time Peter Mandelson gave his vastly assured performance on Newsnight, the plot was dead and the story was, in effect, played out.
Of course, politically it is a (short-term) disaster for Labour and the ramifications will continue but in media terms it was fascinating to see something forced to a conclusion so rapidly.
Back in the mid-90s as Euro-sceptic Tories continually plotted to bring down John Major I worked for a weekly politics programme. Despite the cliff-edge febrile atmosphere of the time, both MPs and journalists still thought in terms of days and weeks rather than hours as they hatched their plots and spun their wicked webs. No more.
Between the blogger at his keyboard and Adam Boulton standing outside Number 10 there is little time to react or reflect. Modern politics is now played out live online and onscreen. It is certainly much more exciting . But perhaps it might even encourage people to be a bit more open in the first place?
“But perhaps it might even encourage people to be a bit more open in the first place?”
1. No, not if one is a congenital liar, and just can’t help it.
2. No, the lying just has to be faster and more furious.
Could be that as the party was in disarray with moral at an all time low the “coup” was a Machiavellian device to get MPs to unite behand Gordon
Let me help you a bit, the ‘BBC’s Political Editor’ that you refer to was in fact Nick Robinson. He was caught with his panties round his knees big time.
Ian Thorpe describes the Labour Party being “with moral at an all time low”.
I’m guessing that was a spelling error, and he meant “with MORALE at an all time low”. That seems a realistic observation.
On the other hand, the Labour Party does appear to be almost devoid of morals or understanding of morality. It has been that way at least since it lied its way into government in the 90s.
Well done, then, Ian, for getting two different but apposite observations into one single word.
It may well be an exciting media development, but the political ramifications can be both severe, and unpredictable. Up-to-the-minute reporting appears to have a nasty habit of sensationalising otherwise unspectacular political occurrences.
Hi William,
Thanks for your comment.
It’s a fair point – and I talk about febrile atmosphere etc in the post as well – but I think media coverage of political plotting etc has always been pretty ‘sensationalist’ – go and have a look at Sun or even Guardian headlines from the Major years for example. I think the difference is that in the mayhem it is more difficult for either politicians or the Westminster Lobby to control things – that’s not necessarily a Good Thing but it feels more open in some ways. (By the way, you’re not suggesting that this was ‘otherwise unspectacular’ are you? It seems to me this was political drama/farce of some significance)
cheers
Charlie
What seems odd is that the comparisons have been aimed at the previous Conservative Government, that is, Margaret Thatcher and John Major. Surely there’s a better example more close in time, namely Gordon’s frequent (and ultimately successful) attempts to get himself installed in place of Tony Blair. As the old saying goes, those who live by the sword shall perish by the sword.
Meddlesome may have been “vastly assured” on Newsnight, but he was anything but on PM on R4 … it seemed he had to drag the word “leadership”, in relation to the Prime Moron, struggling and fighting all the way. From that point, he went for smugly smooth to most definitely NOT assured, as near as you will ever hear this fork-tongued serpent to lost for words.