In all the frenzied analysis of why we lost Crewe and Nantwhich there is one contributory factor whch invariably fails to get a mention. Pundits and politicians will pour over policies, presentation and personality but there is a conspiracy of silence over what is really calling the tune. I refer, of course, to the influence of the media.
It is easy to understand why this should be so. The pundits work for the media, as do their editors and producers. The politicians work through the media. You don't bite the hand that feeds you. Nor do you bite the hand of those who write about you.
However there cannot be a proper diagnosis of what went wrong without reference to what is being reported and how it is being reported. If the blame for global economic setbacks is repeatedly being laid at the door of No. 10, if spending time to make considered judgements on complex political problems is continually being presented in terms of Gordon Brown being a "ditherer", if the 10p mistake becomes "a kick in the teeth" for every working person in this country, regardless of the remedial meaures and of what else Brown has done for the poor both here and overseas, then it is small wonder that people are totally fed up with this government.
After all, the voting public do not usually make up their minds after weighing up all the pros and cons of difficult election issues. They tend to focus, emotionally, on the cons as conveyed to them by the press (or rather the press headlines), the radio and television. If there's a relentless barrage of anti-Brown/government stories it's inevitable that this will sway voting intentions, particularly when it takes enormous commitment (and guts) to stand out against the crowd.
We expect this kind of hyped-up negativity from the right-wing tabloids and broadsheets, of course. But when they are joined by a left-wing commentariat intent on punishing this government for not following their agenda there's little that can be done to tip the balance in our direction. The last straw is when the dear old BBC, that last bastion of public service impartiality, starts taking its cue from the tabloids and left-wing critics in its coverage of how the government is performing.
One day it's the the best crime figures we have had for years (an overall fall of 9%) being presented almost soley in terms of a 4% rise in gun crime, which represented only a tiny fraction of the grand total (click on here for the full story). On another day it's John Humphrys in his interview with Gordon Brown referring to the £2.7b rescue package as "that little bribe". As I write this, Humphrys is at it again describing this government as simply "a continuation of the Thatcher government" ( in his On the Ropes interview with John Prescott). And then there's always Jeremy Paxman sneering away from his Newsnight pulpit at anything ministers have to say in defence of their government.
No government can survive such a concerted and sustained distortion of its record and policies from all parts of the media. Unless some serious thought is given to how the media can be made to behave in a more responsible and even-handed way, all talk about how we can save ourselves is just spitting in the wind.