The Media’s Views on Green Politics.

Introduction.

Media Magnates.

Lord Beaverbrook.

"The Guardian reported in November 1991 that Lord Beaverbrook had brought Guyana's national timber company for £9.7 million and swapped it for shares in United Dutch worth on paper £60 million). (United Dutch has now gone into receivership)."[1]

Robert Maxwell/Rupert Murdoch.

Media Companies.

Associated New Media.

Publishes the Daily Mail, The Mail on Sunday, Evening Standard and Metro newspapers.

CNN.

“Jerry Levin's CNN which promotes Sharon violence, allows African American commentators to read copy only, while giving only pro Likud Party white males commentator time i.e. Larry King, Jeff Greenfield, Aaron Brown, Wolf Blitzer). There are virtually no Muslim commentators on CNN to represent the world's billion Muslims.”[2]

Media’s Approach to Green Issues.

The Pro-Meat/Pro-Pharmer Bias of News Journalists.

Transforming a Health issue into an Industrial Crisis.

Over the last few decades, news journalists have slavishly followed the tory/labour government’s line and have been dedicated to presenting pharmers as the innocent victims of a succession of epidemics from salmonella in eggs, bse, foot and mouth disease, etc. When the announcement of 10 bse-cjd victims was made in march 1996, the media instantly transformed the epidemic from a threat to ooman health into an industrial crisis whether pharmers could make enough money to survive. Instead of focusing on ooman fatalities, bbc news adopted the headline ‘Beef Crisis’ - in other words, the problem that urgently needed to be addressed wasn’t that ten people were dead from a disease pharmers said was not a threat to ooman health, it was the fall in bseef sales threatening to bankrupt many pharmers. It’s not surprising the media gave the issue such an appalling make-over when news journalists such as john snow for channel four; dermot murnaghan for itv; and jeremy paxman for bbc2’s ‘newsnight’, to name but a few, are all self-confessed carnivores.

Journalists and Broadcasters should be Forced to declare their Dietary Interests.

Carnivorous journalists are simply not impartial where bse and pharmers are concerned. The interests of all journalists reporting on such issues ought to be declared in the same way as mps have to declare their interests in parliament. This might also stop journalists from giving publicity to their favourite causes.

The Local Media’s Favouritism towards Pharmers.

The ignorance of the cadaver-eating, bseef-loving, pharmer friendly, media commentators is more profound than that of the public since they’ve managed to work their entire lives in the information economy without appreciating the damage caused by the pharming industry. The fact that these so-called commentators never blamed pharmers for their part in the autumn floods is partly due to the greenless greens failing to scream and shout about the pharming industry’s role in boosting global burning. Piers morgan, the editor of the mirror newspaper, argued that the november floods were ‘an act of god’ - showing what a blithering ignoramus he is about the geophysiological damage that pharmers have committed since the second world war. [3]

A recent news item on regional television showed the environment agency trying to persuade a group of pharmers to change their tilling methods in order to help prevent future floods. The implicit assumption here was that pharmers were responsible for the flooding but the commentator did not make this point explicit. There was no attempt to castigate the pharmers for what they had done - it was almost as if the matter was not of public concern because it was being sorted out by a bit of quiet diplomacy through the old boys’ network.[4] The only time the media mentions pharmers and floods is in occasional news snippets which completely ignore the significance of the connection between the two. For example, in the middle of february 2001, oxfordshire suffered yet another lot of local floods. A front page article in the local paper exclaimed, ‘Floods: Here we go again’. It reported, “Torrential rain brought more flooding misery to oxfordshire for the second time in two months. An inch of rain - the monthly average for this time of year - fell within a few hours yesterday causing flash floods.” Half way through the article it was casually mentioned, as if of no great significance, that, “The county council’s area highways engineer martin turner said, “I’ve never seen it so bad on the roads. The water is just flowing off the land on to the roads and the drainage system is choc-a-bloc.””[5] The rain shouldn’t have been pouring off the fields. Everyday ideology tells us that rainwater runs off roads and into fields not vice a versa.

Well at least it is a bit of a relief that greens, politicians, pharmers, and the media, didn’t blame the Animal rights movement for global burning or the floods but doubtlessly fred pearce, and other politically conventional bigots, will be drawing up some ideas for articles which blame them in one way or another.

Media complicity in Bse.

Both politicians and pharmers were responsible for the creation of bse and bse-cjd and the spread of these diseases not merely around the country but the world. However, the brutish media were also complicit in these crimes: firstly, because they did not research the truth; secondly, they did nothing to challenge the blatant propaganda and scientific fraud being perpetrated by pharmers and pharming mps; thirdly, because their pro-pharmer bigotry overshadowed their concern for the protection of consumer health; and, fourthly, despite the fact that they have produced many cookery series they have never featured any vegetarian programmes. The media refuses to mention the word vegan for fear of being regarded as traitors to the meat eating pharming establishment.

It is often held that the media is the fourth arm of government and that the separation of powers helps to curb legislative and executive excesses. However, the bse slaughter showed that the media colluded with politicians to give overwhelming support to pharmers’ interests. The extent to which politicians supported pharmers’ interests, at the expense of every other section of society, was apparent not merely from the fact that they refused to condemn the consumption of bseef but that they also refused to condemn the vast subsidies lavished on pharmers during the slaughters.

The grossest example of just how appallingly corrupt the country’s journalists and editors were could be seen from the fact that not one of them reported on the lavish honours heaped upon lord phillips as a bribe for exonerating the mass murderers responsible for the bse-cjd epidemic. Brutish journalists are amongst the most snivelling, pathetic, servile, cretins, to be found anywhere around the world, so such information about these honours could be acquired only on the american website - madcow.org, “Here are the promotions and new titles received by Phillips during the Inquiry. These reached their grandest moment in appointment to Master of the Rolls (a title Pooh-Bah ridiculed a century ago by Gilbert and Sullivan in the Mikado). In January 1999, it was announced that the judge who is overseeing the proceedings, Sir Nicholas Phillips, now 62, is to be a Law Lord. He has been appointed Lord of Appeal in Ordinary and is to be known as The Rt. Hon. The Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers. Phillips was then promoted during the inquiry to the Lords Justices; as the Inquiry neared the end, he was promoted again, in June this year, to Master of Rolls in the Court of Appeal and Head of Civil Justice, with Lord Justice Nourse filling in until Phillips assumes his new duties on October 1. The Right Honourable Sir Nicholas Addison Phillips, Knight, a Lord Justice of Appeal, having been appointed a Lord of Appeal in Ordinary and created Baron Phillips of Worth Matravers, of Belsize Park in the London Borough of Camden, for life--was, in his robes, introduced between the Lord Alexander of Weedon and the Lord Mustill. [House of Lords Tuesday, 12th January 1999]. In short, heading up this inquiry really put Phillips' career on the fast track.”[6]

For the phillips enquiry to say that no politician had lied during the bse epidemic was going far too far even for the lords’ widgery junkers. It is obvious that the reason phillips dragged out his report for over two years was simply because the longer he did so the more bribes he could extort from the eco-nazis in government.

Media’s Loyalty to Pharmers.

The media supported pharmers in the f&m epidemic (as they did during the bse epidemic and the fuel tax insurrection) and bestowed upon them enormous amounts of sympathy. It portrayed them as innocent victims of a terrible tragedy. They may have been the innocent victims of one disease but after being afflicted by four diseases suspicions have to be voiced. Is it really feasible that pharmers are the accidental victims of a succession of disease outbreaks such as salmonella, swine fever, bse, and f&m diseases? The media plugged the propaganda that pharmers:

* weren’t at fault for the disease;

* deserved the public’s sympathy;

* deserved subsidies as soon as possible; and that,

* these subsidies should be provided in whatever quantities pharmers desired.

The easy access that pharmers had to the media enabled them to put over whatever propaganda they wanted. After the f&m disease struck they blamed everyone else (bse) - the global market; the common agricultural policy; foreign imports; the closure of local abattoirs for increasing transport when moving Animals to concentration camps, etc.

One of the great advantages of the f&m epidemic was that it provided pharmers with a platform to spread their poisonous ideology. Thus it just so happened that, a few days into the f&m outbreak, parliament held a debate over the banning of Fox hunting and pharmer politicians used this as a prime opportunity to condemn the ban on the grounds that it would show a lack of sympathy for pharmers i.e. a lack of sympathy for the pharmers who had spread the disease.

The Brutish Media doing its best to serve the interests of Mad Tory Pharmers’ Disease.

In the winter 2000-2001 the media didn’t seem in the least bit bothered about the dramatic spread of bse in europe. The only time it was mentioned was when it afforded an opportunity to suggest that brutish bseef was safe in comparison to that in europe. The media doesn’t want to discuss bse in europe because this will only remind brutish carnivores that there is still a bse problem in brutland. Certainly, the media doesn’t want to discuss the way that brutish pharmers are responsible for spreading bse to europe. Although the brutish floods in autumn winter 2000-2001 dominated media headlines for many weeks, this did not provoke much of a discussion about global burning which continues to remain in oblivion. It is almost as if the floods have nothing to do with the destabilization of the climate. The floods have done nothing to persuade the labour government that global burning needs to be taken more seriously.

Television.

Anti-Animal Rights.

Brutish tv runs a large number of cookery programmes. Very few of them to date have been devoted to vegetarianism  and there’s never been a whole series of vegetarian cookery programmes. There have been no cookery programmes about veganism.

BBC.

Anti-Animal Rights.

Countryfile.

The bbc is a blatantly pro-farmer channel. After her general election victory in 1987 margaret thatcher stressed the need to get into council estates in order to solve their social problems. Very little was done, of course, but the bbc responded quickly with a contribution i.e. ‘Country File’. The first ten years of this programme almost invariably featured john craven, the presenter, sprawled over the bonnet of his land rover as if to symbolize that this was what the countryside was all about.

Cookery Programmes.

The bbc hasn’t run a major documentary on the bse crisis in years - instead it has come up with a programme by what is left of the two fat women about how wonderful country life is when people are allowed to brandish shotguns and shoot anything they like.

F&M Special BBC1.

The bbc produced a f&m special which was shown on bbc at a prime time slot 8pm. It was the third special programme shown in a week. The studio was tastefully laid out like a cattle auction market and the audience was placed behind what appeared to be stockades looking in at the prize heiffers being exhibited in the ring who consisted of nick brown, the secretary of state for agriculture, and ben gill, leader of the nfu. Clearly the bbc has no bias about its outright support for the pharming industry. It is produced in conjunction with Countryfile, Tomorrow’s World and Watchdog and has four outside broadcast units - most of which spent their time interviewing pharmers who regurgitated sob stories about how much it had hurt them to see their Animals being killed and put on funereal pyres. Also lots and lots of photos of cadavers swinging around in refrigerators and being cut up. Clearly the bbc was trying to educate urban people into accepting the bloody, and gory, nature of rural life and the Animal exploitation industry.

The host of the f&m special was nicki cambell who gave an opportunity for three anti-intensive pharming spokespeople to express their points of view. A questioner asked nick brown about intensive pharming but he showed no interest in answering the question - after all he was brought into the business to support the pharming industry not tear it up. Cambell gave juliet gellately a say. However, there are various techniques for ridiculing unacceptable opinions. Firstly, her caption remained on screen for only a few seconds so anyone thinking about contacting her or her organization would have difficulty in doing so. Secondly, when she spoke the director of the show quickly switched to another camera showing ben gill’s contempt for what she was saying so that the public was led to conclude that she is a crackpot expressing crackpot ideas. Thirdly campbell allowed a heckler to intervene and thus spoil a point she was trying to make. When he attempted to give her a second say she was shouted down by another heckler. Overall though cambell’s performance was fair and there was a fair balance of speakers on either side of the intensification battlelines.

Also attending were the pharmers’ friends from the green movement all posing as pharming critics: charles secrett, robin page, and a bloke from compassion in world farming. There’s also don curry of the meat and livestock commission, a government funded pro-pharming propaganda unit. No other industry in the country has state financed propaganda. He states that the country’s abattoirs are the cleanest in the world - they would have to be after all the dirty ones had been pulled down.

Channel 4.

Against Nature.

Channel four has tended to be more adventurous in its programming than other terrestrial channels but in november-december 1997 it was rather surprisingly the source for what seemed to be a right wing attack on the green movement. The ‘against nature’ producers presented the argument that everything was going well for the environment, “Over the past half century the environment in the over-industrialized world has actually improved.”[7]; “Air pollution has been falling in the modern industrialized countries for the last forty years and has been falling precisely because of economic growth and improvements in technology. Even los angeles, which has the worst smog in the u.s., air pollution levels have fallen by half over the last 25 years and that’s at a time when the area’s population has doubled and when its economy has tripled.”[8]; “In the u.s. as a whole over the past 25 years, the population has increased by 30%, while the number of cars and the size of the economy has doubled and yet during the same period emissions of the six main air pollutants have decreased by 30%.”[9] This statement neglected to mention that greenhouse emissions have continued to rise markedly.

The main message of the programme was that environmentalists were impoverishing third world countries by opposing industrial development such as dams. Perhaps its weirdest proposition was that environmentalists were the heirs of adolf hitler, “The most notorious of history’s environmentalists were the german nazis. The nazis ordered soldiers to plant more Trees. They were the first europeans to establish nature reserves and order the protection of hedgerows. Despite the industrial efficiency of their war machine they were horrified by the idea of hydro-electric dams on the rhine. Adolf hitler and other leading nazis were vegetarians and passed numerous laws on animal rights.”[10] The programme finished off with an overdose of optimism, “We must go forward to a better future with confidence in our ability to understand and change the world.”[11]

The australian branch of foE tried to discover the source of the programme’s ideology, “At first we thought the far right might have been involved. But over the last three weeks another picture has begun to form. Against nature .. comes from an obscure and cranky sect called the revolutionary communist party. Frank furedi, the series’ key interviewee and a protagonist in tuesday’s debate, has been described as the father of the modern rcp. He is a regular contributor to the rcp’s journal, ‘living marxism’. Of the two main contributors to the third program, one, john gillott, is ‘living marxism’s science correspondent. The other, robert plomin, though not rcp, has recently been interviewed sympathetically by the magazine. Martin durkin, the director of the three programmes, describes himself as a marxist; the only brand of marxism which follows the line the series takes is the rcp’s. The husband of his deputy, against nature’s assistant producer, is the co-author of the rcp’s manifesto and books’ editor of living marxism. It’s an extraordinary coup for a tiny group of cranks: three hours of prime time propaganda. But how on earth did they pull it off? It is surely inconceivable that channel 4’s top decision makers, such as sarah ramsden, also belong to the party. But many television executives hate environmentalism. They see it as a grim memento mori at the bottom of the picture, spoiling the good news about cars, clothes and consumerism. So, when the film makers suggested an all-out assault on environmentalists, their proposal fell on fertile ground.”[12]

The attitude of many of those on the extreme left of the political spectrum is one of opposition to capitalists but utter admiration for capitalism which is looked upon as unleashing oomans’ productive forces. Their attitude towards green politics is that greens stand in the way of capitalism and the unleashing of oomano-supremacism and will not tolerate any arguments which seem to suggest that oomans might be overdoing their industrialization of the planet. Like those on the extreme right who argue that the Earth is basically infinite, they too believe that ooman ingenuity is infinite and nothing should be done to block new innovations because they are of immediate benefit in spreading wealth or, because such technologies would be invaluable after the creation of a socialist state in reinforcing oomans’ dominance of the planet. There are a number of former extreme left wingers in the labour party and it was easy for them to slither across the political spectrum because of the similarities in their underlying values. Most of the former marxists such as jack straw and stephen byers have remained true to their marxist attitudes towards nature - which is why straw has done so much to block efforts to ban Fox hunting.

Newspapers.

Evening Standard.

Rural Bigotry in an Urban Newspaper.

“The government deserves to be embarrassed by the coincidence that, even as britain’s countryside faces it worst crisis for a generation from foot and mouth disease, the house of commons was yesterday debating labour’s proposed ban on fox hunting. One of many objections to the fox hunting legislation is that labour politicians are indulging their own urban and suburban prejudices at the expense of attacking traditional rural life. (Traditional rural life means turning herbivores into carnivores, turning Animals into cannibals; and even forcing them to eat their own shit; whilst doping them up with illegal antibiotics - there’s more illegally drug talking amongst pharmers than there is amongst young people). Country people are outraged by the behaviour of a body politic which is unwilling to do anything of substance to succour rural life, whose sole contribution to country life is to seek to ban fox hunting. (Besides the £6 billion a year being given to a ‘lame duck’ industry which couldn’t even export any of its own products if they weren’t subsidised up to the hilt). But it was a wretched business yesterday afternoon, to hear impenitant labour mps baying for a fox hunting ban regardless.”[13] The evening standard is one of the main afternoon/evening newspaper in london, the most urbanized part of the country, in one of the most urbanized countries in the world, and yet many of its editorials, written by the editor max hastings, are about teaching urbanites to accept that they know nothing about the countryside and that only pharmers, and rural people, know how to look after the countryside. It’s quite amazing that a newspaper can get away with admonishing its own readers for their ignorance - and what’s even more amazing is that people buy the paper.

Express, Daily.

A mere three months before the march 1996 announcement, the daily express was trumpeting on its front page the news that bse was no threat to oomans, "Scientists claimed a major breakthrough yesterday in demonstrating mad cow disease cannot be passed on to humans through eating infected beef. Researchers who carried out tests on mice believe they have proved that the chances of bse jumping the species barrier from cattle to humans to cause Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease are extremely remote."[14] It seems peculiar that the journalists in this newspaper who pride themselves on being tough and being able to see through politicians’ contricks, hoaxes, and publicity stunts, etc, should pay so much attention to what Mice have to tell them. (Cartoon - small Mouse whispering into the ear of a media tycoon ‘Believe me, there’s no such thing as bse’). Perhaps if the Mice hadn’t been tortured before telling them this lie they might have told them the truth but these media hacks obviously haven’t understood the first lesson of their trade - that people tend to say whatever their torturers want to hear.

Mirror.

This section consists of an analysis of the mirror’s editorials ‘the voice of the mirror’ written by piers morgan.

Monarchism.

Support for the Royal Family - 29.6.2000.

“The royal family is a tremendous institution. Let nobody say the mirror is ever anti-monarchy.”[15]

The Mirror is so Obsequious about the Royal Family it even creates Fake Royals - 8.2.2001.

The mirror has been trying to whip up public support for charles windsor’s relationship with camilla parker bollox - possibly even supporting their marriage and thus the elevation of mrs bollox as queen of england. Its support for her is such that it not only set up a website for her, it also published a fake photograph of her and william together because apparently charles had felt the public was not ready for them to be seen together. The mirror, on the other hand, was much less cautious about this issue and wanted to do its best to prepare public opinion for the moment when camilla parker bollox would not merely be photographed in the company of charles and his family but would become the next queen of england.[16]

Pharmers’ Diseases.

Bse.

Mirror supported the lifting of the Bseef-on-the-Bone Ban - 1.12.99.

For this see the following section, The Mirror’s Campaign to Encourage the Consumption of Bse-Infected Bseef.

Demand for Action against those Responsible for Bse - 23.10.2000.

The mirror was one of the few brutish newspapers to demand the prosecution of those responsible for the spread of bse-cjd, “When the mirror revealed that mad cow disease could be transmitted to humans we said it was the worst scandal to hit the country for many years. Ministers whose behaviour is not just incompetent but reckless are guilty of the most serious breach of public duty. What they did was to cost the country billions and lead to the deaths of almost 80 people. There must surely be some action that can be taken against those who act with such disregard for human life.”[17]

Testing the Wrong Brains for Bse - 20.10.2001.

The mirror was livid about the ‘wrong brains’ experiment, “The revelation that government scientists spent four years testing cows’ brains for bse links thinking they were sheep’s brains is beyond a joke. It is utterly, shockingly incredible that £217,000 of taxpayers’ money was wasted on such a basic and potentially catastrophic blunder. The entire national sheep flock could technically now be at risk, although that is an unlikely worse-case scenario. But it means we are no nearer knowing whether our lamb is infected with bse than we were in 1997. It is hard to know what is more sickening - the fiasco occurring at all or the way mrs beckett and her staff tried to sneak it out when, hopefully, none of use was looking.”[18]

Morgan’s criticisms of the ‘wrong brains experiment’ revealed just how little he knew about these experiments. He did not condemn the experiments themselves he only condemned the failure and the waste of money. He also regarded the government’s announcement of the blunder as being as bad as the blunder itself. Morgan failed to understand the following points:-

* firstly, the statement that “we are no nearer knowing whether our lamb is infected with bse than we were in 1997” was inaccurate. The first case of bse was discovered in 1984 which meant that government obfuscation prevented scientists from discovering the prevalence of bse in Sheep for the last 15 years. Is it not incredible that the government and the pharming industry kept the public in the dark about this disease for 15 years?

* secondly, the government’s decision in 1997 to initiate the ‘wrong brains experiment’ was chosen in preference to an alternative experiment by john collinge, precisely because the government knew that Mice experiments would take four years to complete - whereas john collinge’s tests took only two days. At the very least it might have been thought that collinge could have been allowed to carry out preliminary tests to see what results were achieved and then compared them to results from the longer experiments. The fact that the maffia refused to do even this bare minimum showed that what they were concerned about was not discovering the truth but wasting as much time as was possible. The ‘wrong brains’ experiment proves conclusively what hans reich and other Animal activists have been saying for years - that Animal experiments are designed to cover up the truth not to reveal it and that people have died because of the delays in discovering the truth.

* thirdly, the government’s decision to initiate the ‘wrong brains’ experiments was made in the knowledge that the Sheep which would be tested had died seven years’ earlier and that, as a consequence, firstly, that by the time the results of the test were known four years later, they would be eleven years out of date and, secondly, that Sheep pharmers would immediately argue that because such results were eleven years ago they shouldn’t be used as the basis for formulating current policies for the Sheep industry. Pharmers would then have insisted that another lot of Animal experiments should be carried out to find out whether bse was present in current flocks which, of course, would have taken another four years of experiments. Animal experiments are thus just an opportunity for outright political corruption.

* fourthly, at the same time as it was waiting to find out whether bse is present in Sheep, the government bought one and half million Sheep from farmers because, as a result of the foot and mouth epidemic, they couldn’t be exported abroad and it then encouraged brutish consumers to eat these possibly contaminated corpses. This doesn’t exactly suggest that the government was in the slightest bit worried about the question marks hanging over the health of brutish Sheep.

What the ‘wrong brains’ experiments reveal is not merely the degree to which successive governments successfully covered up the spread of bse but that Animal rightists’ accusation, that Animal experiments help to cover up the truth, has been right all along. It is doubtful whether the editor of the mirror has the courage to admit that he has been wrong about Animal experiments and will stop colluding with the country’s security services in printing black propaganda stories about Animal rightists who have been trying to draw people’s attention to the inherently unscientific nature of Animal experiments. The black propaganda being spread against the Animal rights movement is solely attempting to prevent Animal rightists from exposing the farce of Animal experiments which almost invariably leads to such debacles as the wrong brains experiments.

Foot and Mouth Epidemic.

Mirror depicts Pharmers as innocent victims of F&M - 22.2.2001.

The mirror believed that pharmers were the innocent victims of the f&m epidemic, “Farmers must be wondering if any other disaster can strike them. In the past five years they have been hit by one crisis after another. But the government must be prepared to help farmers get over this latest crisis.”[19] Over the last couple of decades, on each occasion that pharmers have been hit by a disease outbreak, the media including the mirror has depicted them as the victims of these epidemics rather than their cause. But given the number of epidemics that have flared up in brutland, such a response is becoming increasing unreal. Surely it can’t be a coincidence that brutish pharmers have been plagued by so many different diseases? The fact is that the succession of epidemics in brutland have been caused by pharmers’ appalling exploitation of Animals. Bse was caused by turning herbivores into carnivores/cannibals and the f&m disease was caused by pharmers ‘bed and breakfasting’ activities. It’s as if piers morgan is a bit like lois lane seeing clarke kent and superman on a regular basis and yet completely failing to notice the only difference between them is that one wears glasses and the other doesn’t.

Hyping up Sentimentalism for Pharmers - 22.2.2001.

The mirror continually attempted to stimulate public sympathy for pharmers during the f&m epidemic - no matter that they were responsible for triggering this disease, “After 20 days we have got used to the pictures of funeral pyres and mounds of dead animals. But the real story of the f&m epidemic is quite different. It is of the anguish of farms all over the uk.”[20]

Mirror Blames Intensive Pharming for the F&M Epidemic - 3.3.2001.

Some pharmers blamed the f&m epidemic on the intensive livestock industry and the mirror concurred with them, “For surely, there cannot be any doubt that intensive farming is at least partly responsible for the horrific outbreaks of mad cow disease and now f&m”[21]

Further Sentimentalization of Pharmers - 13.3.2001.

Another way in which the mirror managed to sentimentalize about pharmers was by highlighting the plight of individual pharmers. Mirror reporter jane kerr’s family has a farm with 1600 breeding Sheep and she wrote a double page spread about the effect of the epidemic on her family.[22]

The Mirror Demands adoption of Vaccination Policy - 16.4.2001.

On a couple of occasions during the mass cull, the government tried to promote the vaccination policy as an alternative to culling but it was always forced to abandon the idea under pressure from pharmers who wanted to maintain the country’s f&m free status. The mirror reported a government press briefing to test pharmers’ response to a vaccination policy, “Tony blair was last night poised to cave in to growing demands for vaccination to halt the spread of foot and mouth disease. Ministers are expected to order the inoculation of 200,000 cattle in cumbria and devon after claims that their strategy in fighting the disease is in disarray. One maff official said, “We are close to a decision. The vaccine doses are in the areas and the 300 staff to administer them are on standby.” Pressure for the scheme, previously opposed by the government intensified after calls from its chief scientist david king. As the number of cases topped 1,300 he confirmed that vaccinating cows before they are moved from winter barns to spring pastures would help to stamp out the plague. Mr brown admitted the government was having increasing difficulty finding acceptable ways of getting rid of dead animals.”[23]

The mirror, for many years a loyal mcblairite tabloid, did its best to back the government’s pressure for a change in the policy, “The change in attitude (over vaccination) is caused by the failure of the culling policy. The backlog of animals waiting for disposal or slaughter is too great to handle, even by the military. The government also made a terrible blunder in trying to save the meat export industry worth a few million a year, at the expense of the tourist industry, worth £64 billion. Vaccination should have been started weeks ago. It must begin now, without more delay.”[24]

Highlighting Cancer Risks from Funeral Pyres - 17.4.2001.

“Five hundred people protesting against a giant funeral pyre were yesterday told they risked getting cancer. Thousands of carcasses will be burned less than a mile from holsworthy, devon. Dr lawson (from the green party) said bse spores could also be released into the air.”[25] The mirror did some good work by looking into the question of whether smoke from funereal pyres might be dangerous to ooman health and published an article concluding that there was a threat.

Pharmers’ Subsidies.

Pharmers Subsidies - 16.4.2001.

This article was one small indication that the mirror seemed to be losing patience with pharmers over their vast and endless subsidies, “Yet there are lots of people in the countryside who are losing patience with farmers. But they see them getting huge compensation while tourism and other rural industries suffer with virtually no help. The best advice and the best interests of the country demand that vaccination begins at once.”[26]

Welfare Benefit Scroungers and no Mention of Pharmers - 5.7.2001.

In the middle of the f&m epidemic, and a gigantic multi-billion pound handout of welfare benefits to pharmers, the editor of the mirror decided that the most pressing concern of the day was to inflict a good moral beating on (urban) welfare benefit scroungers, “Yet welfare reform has been a hurdle which few governments have even attempted. A culture has grown of dependence on welfare. Of people who fiddle benefits. This is not a victimless crime. Every pound got by cheating is a pound taken from a hard working taxpayer.”[27] He failed to even mention pharmers - as if their receipt of welfare benefits was beyond questioning.

Mirror Condemned Pharmers for Infecting their Flocks - 30.7.2001.

The ‘mirror’ carried an article suggesting there was evidence that pharmers were deliberately infecting their own Animals in order to receive welfare benefits, “New evidence of a foot and mouth scam in which herds are deliberately infected by farmers to claim compensation has been given to the mirror. Allegations of fiddling have been widespread as the outbreak has continued for five months. Yesterday breeder nuala preston told how she was offered an infected sheep for £2,000. She stated, “The compensation for a ewe and lamb is £90 whereas you would be lucky to make more than £30 selling the animal - and then you have transport and disinfectant costs to take into account. I’d heard on the grapevine that this infected stock scam was happening and I think it’s far more widespread than people suspect - not just in wales, but england and scotland, too.” A senior source at the department for the environment, food and rural affairs said officials believed the scam did exist.”[28]

A mirror editorial condemned such criminality, “There is little doubt that some (farmers) have deliberately infected their sheep so they can claim compensation. A sheep is worth only a few pounds at market but many times more if it is slaughtered in the great cull. For a large flock, the difference could be hundreds of thousands of pounds. This is a criminal act, just as much as defrauding the taxman or fiddling welfare benefits.”[29] At last, a comparison between urbanites on the dole and pharmers on the dole.

Mirror’s Condemnation leads to Political Changes - 31.7.2001.

The mirror announced a change of government policy over pharming subsidies. What a coincidence that was after its story yesterday, “Big payments to farmers hit by the foot and mouth epidemic were scrapped by the government last night. It came as evidence grew of farmers deliberately infecting herds with the disease to claim the payouts. Compensation will be fixed only after independent experts decide the value of slaughtered animals. Farmers are currently given a set rate for their animals - often far higher than they would get at market. The defra said, We take these allegations very seriously. If anyone has any evidence, let us know. This is deliberate fraud and it would be a police matter.”[30] The government abolished the fixed payment system because it had been set too high and replaced it with a more flexible type of subsidy in which independent experts would set the level of compensation. Since most of these independent experts were farmers the idea that they would provide lower compensation payments was doubtful but at least the government made it seem to the public that it was acting against pharmers’ fraud.

The Mirror’s Double Standards over its Concern for Animals.

Over the course of the last three or four decades the mirror has done some hugely influential work on publicizing Animal abuse. Unfortunately, it has then, blotted its copy book by publicizing the sale of many of these items.

The Mirror’s Work for Animals.

The Mirror’s Expose of Animal Abuse Experiments - 24.11.99.

“Animals are routinely abused in lab experiments in the name of medical research, the mirror can reveal today. Undercover work by the pressure group Animal defenders highlights the terrible suffering by Mice, Rabbits, Cats, Dogs and Monkeys. An investigator secretly filmed for eight months at Oxford’s john radcliffe hospital where tests are done for the university. In one horrific scene, to be screened for mps tonight, a lab technician smashes a Mouse’s head against a bench. He then turns to the camera and says with a grin, “That’s well and truly fucking dead. He won’t get up. I’ve smashed its head in.” Holes were punched in rodents’ ears, and toes and tail tips removed without anaesthetic for easy of identification. Rodents no longer wanted were gassed or had their necks rung. The undercover film, ‘Unlock the Labs’ features seven uk labs and three breeders. Last night an oxford university spokesman promised an internal review.”[31]

The Mirror’s Support for a Ban on Hunting with Dogs - 27.2.2002.

“When labour came to power in 1997 it promised to abolish hunting with hounds. Five years later, the disgusting sight of hare coursing still disgraces the english countryside. Yesterday the year’s biggest hare-coursing event, the waterloo cup, was run. It should not have been. This barbaric sport should have been banned long ago. The government must make it a priority now.”[32]

The Mirror’s Support for the Animal Exploitation Industry.

Mirror promotes Consumption of Illegal Substances - 12.1.1999.

The mirror supported the lifting of the ban on bseef-on-the-bone, “Lifting the ban on beef on the bone is the final move in one of the most appalling episodes in britain’s recent history.”[33] The types of people demanding an end to the bseef-on-the-bone ban were usually the same people who decried young people’s consumption of illegal drugs. Only someone suffering from a brain-rotting disease could possibly believe that the consumption of cannabis is far more of a threat to ooman health than the consumption of bseef-on-the-bone. Some young people even believe that now that they have been infected by eating brutish beef, the least that tory-pharming mps should do is allow them to consume as many drugs as they wish so that they can enjoy their last few years of sanity. At the very least, the refusal of the country’s rural, redneck carnivores to abide by the bseef-on-the-bone ban gives young people the social justification they seek to keep taking whatever drugs they want. After all no drug is as deadly as bse.

Condoning the Breaking of the Bseef-on-the-bone Ban - 2.3.1999.

The mirror encouraged people to break the law and consume an illegal substance. Firstly, it printed a photograph of one of its journalists tucking into bseef-on-the-bone. Secondly, it published a series of briefings from the maffia about scientists withdrawing their objections to beef-on-the-bone. These briefings were designed to put pressure on seac to overcome their scientific judgment that bseef-on-the-bone was a health risk. Thirdly, it printed a photograph of charles windsor and Alan michael also consuming bse-on-the-bone, “Charles windsor tucked into banned beef on the bone yesterday and said it was “absolutely delicious”. Welsh secretary Alan michael also sampled the outlawed sirloin at a St david’s day lunch. Their apparent distaste for the government ban re-ignited the row over the 15 month old law. Officials later explained that both the prince and the minister were unaware of the exact cut they were eating. However, pictures showed the pair standing watching as a chef carved the meat from the bone. Lib dem agriculture spokesman charles kennedy said: “Congratulations to the prince for his positive endorsement of beef on the bone. Government policy is now rendered a meaningless farce by a cabinet minister providing beef on the bone to heirs of the throne, while the official policy maintains its illegality. Charles was launching a promotion for welsh beef and ate sirloin cooked by the celtic manor head chef trefor jones and carved by tv cook james martin. Hotel spokesman stevee howell said it had not broken any law, “We did not buy the beef, we were given it by a wholesaler in normal deliveries. Newport chief environmental health officer colin streeter said, “On the face of it, there has been a contravention of the legislation.” Under the 1998 beef bones regulations, it is illegal for a hotel or restaurant to serve beef on the bone to guests, even if they do not pay.”[34] Windsor is encouraging all those connected with the Animal exploitation industry to break the law and the inevitable outcome of this is that pharmers will continue to put into the food chain Animals suffering from bse. It is interesting that virtually all of the people here are breaking the law. This is also part of the mirror’s campaign to have the bse on the bone ban lifted.

Meat Adverts in the Mirror - 10.10.2000.

The mirror publishes a quarter page advert from sainsburys with a photograph of a large chunk of bseef.[35]

Support for Pharmers: Attempts to Deter People from giving up Eating Meat - 21.4.2001.

The mirror carried out a poll asking readers seven questions in order to try and find out what they thought about the f&m epidemic. However, the one question the mirror did not ask was whether pharmers should be given compensation for the Animals slaughtered for having a common cold. On the contrary, it took such compensation for granted and only asked whether compensation ought to be extended to others hit by the f&m outbreak - amazingly 51% said yes. When the mirror discovered that 28% of them said they’d stopped eating meat because of the epidemic, the editor responded, “That would be devastating for the meat industry which is struggling to survive anyway after being hit by foot and mouth and mad cow disease.”[36] In other words, people ought to eat diseased meat in order to keep pharmers in employment.

Fur.

The mirror’s most blatant hypocrisy over Animal rights concerns the fur issue. It has done some first class work in highlighting the cruelty entailed by the fur trade. But, at the same time it has also published photographs of models and media stars wearing fur. It has basically been trying to enjoy the best of both worlds.

Fur Photos - 20.1.1998.

The mirror published a huge colour photo of a jewel encrusted Fox fur wrap. It was modelled at italian designer valentino’s haute couture show in paris. “But the real shock was that as well as claudia schiffer, brutish girls agreed to parade in the fox fur stoles. But rising young stars karen elson and erin o’connor snubbed brutish opinion to appear in valentin’s show. Karen (had) around her neck was the skin of a fox with its fur dyed a matching shade of grey. But u.s. vogue editor anna wintour attended the show wearing a huge grey fur coat, giving the trend her seal of approval. .. the continued revival of the fur trade. Last year it was up nearly a third.”[37]

Catherine Deneuve - 22.1.1998.

At a paris fashion show .. “guest of honour actress catherine deneuve, wearing an enormous fur-collared coat.”[38]

Support for Fur - 20.8.2001.

“It looks like a dead cat and its made from real animal fur. It’s also the surprise toy craze for 2001. But the cats have sparked protests from animal welfare groups because they are made from rabbit fur and some goat hair.”[39]

Three Photos - 4.3.2002.

A whole page devoted to three photos of models wearing fur.[40]

The Mirror’s Treatment of Paul Mccartney.

Paul mccartney was interviewed by the mirror and is quoted as saying certain things which he later retracted, “Paul mccartney today reveals the heartbreaking dilemma he faced when he realized the drugs his wife linda took to fight cancer were tested on Animals. He says, “I’m finding out now that there is quite a lot of animal experimentation. Some of it i suppose is absolutely necessary when you come down to the final tests before people. I suppose a limited thing is unavoidable but it is very difficult for me to think like that because i favour the animals.” (However right at the very end of this two page article it is stated, “Last night paul issued a statement denying that he had changed his opinion. He said, “I am totally against experiments on Animals. I don’t know of a case where it is necessary and i haven’t been persuaded of any case.””[41] The massive headline for this article was ‘Some Animal tests are needed .. but it was so difficult for my Linda’. Given that mccartney made his view clear this story seems unnecessary. Despite mccartney’s retraction the ‘Voice of the Mirror’ waded in, “No matter how much we love animals, we should care more about humans. Now even sir paul maccartney, one of their greatest supporters, has made that clear.””[42]

Tony parsons perpetuates the myth that mccartney now supports Animal experiments, “Mccartney has reluctantly come to the conclusion that the testing of medicine on animals is an unfortunate but necessary evil.”[43] He obviously can’t read in their entirety articles that have been printed in the newspaper he works for.

The Mirror’s Black Propaganda against the Animal Rights Movement.

The mirror has not merely condoned Animal experiments, and publicized the wearing of fur, it has also contributed to black propaganda against Animal rightists. Basically, the mirror has been helping the Animal exploitation industry to attack Animal rightists.

Condemnation of Animal Rightists.

Animal Rights Pacifists threatening to murder Oomans - 3.12.98.

Another example of the mirror’s black propaganda campaign against the Animal rights movement was the allegation that Animal rightists, who are mostly pacifists, were threatening to kill oomans over the death of barry horne, “Animal rights extremists yesterday threatened to murder ten people if jailed activist barry horne dies on hunger strike.”[44]

Support for Jack Straw’s Attempts to Oppress Animal Liberationists - 3.12.1999.

“Green campaigners who plot violent attacks were yesterday named as targets for new anti-terror laws. Home secretary jack straw warned eco-warriors and religious fanatics would be given the same treatment as irish terrorists.”[45]

Further Support for Jack Straw’s Action oppression of Animal Liberationists - 31.8.2000.

“Mi5 agents are to intensify the front-line war on animal rights terrorists after a dramatic upsurge in violent attacks. The move comes as home secretary jack straw yesterday confirmed he wants tough new police powers to stop extremists targeting scientists and lab staff. Mr straw said, “The action they’ve been taking has been preposterous. Many of us would not be able to lead healthy lives were it not for the pharmaceutical firms testing their drugs on Animals.”[46] Straw spoke with the cliched wisdom of a man who’d spent his entire life in the labour and trade union livestock movements. For years he used to claim that marijuana was an extremely dangerous and addictive drug but, when the mirror exposed the fact that his son was selling the drug, strangely the police took no action against him.

Blaming Animal Rightists for the F&M Epidemic - 2.3.2001.

The mirror published another example of black propaganda - quite possibly resulting from collusion between pharmers, the landowning elite, and mi5, “Animal rights terrorists could be behind the f&m crisis, ministers fear. .. ministry of agriculture investigators were probing the idea that activists planted the disease in an attempt to discredit farming practices. A ministry source admitted last night, “It’s too early to rule out the possibility that terrorists are behind this.”[47] This article was accompanied by a photo of a pharmer with two lambs under his arms “moving them to safety” - symbolizing that Animals are safe only in the arms of rural terrorists rather than urban Animal welfarists. The article was surely one of the more appalling pieces of black propaganda against Animal rightists. It is quite true that there are terrorists behind the spread of this disease - they’re all members of the national pharming industry.

Pharmers’ Dumping Mink and then Blaming Animal Liberationists.

In september 1998 the mirror launched another rabid campaign against Animal rightists accusing them of liberating large numbers of Mink from various fur farms. The mirror believed the Mink posed a threat not merely to Wildlife but to oomans - especially babies.

13.8.98.

Two stories about ‘escaped’ Mink 13.8.98 p.22 & p.30.

Mink on the Rampage against Oomans - 15.8.98.

“One of the mink freed from a new forest fur farm by animal activists attacked a man yesterday. Barman mark parham was bitten by one of the runaways as he walked with friends along a country path.”[48] When questioned by the local constabulary, a witness said, “It was definitely one of the convicts from the farm. I recognized it because i’d seen it drinking with noye in the bar a few hours earlier.”

Animal Abuser gets let off - 2.9.98.

At least the mirror had the decency to cover other aspects of the Mink issue, “A worker at the fur farm where thousands of mink were set free by Animal Rights campaigners escaped jail yesterday for abusing the creatures. Ian stroud was supposed to gas hundreds of mink each day with carbon monoxide. But he was caught on film swinging them by their tails and banging them against the floor. He is still employed by the farm owner.”[49]

Beast on a Killing Spree - 11.9.98.

“Wildlife experts were fuming last night after thousands of Mink freed by Animal rights protestors went on a countryside killing spree (sic). The rampaging beasts (sic) have already slaughtered hundreds of game birds, a kestrel, two owls and a family of wildcats since being released from a fur farm.”[50]

18.9.98.

The mirror published another article about the Great Mink escape. The voice of the mirror commented on the article, “The militants who freed thousands of mink yesterday are not real animal lovers. In fact they are filled with hate. Humans and animals living nearby will be terrorized. Some will be hurt and others will die.”[51]

Analysis of the Mirror’s Black Propaganda against Animal Rightists.

The mirror’s black propaganda against Animal rightists over the escape of Mink from a fur pharm was rabid. Firstly, there was no evidence that Animal liberationists had been involved in this liberation. Indeed it is more than likely that it was an inside job by Mink pharmers who were on the verge of being put out of business by the labour government’s promise of legislation to ban Mink pharming in brutland.

Secondly, the Animal liberation front tries to disburse liberated Animals safely into the wild - it doesn’t simply open the flood gates so that thousands of escapees have to scramble around desperately looking for safety.

Thirdly, it is theoretically possible that Animal Liberationists could have been involved in setting Mink free because they are opposed to the incarceration of all Animals. But the Mink issue is slightly different from other liberation issues because Mink are not native to the brutish isles. If Mink were to be liberated they should have been returned to their own habitats. They should not be allowed to invade exotic habitats because, as carnivores, they would pose a considerable threat to native species who have not evolved defences against such Animals. Over the last few centuries, oomans have transferred species around the world and the result has been a carnage of indigenous Wildlife because they had no defences against exotic carnivores. The result has been a considerable loss in native species. Mink are carnivores and releasing them in exotic ecologies such as brutland poses a threat to native species. It is unlikely that Animal liberationists who appreciate the need to respect the integrity of native ecologies would be so irresponsible as to release exotic species into alien habitats.

Fourthly, to suggest that Animal liberationists were “filled with hate” because Mink would terrorize oomans was outrageous - as far as is known four years later, no other Mink has been involved in an attack (whether viciously or not) on oomans. To promote propaganda about threats to babies is almost invariably rabid - and this one about Mink was no exception.

Finally, the mirror’s coverage of the issue completely failed to mention the appalling conditions in which Mink are kept and the horrible way in which they were killed i.e. gassing. Is it possible that the mirror was worried that if Mink were freed it wouldn’t be able to show models flaunting their Mink coats in the people’s paper.

The Mirror’s Double Standards over its Concern for the Earth.

The mirror has appalling double standards over the Earth’s life support system because it promotes Earth wrecking activities.

Save the Earth Twaddle - 27.11.2000.

The mirror put forward its ‘20 Ways to help Save our Precious Planet’ “We can all do our bit to help save the planet from cutting down non-essential car journeys to switching off lights when we leave a room.”[52]

Praising the State of the Brutish Countryside.

“The beauty of our Countryside” - 29.11.2000.

Our beautiful countryside ....”[53]

“One of the glories of the world” - 28.2.2001.

“The british countryside is one of the glories of the world. We cannot allow it to be destroyed.”[54] Morgan comes over as a mindless victim of the countryside alliance’s propaganda. The brutish countryside is a vast green car park with virtually negligible ecological value and virtually no Wildlife. The clearest indication that the brutish countryside is a rural wasteland is the fact that this country absorbs a mere 1.4% of its Carbon emissions. Perhaps the most accurate analogy to describe the country’s barely-existing life-sustaining processes, is that britain’s countryside resembles a vast frying pan covered in lard from one of the country’s cheap motorway cafes serving traditional english breakfasts for those looking forward to an imminent heart attack.

Global Burning.

The mirror has been as duplicitous about combating global burning as it has been about protecting Wildlife and the Earth. Over the last decade or so the mirror has run countless number of articles about global burning and yet, at the same time, it supports a wide range of policies which help to destabilize the climate. It has basically been trying to please both worlds. It was remarkable however, as will be noted below, to discover that the mirror’s editor had failed to take any notice of the global burning articles he was printing in the paper.

Autumn Floods - 13.4.98.

After the Easter 1998 floods which caused widespread devastation across the midlands all that the mirror had to say about it was, “The easter weather has covered just about every variation the heavens hold.”[55] In other words, nothing at all about global burning.

Initial thoughts about the October 2000 Storms - 31.10.2000.

Morgan’s powers of understanding seemed woefully inadequate in trying to understand the october 2000 storms - which turned out to be just the first month of a series of storms that lasted until february the following year. It seemed as if he’d failed to take any notice of the scientific debates that had taken place over the last decade or so about global burning - but, then again, given his view that brutish bseef was safe to eat, he was obviously not in the habit of heeding scientific warnings. He believed the storms causing widespread flooding across the country were natural rather than having been caused by pharmers, “For once no one is to blame for what is happening. Britain is being crippled by what insurers like to call an act of god.”[56] - except that even the grossly right wing, free-market, reactionaries running the insurance industry no longer believe that the sudden spurt of storms since the mid 1980s were due to acts of god although they were far too reactionary to suggest the main cause was the global Animal enslavement industry. Oh dear, oh dear. How is it possible to combat global burning when the editor of brutland’s biggest circulation newspaper, read by a huge section of society, revealed he was a complete ignoramus about the major global issue of the last decade?

The Voice of the Mirror hears the voice of Science ... at long Last - 4.11.2000.

To his credit, morgan must have realized his mistake because within a matter of days he’d changed his ideas, “The worst floods in memory are swamping large parts of the country .. Should there be better flood defences? The real challenge is to combat the threat of global warming. None of us has taken it seriously. But the biggest challenge is how we deal with global warming.”[57] However, it has to be wondered whether this was a genuine change of mind or whether it was just a bit of propaganda floss to support the labour government because three weeks earlier mcblair had given his first speech on the environment in three years - perhaps one of mcblair’s spin doctors had phoned morgan and told him to get into line with the government over the global burning issue. Is it possible that mcblair and the mirror were blaming global burning for the floods as a means of justifying yet more subsidies for the pharming industry? The pharming industry demands sea/river/flooding defences against global burning but since the pharming industry is the biggest cause of global burning perhaps it would be better if large parts of the Earth could be fenced from these econazis.

Criticisms of Bush on Kyoto - 15.6.2001.

It has just been noted that the mirror’s editor suddenly discovered global burning on saturday november 4th 2000. After his 11/4 conversion, morgan started sounding like an environmentalist, “He (bush) clearly does not realize the importance of kyoto. Even if he did, he is no more than a mouthpiece for the us oil industry, which employed him and funded his presidential campaign.”[58]

Info about Global Burning - 20.12.2001.

At the end of 2001, the mirror reported, “And the 10 hottest years since modern records began in 1855 have all been since 1988 - with only 1988 warmer than this year, according to scientists at the met office.”[59]

Fuel Tax Protests.

The fuel tax protests in brutland in september 2000 were a good example of the mirror’s duplicity about global burning and the Earth. It simply could not make up its mind whether to support the protestors as did the sun newspaper or to oppose them because of the damage they would cause to the environment. In the end it fudged the issue because it simply couldn’t take global burning seriously. Morgan’s attitude was also a reflection of the labour government’s own disenchantment with the issue of global burning. Whilst mcblair made all the right noises about the threat posed by climate change, most of his policies were simply making it worse. In the end the mirror opposed the protests because it saw them as a law and order issue and felt that it had to support the government’s line.

Demands for Cheaper Petrol - 8.9.2000.

“Chancellor gordon brown was urged last night to use a £1.25 billion windfall to knock 4p off a litre of petrol. Drivers were hit by a 2p increase to an average of 82p a litre yesterday as world oil prices soared. Another 2p rise is expected this weekend .. About £1 billion comes from the petroleum revenue tax levied on oil companies. Another £270 million is from vat due to rising forecourt prices”[60]

Support for Law and Order - 8.9.2000.

The editor stated .. “French truckers, farmers, fishermen and taxi drivers who are blockading roads and bringing the country to a standstill. What they are doing simply is not right. Not because it affects so many british firms and holiday makers but because brute force is no way to try and sort things out. We have not taken to the streets and we won’t. We’re not like that. But the chancellor should still give us a cut in fuel tax.”[61]

Compromising with the eco-nazis - 12.9.2000.

“Soaring oil prices have given the treasury a windfall. Surely some of that could be given back to motorists so this crippling action is ended.”[62]

Shifting the blame onto the Government - 13.9.2000.

The mirror carried a montage consisting of mcblair, brown, and prescott with fuel gauges showing empty and the caption, ‘These men run the country. Today the country will run dry. None of them knows quite how to get it going again .. but they all agree it’s not their fault..”[63] Morgan’s editorial was shifting towards the protestors, “If there is no change the effects will be catastrophic.”[64]

Trying to Avert Extremism - 31.10.2000.

As the second fuel protest drew near, the mirror’s editor was under no delusion about what the pharmers, and their rural rustic alliance, were aiming to achieve, “They are demanding the impossible. They want fuel duty slashed by 15p a litre. The worst extremists want almost double that amount off. It is not up to pickets to try to bring the country to its knees.”[65]

Mirror Presents Earth-Wrecking Budget as a Green Revolution - 9.11.2000.

It was pointed out above that despite morgan’s 11/4 conversion it was questioned whether his interest in the environment was real or just a means of protecting the labour government from criticisms over its disinterest in the environment. The chancellor’s budget clearly promoted Earth-wrecking activities, so when the mirror’s editor sought to present it as a green revolution it became clear that morgan was more concerned about labour’s presence in parliament than the presence of life on Earth, “Gordon brown launched a green revolution yesterday in a bid to scupper a new round of fuel protests. The chancellor unveiled a £1.75billion package which he said would cut fuel costs by the equivalent of 8p a litre for lorries and 4p for cars. Mr Brown scrapped plans to raise tax on petrol by 1.5p in next march’s budget. The freeze comes on top of a penny cut last year. He trimmed the levy on ‘green’ ultra low sulphur petrol by 2p a litre and dramatically increased the number of cars qualifying for £100 lower-rate road tax. He also .. dropping tax on ultra low sulphur diesel, used exclusively by lorries by 3p a litre. Friends of the Earth added, “We welcome cuts in low sulphur petrol duty which will help improve air quality.”[66]

Social Views.

Romanticizing Murderers, Criminals, and Thugs.

Virtually all parts of the conventional media are caught by the contradiction between supporting the law and informing the public about crimes and criminals. They know they ought to support the law but they also know that the public is fascinated by criminals and criminal activities. There’s a fine line between reporting what criminals do and glorifying them as underground heroes. The mirror has, unfortunately, crossed this line all too often. So whilst on the one hand it denounces the Animal liberation front for supposedly liberating Mink which pose a terrible threat to babies around the country, it sees nothing wrong in publishing double page spreads about criminals who have brutally tortured and murdered people. If the krays had been Animal liberationists they would have been locked up before their 16th birthday and they would never have been heard of in the public domain but because they were criminals killing people the media is perfectly justified in giving them the oxygen of publicity. As far as is known the mirror has never attempted to interview members of the Animal liberation front nor give them double page spreads to outline their ideas even though it commonly bestows this honour on murderers and even mass murderers. Apparently it’s quite morally acceptable to interview multiple murderers but not to listen to the views of decent people supporting Animal rights.

Glorifying the Krays - 28.8.2000.

The mirror writes a drooling front page article on reggie kray who is in hospital dying from cancer showing the house where he hopes to die. This is followed by a double page spread.[67]

Glorifying the Krays - 29.8.2000.

“Dying reggie kray took his first, faltering steps of freedom yesterday.”[68] Yet another double page spread in honour of reggie kray.

Glorifying the Krays - 12.10.2000.

Mirror devoted a double page spread to the krays.[69] The paper devotes more to the krays than it does to green issues.

Interview with Michael Stone - 18.11.2000.

The mirror carried a double page interview with michael stone who murdered six catholics in northern ireland and who was released under the good friday agreement.[70]

Drugs.

“The war to curb the rise in drug use, let alone halt it, has clearly been a complete failure.”[71]

Damiola, Urban Decay, and Rural Subsidies - 29.11.2000.

It was pointed out earlier that the mirror would think nothing of denouncing urban dole cheats but would rarely say anything about pharming dole cheats. The mirror confronted the two topical issues of the day - the murder of a urban youngster and the labour government’s proposals for vast rural subsidies. However, it failed to acknowledge the connection between the decaying urban conditions in which this boy died and the increasing rural prosperity resulting from the tens of billions which have been poured into the rural economy since labour came to power. The mirror didn’t seek to cover up the grim realities of urban life, “The death of damilola says a lot about the sort of place britain has become. .. there are areas which are genuinely lawless. Where gangs rule. Where children - even young children - roam the streets bringing terror to all.” But then, in the next editorial, it applauds the government’s plans for vast investments in rural areas which don’t have anything like the same scale of social problems, “The boost for the country (by which the mirror means the countryside!) announced by the government yesterday will not only benefit people who live there. If the huge drain from rural areas to cities continues, this will become an unbalanced nation. Our beautiful countryside will have fewer and fewer people living in it while cities choke with too many residents.”[72] For the decade or so before 1997 it was not true that all cities are growing. There had been a movement away from decaying cities into the peace and prosperity of suburbs and the countryside rather than vice versa. The decay of urban areas was driving richer people to move to prosperous, clean, well heeled, rural areas. It was only when the labour government allowed in hundreds of thousands of immigrants that the cities began to expand again. During labour’s period in office it has allowed slum council estates up and down the country to rot whilst pandering to the interests of prosperous rural communities.

Political Views.

The Smearing of Scargill.

There seem to be divisions between the mirror’s former employees about whether their story on scargill was true or not. Terry pattinson defends the article he wrote in the mirror accusing scargill of theft, “In last week’s media Guardian, Roy Greenslade apologized for a story he ran while editor of the Daily Mirror accusing Arthur Scargill of pocketing union funds.”[73]

On Mcblair and the Afghanistan War.

“Tony blair’s labour government really will sell their oldest and best friends down the river when it suits them.”[74]

The Middle East.

For the mirror’s views on this issue please see tf25.

Conclusions

On sunday march 24th 2002, the sunday telegraph published a front page article claiming that large numbers of people were disappointed with mcblair’s leadership of the labour government.[75] This disappointment is not an automatic consequence of the public relations’ hype that surrounded mcblair’s first general election victory since it would have been impossible for any government to have met such expectations. The disappointment is due to the fact that even when mcblair had the opportunities to introduce reforms and to modernize the country he failed to do so. It is disappointment that very little has changed culturally or politically since the labour party came into government. To give but one example. Under the old house of lords, dominated by hereditary peers from the landowning aristocracy, there was a huge majority against the banning of Fox hunting. In the so-called reform house of lords the vote against such a ban was almost exactly the same. The institution had been reformed but its culture had not. The one bright spark of during this period has been remarkable editorship of the mirror - recognized indirectly by the paper winning the ‘newspaper of the year’ award.[76] Of course the paper still contains many traditional elements but it has still been a remarkably progressive paper over a wide range of issues. To a large extent then, piers morgan has been the breath of fresh air that a stagnant mcblair could never be.

New Scientist.

Bse - 18.12.99.

There was a surprisingly derogatory comment in a ‘new scientist’ editorial sneering at the bse controversy as if this magazine, which prides itself on its adherence to scientific method, believed the fact that the brutish government’s failure to investigate the prevalence of bse in brutish herds was an example of good science whilst the french were being unscientific for carrying out such an investigation, “The sale of british beef in france - which french scientists are alone in thinking might harbour significant risks of infection with bse ...”[77]

Pharmers’ Viruses - 26.8.2000.

“A genetically modified virus that can spread from rabbit to rabbit for one generation and immunize them against two major diseases has been created in spain. Its development has caused unease in countries such as australia where rabbits are serious pests and the diseases play a key role in limiting their numbers. “If i was a farmer I would be concerned,” says David Cowen of Britain’s Central Science Laboratory in York. “Rabbits cause up to £100million worth of damage in the uk per year.” The vaccine, developed by juan torres in madrid .. is partly funded by the spanish federation of hunters.”[78] Notice that there is a quote here from the pharmers’ perspective not that of an animal rightists because, as far as the magazine is concerned, the views of the former are far more important than those of the latter.

Sun.

Bse - 22.3.96.

Prior to the government’s march 1996 announcement of 10 bse-cjd victims, the sun had dismissed bse’s threat to oomans, “Let’s remember the massive scares over salmonella in eggs and listeria in yoghurt. Neither turned out to be serious long-term threats to our health.”[79]

Sunday People.

Criticisms of Speed Cameras: Support for the Criminal Activities of Speeding Motorists - 17.6.2001.

“A flood of spy cameras is set to swamp britain’s motorists - and the sunday people is fighting back. Today we send a crucial message to the nation’s rulers: Leave our drivers alone. From next month police forces will be given a free hand to set up traps and pocket a share of the takings. The number of speed cameras is expected to treble.”[80]

Telegraph.

The Drunken State of Daily Telegraph Journalists.

Dominic Swords.

“A daily telegraph journalist was jailed for 28 days yesterday after drunkenly racially abusing a motorist thinking he was a taxi driver. Dominic swords, 34, flagged down council worker delbert husband as he staggered home from a party. He threw his bag in the back of his ford grenada and told him to take him home. When mr husband tried to explain he was not a cabbie, swords just shouted, “Just take me home you low life n***r.””[81]

Mr Chancellor.

"Mr Chancellor - a Daily Telegraph associate editor - was stopped after driving at 43mph in West Kensington, west London, shortly before Christmas. He was later found to have an alcohol level of 72 microgrammes per 100 millilitres of breath, compared with the legal limit of 35 microgrammes." He was fined £400 with £50 costs and disqualified for driving for 15 months.[82]

Country Life.

Bse - 2.8.1996.

“Some farmers have already gone to the wall over bse. Very few if any new cases of cjd in young people (with which there may conceivably be a link with bse) (sic) have appeared since the spring. So it may yet be that more deaths will result from farmers committing suicide than from children eating hamburgers.”[83] There have been 116 bse-cjd fatalities so far so let’s hope a far greater number of livestock pharmers have committed suicide. If any pharmer needs assistance please give us a call.

The Ecologist.

Bse - July 1999.

The ecologist is supposedly the country’s leading green magazine and objects to the view that bse originated from infected feed. It would much rather blame the chemical industry than pharmers. Not surprisingly in 1999 it printed an article by a pro-meat, pharmer-loving, rustic who sought to legitimize the cannibalistic practices of brutish pharmers by pointing out that Cattle are by nature carnivores, “Bse is probably not caused by cows eating animal parts with their food, a practice which imitates nature, as cows eating fresh grass consume insect larvae and eggs.”[84]