> I wrote something about how annoying it is to see people with massive audiences, whose media companies make £££, complain about “the mainstream media”.
Perhaps, but the "Mainstream Media" are the media of the actually powerful, the ones the bureucrats, upper middle classes, and managerial elites follow, shape, and adhere to, and whose edicts are taken as gospel by the punditry.
That's despite the audience disparity. They would still have that power even if just the public sector heads, unelected bureucrats, academics, and Hill pundits alone read them, and everybody else watched Joe Rogan or something.
In other words, Rogan doesn't dictate "The Narrative".
Yes, he is. But not because of Rogan - because of millions being dissatisfied and disenfranchized with business-as-usual sneering elites. That is, the same reason people turned to Rogan instead of "official" media.
Both Trump and Rogan are effects, neither is cause, and Rogan least of the two.
But my point was that the Mainstream Media are "the media of the actually powerful, the ones the bureucrats, upper middle classes, and managerial elites follow, shape, and adhere to, and whose edicts are taken as gospel by the punditry."
That's where real policy power lies. Trump, and the presidential office in general, are figureheads. At best they can move things 5% towards some direction they chose. I doubt they can move them 10%, much less to a degree that has real impact.
For all his shortcomings, Yarvin has a point here in describing the token-ness of the Prez:
James Bloodworth shows how jealous James Bloodworth actually is of Douglas Murray. James Bloodworth’s boring and bitchy article offers not one balanced argument. Not one noteworthy insight except into his self-perceived inadequacy. His article is a series of quotations which if removed leaves a vacuous blathering. Bloodworth has no intellectual or articulate approach and assumes that journalism ought to be shooting the messenger by criticising a person’s image.
“I wrote something about how annoying it is to see people with massive audiences, whose media companies make £££, complain about “the mainstream media”
As for Douglas Murray, he strikes me as someone who clearly has a mind and who clearly has not had to think for a very long time. Unlike, say, Andrew Sullivan (another gay conservative Brit who found fortune in America) who seems to think a lot. Murray is happy to earn a crust policing the Friend/Enemy distinction with his armory of quips.
The poster for his latest speaking tour had him in a flak jacket. He looked like a child who had just found the dressing up box.
I like Politics at Jack at Sam’s for insider nerdiness. Though I suppose the closest thing in terms of “weary former combatants” is Political Currency with Ed Balls and George Osborne.
Wait, what is this two-fingers-up thing? Do Brits hold up two middle fingers instead of one? How did I reach my advanced age knowing what a brolly is and not this fact?
Not two middle fingers….index and the next one (Peter Pointer and Toby Tall, in the song😀). It’s also known as a V sign, but V for Victory ( see Churchill) or the peace sign has the palm facing outwards. For maximum effect the gesture needs to sort of scoop the air up, and be accompanied by a hissed Fuck Off! More genteel version? See Baroness Trumpington in the House of Lords 2012
Yeah, and Australians and Kiwis two. Maybe Canada as well.
There's also a legend about the origins of this gesture: from longbowmen caught prisoners during England's wars, who had those fingers cut off when, so they couldn't operate the longbow again!
I haven’t seen a wanker gesture in the wild for a long time! Glad to hear it’s struggling on. I talked to my daughter the other day about how her generation had lost one of the great offensive gestures. Flicking the V is so much richer as an insult because it can be done humorously or rudely or anything in between. It’s much more hard working than the middle finger.
British politics has a problem similar to 1970 when Edward Heath won the election and promised to get the economy moving, cure inflation, reduce unemployment, etc. within 3.5 years he was gone, the victim of failed promises he appeared incapable of resolving. Here we are, 54 years later, with Keir Starmer making more or less the same promises and as determined to succeed as Heath was. The economy is totally different, so too the workforce, much better educated but with 9.5 million too unwell to work. Heath was defeated twice by the Miners and eventually did what Macron is doing today and the South Korean President did earlier this week, challenge the people to back him or sack him. Starmer is not challenging anyone but himself to achieve his objectives. Very wise of him.
Appreciate the recommendation Helen! Glad you liked the piece
> I wrote something about how annoying it is to see people with massive audiences, whose media companies make £££, complain about “the mainstream media”.
Perhaps, but the "Mainstream Media" are the media of the actually powerful, the ones the bureucrats, upper middle classes, and managerial elites follow, shape, and adhere to, and whose edicts are taken as gospel by the punditry.
That's despite the audience disparity. They would still have that power even if just the public sector heads, unelected bureucrats, academics, and Hill pundits alone read them, and everybody else watched Joe Rogan or something.
In other words, Rogan doesn't dictate "The Narrative".
Err…. He does. And Trump is about to be the actual president, not just the podcaster in chief.
Yes, he is. But not because of Rogan - because of millions being dissatisfied and disenfranchized with business-as-usual sneering elites. That is, the same reason people turned to Rogan instead of "official" media.
Both Trump and Rogan are effects, neither is cause, and Rogan least of the two.
But my point was that the Mainstream Media are "the media of the actually powerful, the ones the bureucrats, upper middle classes, and managerial elites follow, shape, and adhere to, and whose edicts are taken as gospel by the punditry."
That's where real policy power lies. Trump, and the presidential office in general, are figureheads. At best they can move things 5% towards some direction they chose. I doubt they can move them 10%, much less to a degree that has real impact.
For all his shortcomings, Yarvin has a point here in describing the token-ness of the Prez:
https://graymirror.substack.com/p/its-easy-from-here
https://graymirror.substack.com/p/its-not-easy-from-here
https://graymirror.substack.com/p/chevron-and-the-professional-republicans
Thank you for sharing the Douglas Murray piece. A lot of good points in there and all the better for not being an out and out hatchet job.
James Bloodworth shows how jealous James Bloodworth actually is of Douglas Murray. James Bloodworth’s boring and bitchy article offers not one balanced argument. Not one noteworthy insight except into his self-perceived inadequacy. His article is a series of quotations which if removed leaves a vacuous blathering. Bloodworth has no intellectual or articulate approach and assumes that journalism ought to be shooting the messenger by criticising a person’s image.
Hello Douglas!
No not Douglas. Thanks for the compliment.
“I wrote something about how annoying it is to see people with massive audiences, whose media companies make £££, complain about “the mainstream media”
Agree on this *very strongly*
https://tempo.substack.com/p/podcasting-pearls-before-swine
https://tempo.substack.com/p/weak-sauce
As for Douglas Murray, he strikes me as someone who clearly has a mind and who clearly has not had to think for a very long time. Unlike, say, Andrew Sullivan (another gay conservative Brit who found fortune in America) who seems to think a lot. Murray is happy to earn a crust policing the Friend/Enemy distinction with his armory of quips.
The poster for his latest speaking tour had him in a flak jacket. He looked like a child who had just found the dressing up box.
I *love* Hacks on Tap and I don’t think it’s just West Wing-itis and this week’s is brilliant.
Is there a British politics podcast which brings that sort of world-weary insight, laced with self-deprecation and plain-speaking? Sign me up if so.
I like Politics at Jack at Sam’s for insider nerdiness. Though I suppose the closest thing in terms of “weary former combatants” is Political Currency with Ed Balls and George Osborne.
Wait, what is this two-fingers-up thing? Do Brits hold up two middle fingers instead of one? How did I reach my advanced age knowing what a brolly is and not this fact?
Not two middle fingers….index and the next one (Peter Pointer and Toby Tall, in the song😀). It’s also known as a V sign, but V for Victory ( see Churchill) or the peace sign has the palm facing outwards. For maximum effect the gesture needs to sort of scoop the air up, and be accompanied by a hissed Fuck Off! More genteel version? See Baroness Trumpington in the House of Lords 2012
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8JyDl9FtWI
Yeah, and Australians and Kiwis two. Maybe Canada as well.
There's also a legend about the origins of this gesture: from longbowmen caught prisoners during England's wars, who had those fingers cut off when, so they couldn't operate the longbow again!
In your defence, I think the middle finger is more prevalent these days in the UK. Though we've held on to the wanker gesture.
I haven’t seen a wanker gesture in the wild for a long time! Glad to hear it’s struggling on. I talked to my daughter the other day about how her generation had lost one of the great offensive gestures. Flicking the V is so much richer as an insult because it can be done humorously or rudely or anything in between. It’s much more hard working than the middle finger.
British politics has a problem similar to 1970 when Edward Heath won the election and promised to get the economy moving, cure inflation, reduce unemployment, etc. within 3.5 years he was gone, the victim of failed promises he appeared incapable of resolving. Here we are, 54 years later, with Keir Starmer making more or less the same promises and as determined to succeed as Heath was. The economy is totally different, so too the workforce, much better educated but with 9.5 million too unwell to work. Heath was defeated twice by the Miners and eventually did what Macron is doing today and the South Korean President did earlier this week, challenge the people to back him or sack him. Starmer is not challenging anyone but himself to achieve his objectives. Very wise of him.