Give me sympathy for I have been gagged by Stephen Daisley
I have been gagged by Stephen Daisley.
Last Saturday I put a comment on his blog and one week later it is still awaiting moderation. Clearly this is proof of a one party unionist state. A compliant unionist establishment. A supine and biased unionist media trying to silence those in favour of independence. This must be true as some well known cybernats including one who writes about wizards agrees with me. I demand your attention and sympathy. I am a victim, I have a heart of gold, and to prove all of this here is a picture of a pug.
Here is a picture of my still to be authorised comment.
Well I haven’t really been gagged by Stephen Daisley, perish the thought. I did put a comment under the blog version of his Daily Mail article, but there might be a good reason for the comment not yet being authorised.
Like the fact that Stephen Daisley doesn’t read comments. In fact it seems like many members of the Scottish political circle-jerk that Daisley occupies, he has a disdain for the input of those who pay for his work. Which is probably why the article I commented on last week was so utterly flawed.
When I last talked about Daisley, I admitted I liked his opinion pieces.
I think they are normally well written and thought provoking, even though I disagree with a lot of what he says. His latest effort is not up to his normal standard. It is a sad attempt to create a sense of victim-hood and paint a false picture of the political situation in Scotland. The true picture he doesn’t understand because he has isolated himself within a clique of back patting fantasists. Clinging in blind hope to the hull of the good ship Britannia as it sinks further and further into dark and unsettled waters.
He begins the most predictable article in the history of Scottish journalism with the old classic of equating the drive for Scottish independence with what is happening in the USA and with Brexit.
We have talked about the glaringly obvious difference between those movements before so I won’t dwell on it. Suffice to say the nationalism driving Brexit and Trump is coming from people whose countries are already sovereign. It is ethnic nationalism, it is a bunch of white people blaming their woes on foreigners.
The people behind Scottish independence just want Scotland to be sovereign.
If we were already so, and we still had a significant nationalist movement then I would disown it. Unlike the other movements Daisley lumps us in with, the majority of people who want Scottish independence want to be part of supranational organisations, they want more immigration and our actions don’t lead to a massive spike in hate crimes.
He then goes on to his sob story in which he, without irony, laments how Scotland is a country with an establishment full of nationalists and people who monger made-up grievances.
That he does this, blinkered to the reality that his whole piece is a massive fatuous grievance is astounding. That he writes this on the pages of the Daily Mail, which is the most nationalistic, small minded, grievance spreading false news outlet of the lot is perplexing. His new home is so unreliable that it has this week been banned as a source on Wikipedia.
Daisley’s version of events was that two SNP MPs talked to his boss and that got him silenced and then a supine Scottish civic society failed in their duty to protect him.
He likens Scotland to a one party state. The truth is more simple, he was asked by his bosses, maybe due to pressure from those two SNP MPs, to either be the online editor or an opinion writer. How he cannot see that the two roles have a conflict of interest is unfathomable. I suspect his blind spot is deliberate as he is not stupid. This manufactured slight does enable him to secure a writing gig in his natural home. A racist, tax-avoiding, right-wing, British nationalist fanzine, with a strange penchant for scantily clad children. A new home that recently tried to silence judges and stop Brexit being debated in parliament.
He complains that Scottish civic society did not come to his aid.
However, the reason institutions like the National Union Of Journalism didn’t do so is that they know that editorial comment is different from normal opinion. Editorial comment reflects in the readers eyes the views of the publication. It had nothing to do with being in bed with the SNP. Scotland has a minority government that can’t even get legislation like the Named Persons Act onto the statute books. Civic society prevented that and rightly so.
Any glance at any paper on any day and you will struggle not to find stories that are critical of the SNP. Independence supporters form almost half of Scottish society but only one daily newspaper actually supports that cause. Daisley’s case has no substance, it is utter attention seeking, sympathy gathering tripe.
I have written lots of comments on the blogs of pro union writers.
Hardly any of those comments have ever been allowed to appear on those sites. Normally I don’t think much of this, people can do what they want with their own blogs. On this blog anyone can comment and the comments don’t need authorisation. It’s called free speech, an important pillar of a democracy.
However, using Daisley’s own blinkered, attention seeking tactics leads me to feel that I have been gagged. I feel that there is a unionist clique ruling the Scottish blogosphere. I wonder why the whole of civic society has not yet stood up for me in order to make my comment appear. I can only presume that some high profile unionist politicians have interfered in order to ensure my comment does not see the light of day.
There surely can’t be any more down to earth explanation?
Maybe, but if he can say he was gagged when he clearly was given the choice to continue writing. If he can say we have a one party state when we don’t even have a majority government. If he can mould all nationalism together into one cancerous lump. Then I can play that game as well.
Give me attention and sympathy for I have been gagged by Stephen Daisley.
Add your email address to receive updates when we blog and please comment if you have any thoughts on this subject.
Had to laugh at the Journo’s tweets about how nobody reads the comments section and not to read them, they are so oblivious to what is happening around them and so scared to have their POV challenged and scrutinised by the public, they are so out of touch with society that they are making themselves irrelevant, I can’t speak for everyone else, but if I’m reading an article online I invariably scrutinise the comments section far more dilligently than the piece itself, I am far more interested, rightly or wrongly, in hearing the various opinions of the public than I… Read more »
Yeh, it’s disappointing they don’t at least skim the comments. We don’t get as many as big sites but I’d say about 90 percent of the ones we do get are reasonable. Some of those make good counter points. I always reads comments under big articles for balance.
I read the article by loki which started the tweet thread. The comments are harsh but most of them were saying he was too verbose. Which is a fair point he could learn from if he wants to connect with the Scotsman readers.