The Sun today launched an extremely attack on Gordon Brown - well, there's nothing new in that, really, is there? They were extremely eager to string him up while he was in office - "Brown Toast" I seem to remember was reeled out on several occasions - but he's become a rather more sympathetic figure since leaving office. When he talked about how he cried when he realised his son's illness was going to be spread across the entire national press, that reached out to pluck the exact same heart-string the tabloids thrash repeatedly on a daily basis with people like Milly Dowler and the Soham twins.
The Sun have decided to hit back strongly, claiming that the story they ran wasn't "blagged" at all, but actually came from a member of the public whose son also had cystic fibrosis. Now, to start with, that doesn't really make any sense at all, but in the same way as there's absolutely no way of proving it, there's no real way of disproving it. Even though they haven't actually given a name to Mr Imaginary Concerned Parent yet - I suppose the creative minds down at News International are still slaving away on that one to try to come up with the most sympathetic name possible. Cuddly McHugLove, perhaps? Who would disbelieve such a caring parent as he?
The real problem with the Sun's angle is that they're not attacking the main root of the issue here, which is that the story itself was in rather bad taste. On a normal day people probably wouldn't bat an eyelid, but this week the Milly Dowler and dead soldiers stories are fresh in the public mind and News International are in a rather weak position - which is new for them, I guess. They're now being investigated in America and Australia as well, so they should really be circling the wagons rather than striking out like this.
The political reaction continues to escalate too, as the press and the politicians get themselves worked up into a vicious circle. Every non-Murdoch paper and indeed television channel is running this story at full blast, on all cylinders. They're loving it, being on top for a change - the Guardian in particular have rarely looked so very smug. That's why I quite enjoyed Tom Watson's appearance on BBC News not half an hour ago, where he aimed a broadside at the entire media for their complicity in the spiraling culture of poor journalism, singling out (*cough*former Young Conservative chair*cough*) political editor Nick Robinson as "missing out on the story of his life". The presenters reacted with defensive disbelief. The thing is, the harder the media push this, the harder the politicians feel they have to push it. Both claim to be doing this in the public interest, representing the fury of the populace, but a lot of this fury is now self-fuelled. Did we really need a live broadcast from the Commons Select Committee for Culture and Sport? Did millions of former News of the World readers find themselves riveted to that? Anyway, I digress. Back to attacking politicians.
Where is David Cameron in all of this? I haven't seen hide nor hair of him since he was at Canary Wharf. "Twenty minutes down the road" as Ed Miliband derided him during his conspicuous absence in the Commons, leaving Jeremy Hunt dangling in the breeze. His complicity is clear over both being in bed with Murdoch, and obviously trying to avoid being too involved in the current castigation of the old bastard, and more importantly the hiring of one Andy Coulson.
On the Coulson issue the Conservative response has been glumly predictable. They make absolutely no attempt to clear their own name, but instead throw some of the same shit back in Labour's direction. Tom Baldwin was a spin-doctor working for the Labour administration, who was allegedly involved in some "blagging" of outspoken Tory cash-machine Lord Ashcroft. Cracking.
THIS IS NOT THE TIME FOR PARTY-POLITICAL POSTURING. FOCUS, MOTHERFUCKERS. We are at a crucial time, here. Murdoch is on the ropes. We've never seen him this weak before. His entire media empire is under attack - heck, the whole idea of having a media empire at all is under attack. We're standing at a massive crossroads here, and the last thing we need to do is focus on which political party might be a bit more complicit than the other. You're both in it up to your necks and everyone knows it, boys. Focus on repairing the system as a whole and you can dig both of yourselves out of the mire. Work together for the good of the country for once in your lives.
Cameron continues to manfully dodge the issue, though. He has to appear at PMQs this afternoon, but he's confirmed that he won't be showing up at the Commons debate on phone-hacking later in the afternoon because he's visiting the parents of Milly Dowler. One simple question: why? What new information do they have to impart? What could they possibly add at this point - why do they take precedence over a Commons debate? Is it just because Dave doesn't want to show face, and thinks he can get a little positive boost out of being seen with the parents of the dead girl? Christ, it just seems like everyone is queuing up to use that poor dead girl. The papers can't get enough of her, and even the politicians are in on the act now. Hey Dave, why are you skipping out on the Commons debate yet again? "Uh, because of, um, dead girl." Do you really think people can't argue with that just because you're invoking her name? This is of course a man who had no qualms about using his own dead son as a political tool in the election campaign, so there's no surprise really that he still hasn't found any kind of moral core. The spineless bastard.
The one really lovely image that we've had out of it all, though, is the sight of Rupert Murdoch walking out of his hotel into the maw of a truly epic goat-fuck. It's very satisfying, really; he's made countless people miserable by pilling a literal heap of cameramen and journalists right in their faces, a moving whirlwind of lenses and microphones. Now, he's getting a taste of his own medicine, and boy is it sweet. For everyone else.
