This morning’s MSM provide us with a case study in ‘news management’ which also demonstrates how and why the opinion polls are what they are.  I refer to the reports on the Pro-Palestine demo in London yesterday and the staggering contrast between the print and online editions in this morning’s papers.

On Friday, Matt Goodwin published a brief survey on his substack, headlined:“What people think about the war – The striking generational divide in our view of the Israel-Gaza conflict”, observing that:

“It’s both revealing and unsurprising that less than two weeks since the atrocities in Israel only one in ten Labour voters —who increasingly represent an alliance of middle-class liberals and minority voters— sympathise more with Israel. […] The most remarkable of all is not political but generational. Today, it is Britain’s young 18-24-year-olds from Generation Z, born after the mid-1990s, who are, by far, the most likely of all to say they sympathise with the Palestinian side.” (paywalled link)

This cohort is ‘Generation Smartphone’ and today’s MSM front pages demonstrate how this cohort has arrived at their opinion. Look at the contrast between the print editions of this morning’s papers, lovingly compiled by the BBC here, and the online editions of those papers – for example here, here and here. It is remarkable. I’m especially puzzled by the difference between The Times’ printed front page with Israeli flags  which have vanished from their online front page.

The main theme in the broadsheets at the time of writing is Ms Braverman going to talk to the Met Police Chief. The reason for this, the Pro-Palestine demo yesterday in London, is mentioned only in the margins. To be fair, the DT has placed reports on yesterday’s events next to the Braverman article on their online front page, unlike the other broadsheets. The headlines are chilling:

“Five times the Met Police stood aside during pro-Palestine protests – Only 10 people were arrested during the rally, where protesters scaled buildings and called for ‘jihad’ in Whitehall” (paywalled link)

“Police pressure leads to cancelled pro-Israel rally in north London – Event was due to be held on Saturday in Golders Green, a Jewish area of the capital” (paywalled link)

The explanations which news editors might offer is that the demos happened yesterday and are now ‘old news’, of no further interest. Having the Whitehall ‘hate figure’ of the Home Secretary on the front page is ‘news’ and definitely more helpful in the campaign of the Westminster MSM to promote ‘regime change’ here in the UK. 

Since the MSM have been full of reports and essays about Starmer’s ‘inevitable win’ at the coming GE  it should surprise no one that Ms Braverman has become this mornings top ‘news’ issue, nor should the reports of the inactivity of the Met Police. After all, as Matt Goodwin reported, only one in ten Labour voters ‘sympathise with Israel’ and the police officers wouldn’t want to have blotted their copybooks in the eyes of Labour.

The reason why this divergence matters so much – or ought to, are twofold. One is the ever increasing online readership as opposed to reading print editions, especially here in the UK (my emphasis):

“As of 2020, more than two thirds of individuals in Great Britain were either reading or downloading online news, newspapers or magazines. This was more than three times the share of online readers as compared to 2007. The share of UK online readers was higher than the European Union (EU 28) average. As of February 2019, BBC News online had the highest share of readers in the UK, with the Guardian and Mail Online coming in as second and third choice.” (link)

Why do we even wonder about the political attitudes of the age groups of 18-44! Furthermore, in a piece addressed at business PR firms, we read (my emphasis):

“Online articles are written specifically for the web and tend to be more concise than print, as it makes it easier to read and scan on a computer screen. […] On the web, the reader is less likely to read an article in full, maybe viewing multiple webpages at once, and can be distracted by links to other stories. In contrast, readers are more likely to take the time to read print articles in full, and it has been argued that print stories can have a longer lasting impact.” (link)

Furthermore, online articles also provide readers with the opportunity to post comments easily and quickly, contributing to the formation of ‘general opinions’ which colour the perception of others. And that’s how suddenly ‘everybody supports Palestine’: no need to think, just go with the flow – and ‘jihad’ is only a word … This will only get worse because the vast majority of the post-boomer generations only consume propaganda titbits and don’t read anything else.

I leave you with a frightening outlook for the future where the police can dissuade people from demonstrating for an issue critical of government policies. All they need to do is ‘issue guidance’, pointing out that they couldn’t protect us if those with ‘differing opinions’ might resort to violence. 

That’s all I have for today. Having to observe and record the increasing destruction of our society gives me no pleasure whatsoever. Have a good day.