91热爆

No pity for Darling Alastair from this quarter.

I think you underestimate their (politicians) ability to pull rabbits out of hats.

For instance, Government finds itself a bit 'short' of money .. hmmm, about time we bought VAT into line with the 'European average' and hey-ho, by magic, here is another few billion pounds (to waste).

Nick

What staggers many of us is the 'spoilt brat' looks you and some of your colleagues were wearing yesterday seemingly because Andy Marr got the interview.

As we're all so kee on GB being upfront and honest tell us this - had Brown summoned you to Downing Street on Satursday would you really have looked and sounded so narked yesterday?

So Brown - Chancellor for the past decade - has no responsibility whatsoever for the dire straights we are about to find ourselves? Truly Mr McCavity.

PPS

I am astounded you 鈥溾�emain staggered at the number of people willing to blame media speculation for a story which the PM himself now openly admits was true鈥︹�� yes the PM was considering the issue but who hyped up the possibility of an election in their own interest, the media.

Gordon Brown also considered not holding an election, what percentage of time, news bulletins, pieces to camera and column inches of copy were allocated to each of these two considerations, were they treated equally?

Choices of coverage were clearly biased towards the option of holding a General Election, these choices were clearly made by the media; guilty as charged.

The thing is Nick, the British people distrust journalists like you just as much (if not more in some cases) as the politicians.

Didn't gordon originally say there are two types of chancellor - the unsucessful ones, and the ones that get out in time...

However as he is still around, he may not escape the blame for the massive damage he has done (sold our past, stole our today and mortgaged our future) - bribing foolish people with their own money.

Turning the british working people into dinosaurs to be rendered extinct by the rise of the nimble foreign mammals.

When will the scales fall from peoples eyes so they can see browns terrible financial legacy - our poor poor children.

Nick,

For once the media cannot be blamed.I am equally amazed vast numbers believe otherwise.Regards.

Nick, I couldn't agree more on your last piece, there seems to be a hardcore of labour support (or indeed any parties') who will never accept their chosen party can do something wrong but that it's those feral beasts trying to play games with the innocent politician. Naive is a polite explanation or blind stupidity is another. They would be the same people who think 'spin' does not exist presumably.

You raise a point which I have been struggling with for a long time. The government is arguably extracting more money in tax than at any time in history. Yet the government has no money and public services remain at an embarassing level.

What do they do with all the cash that there's never enough and no improvements ?

Nick - why are you staggered ? You fawn over govt announcements while quiping all opposition policies to insignificance

The Sound Bite is strong with you and yours. It would be amusing were it not for the underlying seriousness of the position

And so it is with Darling. GDP has not grown. DEBT has grown. But he can't admit that. The 91热爆 will once again use 'Evanomics' to demonstrate to the masses that these are golden times.

But you will not report the achingly simple truth that debt is what gave us the recent boom. And that a crash is being prevented

Impartial analysis and the courage to report is the currency of trust. Can the 91热爆 attain that high standard or will the easy spin and sound bites continue to rule editorial policy ?

Dear Nick, I think you have missed a vital point here.

Alistair Darling has to, you say, follow 'a decade of the 鈥渕ost successful chancellor in living memory".'

This was a decade, at the beginning of which, the Global economy was already climbing out of a serious decline.

Lets be realistic, your excellent colleague, Evan Davis, could have over-seen the UK economy in the last ten years.

In fact, any reasonably responsible house-wife/husband would have done a better job with the nation's finances than Mr Brown.

He has over-spent, and under-delivered at every turn.

His lack of real control on the economy, and failure to give the UK a direction, has been camouflaged until the last 12 months, when the Global conditions upon which he has relied have started to fail.

PS. Of course people will blame the media, because they have to blame somebody, and this reaction has been fed nicely into the scenario by the New Labour backed populist press.

"Remain staggered?" i.e can't see how no one would disagree with you. Nice one Nick.

Nick,

Gordon Brown had to say it was his fault over the election otherwise you and Boltoun would keep ripping him to pieces until he admitted it was his fault (even though it's all you lot).

You, Marr, Boltoun and the ITN bloke should show a bit more respect to Mr. Brown. It's not as if he's got a Campbell to defend himself is it.

You moan that when the Blair woman gives you daggers yet all you do his attack, attack, attack.
It's like a conastant media blitz.

Ref: Darling - I would have thought he is merely a puppet at the Treasury. He's probably constantly being "advised" (i.e ordered) by our beautiful Prime Minister.

You may remain staggered, but there are a lot of people in the media hating camp on this one.

The Chancellor may have fed the speculation, and have been responsible for it. But the tone of coverage, the verminous machismo of "bottling it" and creatures like Andrew Rawnsley, means that we get much angrier with the media, than with Brown.

Brown screwed up, played chess and lost his queen. Thats the game, fair enough, but the corrosive stuff for the body-politic is the hysteria you guys whipped up. And Brown isn't the one writing your paycheck.

There are some who say that the recent "non-election" was an ingenious weeze dreamt up by the "briliant" Brown purely designed to extract policy plans from the Tories.

Was it ?

Can Mr. Darling please explain that given the resonance and overwhelming popularity of the Tory tax proposals, why he is now focusing on taxation and inheritance tax?
We've had 10 years of forever rising taxation. I have calculated my families' personal taxation to be nearing 50%.
At this level this isn't tax, it's theft. Especially when I see no fruits for the legalised theft that this government commits.
With tax at this level I'm no longer a citizen but a vassal of the state. It's a real shame we didn't have that Autumn election.....

I hope it鈥檚 not the first time you鈥檝e read all the comments on your blog. One suspects the 91热爆鈥檚 invitation to comment is merely a way of releasing steam and directing hostility into the e-waste basket to avoid those problematic and staff consuming telephone calls.

I鈥檓 staggered that you鈥檙e staggered. You are a breath of fresh air but the 91热爆 in general has its nose so close to the window that a lot of coverage and reporting is little more substantial than the condensation on it.

Blame the media ? Perish the thought !

Let's ask Hutton to convene an inquiry to get behind the truth - and then blame the 91热爆, Sky news, ITN,The Times, the Sun, the Guardian etc

Blaming the media = panic at the heart of government. Let's be honest they have lots to be panicky about these days !

hi nick yes i actaully feel sorry for the new man at number 11, what a leaving present brown left him hey, but you can bet your life on it that gordon had a big say as to whats in today two statements

i can sense that darling will try to paper over the cracks that we can all see is appearing, i can't see many rabbits pulled out of the hat cos money is so tight how do the goverment intend to pay for them? answer more tax, more borrowing which means more debt i guess, just to gain political advantage.

the tories need to be snaping at darling's heels and watch the small print for any "con tricks" he he

Nick,

I assume that Justin has his tongue firmly in his cheek when he attacks the press on the subject of Gordo being a big feartie.

As to Conservative policies being hunted down by Labour, I really do worry that the government is guilty of Identity Theft, hardly an honourable practice in any circumstances. I don't expect Labour to be able to hold out that the proposals by the Conservatives were unfunded, yet their near identical approaches can be funded. All round, a good political editor or analyst should be able to highlight such shenanigans to the embarassment of Labour.

There is also the issue of the political momentum having swung away from a weak PM towards the opposition. Apart from anything else, you seem to have conveniently ignored the decline and fall of the Lib-Dems, and the apparent trend in the marginals. Both factors are surely good news for the Conservatives.

As for the Chancellor, expect to see a clunking fist operating Darling from behind.

All the best.

All this kerfuffle over the election that wasn't is a huge press led diversion. The serious issues are being glossed over or ignored and the government is being allowed to get away with signing away our sovereignty to Brussels and spend even more of taxpayers money on failed projects, the NHS and our underperforming state education system. Nick should be using his talents to pursue these matters.

"At 11:40 AM on 09 Oct 2007, Justin wrote:
Nick,

Gordon Brown had to say it was his fault over the election otherwise you and Boltoun would keep ripping him to pieces until he admitted it was his fault (even though it's all you lot).

You, Marr, Boltoun and the ITN bloke should show a bit more respect to Mr. Brown. It's not as if he's got a Campbell to defend himself is it.

You moan that when the Blair woman gives you daggers yet all you do his attack, attack, attack.
It's like a conastant media blitz."

Emergency, someone call 999, prep the operating theatre, I think my sides are splitting...

I believe someone, I can't quite remember who came out with a great word for what you just said. No, despite trying I still can not remember who said it but the word was "Tosh"

Nick,
I think the success of the Brown government will hinge on how much Alistair Darling (and successors if there are any) does as he is told by Gordon Brown. After all, the relationship between Chancellor and Prime Minister is key. And when was the last time we had a Prime Minister who knew the Exchequer inside out.
Like you I pity Alistair Darling, because he will take the flack when it all goes wrong but not be able to create his own solutions.

Brown has spent the last 10 years buying Public Sector Trades Union compliance vis-a-vis The Warwick Agreement. Now Xmas is coming to an end you will see Trades Union militancy come to the fore as they throw their dummy from the pram as they always do when they don't get their own way. No discipline in the public sector as led poorer service levels and a level of complacency that defies description. A 'job for life' culture will always produce lethargy and unrealistic expectatiions.

Politicians talk about Public sector reform but what they really mean is something quite simple: Weaken the grip of the trades unions who will always oppose any change and revel in the 'our members are public servants how dare you criticise them or put them under pressure'!! Nonsense. Its the people in the private sector who need support not public sector!!

Most politicians recognise that public trust in them is much reduced. Almost no journalists accept that the same is true of them.
Who was talking about an election other than politician and journalists? Who was looking forward to one other than journalists and politicians? Who cares other than journalists and politicians?
That is why people blame BOTH politicians the media. At least politicians have recognised that they have a problem!

Nick,
Why is is always higher or new taxes?
I would like Alistair to be politically honest and say "I need higher taxes to pay off the national debt which I will do by cutting back spending at the same time as raising taxes yet again". I for one am sick of spin, but agree that we must endure high tax for no reward for the foreseeable future. How about a back to basics on taxation for this government? Gordon has run from the people on the EU, and run from the people on the PM mandate, perhaps his "untruth"
chancellor will make a stand and show that this Labour governemnt is more than an unelected dictatorship.

Is it just me who thinks of a certain Blackadder episode whenever Mr Darling is mentioned? I have visions of them all sitting round the cabinet table while Mr Brown says "Yes, Darling" from time to time.

Nick

At least one city council issued a notice to councillors on Friday telling them that all reservations for meeting rooms for the next month had been cancelled because they would be in use by the election team. Hardly the result of idle speculation.

Nick

As in all most of these stories both interpretations are partly right.

Yes the story was based on real issues.

But you and others clearly stoked it up in the never-ending quest to be first and most controversial with the news.

May I suggest that it's time the 91热爆's senior political and economic journalists had a quiet private meeting to think through how the medium is increasingly becoming the message and can cause or exacerbate political and economic problems rather than merely reporting them?

A prime case study might be how your colleagues' reporting of what was initially not a serious problem at Northern Rock helped stoke panic with talk of emergency loans and crisis meetings?

Most of us desperately want to be able to rely on what you and your colleagues say - despite some lapses you are still the most trusted commentators on these issues - but our collective faith has been sorely tested in recent months.

Nick, what a load of grouchy posters today! I'm staggered too that Brown thought he could get away with stirring up the election talk without going through with it. How could he ever have called a snap election in reality though, when there would only have been 3 weeks for us to get our polling cards and for postal votes to be sent out and returned !!! Hardly likely to be a great success while there's a series of mail strikes!
why did no-one ask him about the strike in the press con yesterday? A major crisis about which he has said not a word. Could it be because of the 拢5m the CWU have donated to Labour in the past 6 years?
Keep up the good work Nick

Isn't this a case of the chicken and the egg? Did the media begin speculating about the election because the PM was considering it or did the PM begin considering it because all the media was doing was speculating about it? Without evidence to judge we make our best guess and for me it's the second option. Brown is enjoying his bounce but the news monster needs feeding, let's speculate, and see what happens - either way the media have a story.

Dear Nick,
Putting the merrits of Mr Brown vs. Mr Darling to one side, you rightly point out that Mr Brown and his allies promoted speculation by the press (although whether or not this was intentional is more contentious). But surely the close - one might say symbiotic - relationship between the press and the government is thrown into a very revealing light here.
Take Mr Cameron's reversal of fortune. Is it not the case that much of this apparent turn-around can be explained by the media's reaction to his very effective speach. We have seen few new policies of substance from Mr Cameron, very little is really new at all, only the speach itself - and yet as soon as he managed to re-kindle his stage persona the other week, the glowing press reaction started a 'snow ball' reaction, which grew and grew as it tumbled down the proverbial hillside. The influence on public opinion, as indicated by the polls, has been huge.
If only we could run the events of the past week over once more, minus the frenetic activity of the press spotlight, and observe the poll responses. I suspect that Mr Cameron's snowball may have melted.
My point is, in your own response to earlier comments on this site, you seem unaware of the centrality of the press in shaping the behaviour of both the government and political parties.
You are, are you not, in bed with one another, whether you like it or not?

Nick, can you perhaps find a way to educate Justin and I and give us a perspective on senior 91热爆 hack life

I see you fawning. Justin sees you ripping to shreds. Clearly we see alternative views.

What was Jeremy Paxman doing to the govt spokesperson on the night of the infamous Brown Iraq army announcement ? (the deputy, sub, junior, relief, under dogs body person offered up for sacrifice because Des Browne was understandably too chicken to be interviewed by Paxo)

Can Paxo do the PM monthly press conference for us please ? We might actually get journalism rather than a party political spin

Why is there such a vast diff/deference between you guys ?

Of course Gordon Brown and his rumour mongers have largely themselves to blame for election speculation, but the media played it's part. They didn't want a walk over for Labour; as an 11 point lead in the polls was suggesting, so they fixed it with some truly glowing coverage of the Tory Conference. I have known many Tory conferences in the last 20 years that were just as positive and united, yet traditionally, the media, as is their job, could be relied upon to hunt out dissent in the ranks; any controversy at fringe meetings or moaning from delegates and give it full exposure. Not so this year.

The media want a neck and neck election because it's more exciting, sells more papers, gets higher ratings for political programmes and makes more money. Their coverage of this year's Tory conference made sure that the 11 point lead disappeared and we went into last weekend with a nail biting decision for Gordon Brown. Well the media made the race too close, causing him to step back from the brink and cancel the very thing they wanted; a closely fought election. They scared him off.

Should the media manipulate the situation in this way? Who's running the country, Gordon Brown and his cronies or Rupert Murdoch and his henchmen?

Whilst you protest that the snap election was all Gordon's idea, not something dreamt up by the media; remember that the influence of the media probably decided the outcome more than anyone in the government or the country, so they are far, far from innocent commentators.

It is not only spin but a lot of luck that propels politics and the economy. When luck runs out and the spin is slowing election fever fuels unmitigated speculation and unguarded statements. The Tories may just have accepted 'the third light'!

I too blamed (and still blame) media speculation. After all, the media has been happily reporting "election frenzy" for months, even though the only people getting in a frenzy seemed to be ... the media.

Under the circumstances I'm not surprised Brown "did consider it".

More facts and less speculation would help improve the media's image.

More 91热爆 bias. The only people who use the phrase 鈥渕ost successful chancellor in living memory" are Brown and his pals. There plenty of people who have described Brown as a complete failure and an economic illiterate (with the evidence based on his pension-grabbing, selling off of our gold reserves, and huge taxation). Darling can hardly do much worse!

Fair comment on the media being blamed for the election fiasco.

It was, after all, the Government/Labour Party that created and fuelled this 'speculation' by their actions in, for example, recruiting election staff, asking for Union Call centres to be made available for their use, and employing polling experts from the US to assess their chances (not to mention the PM's visit to Iraq during the Conservative Conference). This programme of events would never have happened without the PM's blessing, and it is he, via his underlings such as Balls, Millibrand, and Alexander, who bears responsibility for this, and not the media.

Hi Nick,

As per some of the comments above, I cannot see how you could be "staggered".

Brown's team may have been responsible in this specific instance. And as such "the media" is not responsible for spinning this specific story.

But the media's brand (including the 91热爆) has been damaged just as much as our politicans - by a decade of spin.

We could spend all day listing examples of where the 91热爆 (and other media institutions)has bent the truth in pursuit of ratings and revenue.

Therefore, you shouldn't be staggered when many of us don't believe our politicians or our political analysts!

This collapse of trust in our public institutions is a big social problem. But it will involve huge effort to restore this trust. I am afraid, for the 91热爆, this means more than sending your independent suppliers on an ethics course.

The news today that the factual programming section of the 91热爆 is to bear the brunt of the proposed cuts does not bode well for progress in this area, does it?

Nick,

I would argue that the problem is not whether the PM was considering holding an election. It's what the media then does with that particular snippet of information. This is a wider problem but is well encapsulated by the 'Early Election' story. Put simply, the media sensationalises and simplifies far too much. Consequently, you deserve the blame when stproes snowball.

The business of government (as well as finance and indeed some aspects of commerce) is now so complex and technocratic that many generalist journalists are simply not fit to provide informed comment on it anymore. As a consequence, stories get simplified; snippets of information get exaggerated; and suddenly, incredibly complex debates get reduced to simplistic sentences which can never hope to encapsulate those debates. Indeed, in some cases, the re-interpretation by journalists becomes (unintentionally) actively misleading.

For example, I'm willing to bet that the 'PM might hold an early election' story was blown up from a few lines fed to journalists by a handful of SpAds and maybe one or two cabinet young guns. And suddenly one or two conversations that the government might have held in private strategising sessions gather public momentum.

At least in this case the question of an early election will have no material impact on quality of governance. However, when the same process is repeated with considerations of policy, it actively detracts from the quality of governance.

In short, I guess what I'm saying is: before you feel tempted to comment next time, you and your fellow journalists should ask yourself: "Do I REALLY understand what I'm talking about?" and "Do I REALLY have full knowledge of this debate?". If the answer to either question is no, do the public a favour and decline to produce a story.

Well said Tony from London! Bring them to justice.

I watched Brown's dismal news conferece yesterday. He sweated and stammered his way through it. I thought that he'd get slaughtered with "the Father of the Nation? More a busted flush" sort of headlines.

But no. He had listened to the views of others but ultimately stuck to his original feeling and then launched his fightback on the Tories. On the whole a 'goodish' performance according Michael Crick on Newsnight. What a disgrace.

My question is this:

Why do we have to pay the License fee? In return we are force fed with a pro-Left/Labour slant on all news items.

Another example, the mention John Redwood's recent report on business competitiveness brought the old footage of him mouthing the words of the Welsh National anthem - 15 years ago. Even the 91热爆 apologised for that one.

Enough is enough. No more License fee. Let the lefties tune in and pay their subscriptions for this wicked propaganda.

Over the next few years, we'll all have to suffer the effects of Brown's economic mismanagement since 2000.

I wonder what the 91热爆 will say about that? Remain loyal to their leader? Or be like Nazi's in Germany after WWII - and vanish into thin air?

I say stop their tap. Let the 91热爆 vanish into thin air!

Alistair Darling has an interesting job. Managing the challenge of a slowing economy and keeping quiet sounds exactly right to me. With reduced focus on consumption and growth, I think, investment and redistribution will get their chance. This rebalancing is overdue and going about it in a calm way sounds appropriate.

Earlier generations were not so wealthy or individualistic but they were happier. Indeed, it was people like that that fought in wars and build world class industries. The Lightening jet, Vulcan Bomber, and Concorde are history but what about tomorrow? Being content and more willing to build alliances isn't an end but a beginning.

I don't see problems. I see opportunities! By investing in new technologies and people, and the slow but developing markets of South America and Africa, a more positive sense of quality and trade might develop. It has to happen at some point and procrastinating only makes it worse. Instead, why not use this economic slowdown in a positive way?

Weeeee! I'm so happy. *bounce* *bounce* *bounce*

Who actually coined the phrase "most successful chancellor in living memory" and what is it attributed to?

Is it his ability to squander obscene amounts of tax-payers money whilst failing to improve services?

Is it is ability to sell over half the country鈥檚 gold at the bottom of the market?

Is it is ability to stealthy raid all our pensions so we will all retire into poverty (public sector excepted)?

Is it is ability to grow the economy mostly on borrowing and off-balance sheet PFI fiddling, for which, sooner or later, we will all pay the price?

I could go on, but you get the picture鈥�

I find it amusing that "Seamus in Bracknell" blames the media for people blaming the media.

鈥淚 remain staggered ..鈥� Is this an attempt to steer our opinion, or do you really not see your transition from fact to opinion?
Examples: Brown statement 鈥業 did consider it鈥� is coloured by your use of 鈥榓dmitted鈥� to appear as something he was ashamed of and driven to concede.
His 鈥業 could have decided earlier鈥� you present as 鈥榓dmitting 鈥� his mistake鈥�. There could be lots of scurrilous reasons for delaying his decision, but you chose 鈥� and maybe believed 鈥� it was error and presented that as fact.
There鈥檚 a difference between fact and opinion, even for 91热爆 journalists. You鈥檙e good, Nick, but not that good.

Nick, you state that "we will have less money than we have enjoyed for years". I don't think this is remotely correct. Economic growth may be slowing but it is still growth.

I am amazed that other posters are astounded that Nick remains staggered that the media was to blame etc etc. The gobsmacking revelation for me is that GB actually appears, finally, to have miscalculated something.

I am surprised at the accusations of Nick's bias. Looking back at Nick's recent blogs, all I see is a healthy sceptical view of the political machinations of all parties.

Go on, do a count. All the blogs look at a news story and dissect the background and cause. Since both Labour and Tories cry foul in equal measure I guess that means there is balance?

The only complaint is that such musings fan the flames of spin.

nick,

remember that a proximity to power dulls the wits! the bbc bias towards labour is painful to watch and how browns cringe worthy speech gained favourable press is staggering. if you could step out of the westminster bubble for a minute you would surely realise that brown is the most lucky and over rated politician in modern times.

Nick has every right to be suprised at the comments posted.

It's not the media who escalated expectations. Brown could have issued a statement to quash speculation but chose not to. This is because he was considering having an election.

It's that simple. The Tories had a better than expected conference and it looks like he chickened out. Dispute it if you want but overall it looks like dithering from the PM.

I dont believe for one minute that its vast numbers. It may be the preponderance of posters on this blog, but I doubt very much if that's the general viewpoint from vox pop.
I'm sure someone will be asking the very same question in the next set of polls , so we will have a much better idea of what the man/woman in the street thinks about it.
Personally I thought Brown's dissembling staggering. The media were only reporting what they had been told. Its not the medias fault , its the Labour Party's fault, and this incident , contrary to some suggesting it being a 9 minute wonder , will come back to haunt Labour.
Everything they do or say is going to be given a great deal more scrutiny by the media, and any spin ruthlessly exposed. As ye sow, so shall ye reap!

Nick,

If you were staggered by the number of comments then you will be dumbstruck if you read the vitriol posted on the business blog for Mr Peston. On his blog there is no indication that he has actually read the comments and had any response. I agree that GB has taken the blame, but he has had a few popular policies unearthed in the process so I am still of the belief that it was an orchestrated ploy that gained momentum and got away from him. Too many people picked it up and started running with it.

Perhaps, and I have said this in other posts and my wife is fed-up with me shouting it at the telly, if the news was reported as the facts and not hyped to the point where concern becomes drama, drama becomes crisis and crisis become catastrophe, then things wouldn't get out of hand.

#25 it isn't just you, I have the same vision, and can also put various other scenes from the same series into government deliverances.

Everytime I hear the name darling I always think of black adder!!!!! Is this what our goverment is changing into a joke?

Nick,

Your proclamation about Brown 'the most successful Chancellor in living memory'.

Is this of your origin or from Brown himself or from what source.

Please clarify, and if of your origin please present the arguments and enlighten us, thanks.

The debate of the role of the press in this is fascinating. I accept the general points of Nick and Jon. Jon speaks of a snowball which is very often started by the press or if not started by the press then turned into an avalanche! There are good reasons Nick why folks reach such knee-jerk conclusions about the press in events such as these. In one sense Nick is right that Brown of course could have ended the speculation. But the 'blame press speculation' accusation has to be put in a context; the general ploy of the british press is to let events such as these explode. The press always wins when that Happens. People switch on the news, buy the papers etc. But Brown AND David Cameron are more to blame for this snowball - only its what Cameron wanted wasn't it!? Brown to be boxed into a november poll only to chicken out!

Distraught at the lapse back into Blair type spin. The spin doctors wind up the media then theor bosses say it was all 'tosh' and 'speculation.'
Let's have a 'Bonfire of the Spinners.'

Nick Robinson can't be as naive as he's claiming to be if he's the 91热爆 political editor (he's 'staggered' about everyone blaming the media for Brown's phoney election). Brown was obviously thinking about it, but the media fanned the flames because they feed on stories. The media are so much less providing a public service these days and instead seem to want to be in the entertainment industry. Unfortunately, although Robinson is a reasonable reporter, his halo looks completely out of place. Get real and stop treating us like idiots please.

As it is Nu / Old Labour - who cares - in power then it will be MORE Taxes - covered up, spun, but hey LOOK past the small print as always with this lot - could be another good day to bury bad news.

The media cannot be blamed.
I think it comes down to two things.
Firstly, these people are clearly slavish admirers who can not accept reality.
Secondly, to be fair, many in the press have not taken the opportunity at open goals or held him properly to account so the fall has understandably come as something of a shock.
Case in point. Only a furious Adam Boulton, when excluded from "the announcement" asked Jackie Smith "what these big decisions" over the handling of foot and mouth and terrorist threats actually were?
Extra security at airports for afew days after?
Not paying for "the pipe"?
I won't insult your intelligence. You know exactly what I mean.
He stood around looking grave.
Seems to be his response to this aswell.

The part of the fuss I can't understand is the aftermath of the announcement on Saturday.

Brown and co had made it clear they were considering an early election, then the considering ended when they decided against it, for whatever reason. How is this a 'debacle' (The Guardian) or a 'considerable embarrassment' (Nick)?

鈥淧ersonally I admire a politician that doesn't automatically dismiss every opposition demand.鈥�
How long did Brown need to make a simple decision?? He dithered, waited to see the polls after the Tory Party Conference, saw that he wouldn鈥檛 win and bottled it. Personally I can鈥檛 admire a 鈥渓eader鈥� that is incapapable of making decisions.
鈥淧ersonally I admire a politician that doesn't rely on a knee-jerk reaction.鈥�
See comments above!
鈥淚t was media speculation that turned the possibility of an election into the expectation of an election.鈥�
The media merely speculated and then pressed Clown for a decision. Naturally the possibility of a General Election is going to be big news and generate hype. It is the media鈥檚 role to report on this 鈥� the public鈥檚 expectations may have been hightened by this possibility but it was Clown鈥檚 role to confirm or end the speculation. He couldn鈥檛 and has made himself look a complete tool!

The thing which I find most distressing about this is the continued myth of 'the most successful chancellor'.

He raided our private pensions.

He's spent a fortune on the NHS but lacked the sense or courage to require improved service in return.

He's given in to the public services on pensions while the rest of us have to save and save until we're 70 to have a decent retirement.

He's made best use of the preceding tory policies and then ridden the wave of global growth while managing not to do too much more damage.

He's overseen a near doubling in the size and complexity of the UK tax code, reducing our competitiveness.

He's raised taxes of every kind except income tax, reducing our net incomes while making us increasingly less competitive in the world economy.

... and this is described as 'success'. The only and obvious explanation for all of the above is that the majority of people in this country don't understand the issues, don't care about them or both.

The only things I can reasonably give him credit for are giving the BoE independence and his 5 economic tests which have kept us out of the Euro.

If I could have the government change one thing it would be to have them insist on getting value for money for our taxes rather than pandering to unions and public service workers at every turn.

I have to speak in your defence Nick. I too am staggered at this apparently widely held belief that the election furore was somehow a media creation. Are people really so naive as to think that Brown had no control over it? He could have sent out a lackey to make a thirty-second announcement and killed it all stone dead. He didn't, because he couldn't make up his mind one way or the other. It's hardly rocket science, is it? I truly wonder at the number of people with red-tinted glasses in this country...

Mind you though, a grey uninspiring man suddenly becomes Chancellor and within 18 months he's the PM. Ring any bells??
What odds on Darling as Labour leader if Brown gets a bashing in the polls???

As a professional with worldly experience, Nick should not be surprised. We the people always need a scape goat, whether it is politicians or journalists. For, in our infinite wisdom, we will always vote for those who tell us the most lies, or buy the papers with the most sensational stories, only to blame politicians and journalists later when the truth is out. Who was it who said a people always deserves its government (and its journalists)?

The current inclination of politicians to suggest that media speculation is the problem only demonstrates that the problem is in fact the politicians. "This has been got up by the media" is rapidly becoming a default knee-jerk response, the obfuscation de choix, to anything that looks a little bit too close to the real truth or a bit too tricky to answer or debate.

Unlike Nick Robinson, I'm not staggered at the volume of blame heaped on the media. For those who do the heaping it's an easy way to wriggle out of any tight corner: it consumes time in an interview, limiting that available to address anything of substance; it fragments the meaning of the question which some politicians believe will confuse the audience (fat chance); and it is often their way of leading up to delivering a well-known mantra.

It's embarassing to hear our leading politicians blundering about in the Goebbelsphere. That politics is a difficult and rough trade is accepted. But that is no reason to accept anything but the highest integrity in what its practitioners actually say. As the Reichsminister demonstrated, you can hide the truth by repetition of a big lie up to a point, and for a time, and that lie can even appear as a twisted form of reality. But real people live with real reality and at the moment it's that, more than the battling media itself, which is going to unmask the truth.

Give it time. But stand by your beds as the climate changes and show no mercy when the twisters and bottlers are on the back foot, as they assuredly will be in the not too distant future.

Hmm...

I was actually being serious.

There was a time when news meant telling us what had actually happened. Today the various broadcast media are so desperate to be faster than the opposition that most of a news bulletin is "here is what we expect to happen" (or more likely what has been leaked in advance) instead.
With the exception of unexpected disasters very little is in the past. I fully agree with the comment that I would like to see "fact", "speculation" and "analysis/opinion" identified as such and kept separate.

The media may well have reported the possible election non-stop, but previous party conferences have not seen any such activity. Why? Because there was never any suggestion by the government of the day that there might be an election. This has been entirely brought on by Brown and his supporters because they thought that they could win with a bigger majority than Blair. When they realised that this was unlikely they should have quashed the speculation immediately. What they ought to realise is that a lot of the electorate feels that 10 years is too long for any party to remain in power and it's time for a change anyway. Also, Iraq still hasn't gone away and remains, I believe, one of the most shameful episodes in our country's history. I have never voted Conservative, but I would now.

Will Darling be questioned about the 拢7 billion, blown on this government's illegal war in Iraq? That ort of sum would provide quite a few nurses, teachers, schools.......but hey, all we'll get is more stealth taxes!

Gordon is just like the Grand Old Duke of York

The grand old Duke of York,
He had three hundred and fifty three MP's.
He marched them up to the top of the hill
And he marched them down again.

And when they were up, they were up;
And when they were down, they were down.
But when they were only halfway up,
They were neither up nor down!

and this is just about typical for this government. They spent it and there's nothing left for when times get hard so they do not know where to go.

Nick, an eloquent journalist you are, as are others in the political reporting arena, but this recent `frenzy` is seen by many as nothing short of fanaticism.
The slightest prospect of an election was `stoked up` to what can be describe as a media `feeding frenzy`.

You say you remain "staggered" at the number of poeple blaming media speculation, this is surely the case...the media through caution to the wind and gorged themselves to the point of overload. Most people I discussed this with agree that the media factored this in to `orbit`.

Interesting that Nik and.or the moderators didn't approve my earlier comment asking if his ourtage at the nature of Brown's announcement would have been as strong had HE got the interview and not Andy Marr.

Well said, Nick. Those who criticise the media ought themselves to get their facts right. The truth is, it was the Labour Party which was responsible for this speculation, along with Gordon Brown鈥檚 advisers and government ministers. Jack Straw admitted as much on the Today programme when he accepted that the media - in his words - had not dreamt it up, and that the government had certainly considered an election. What鈥檚 more, all those busy talking one up could easily have discouraged it. But they chose not to for their own reasons, thereby continuing the election frenzy.

A lot of people have nailed the media on this one. I'm not expecting a great rush of humbleness but the Prime Minister has set a good lead and I'd like to see some admission from the media that they had a part in drumming up the frenzy and manipulating public opinion.

If there was ever an argument against a free press, this is it. The media ego twisted their freedom into full-throttled license, and if that doesn't cause a pause for thought I don't know what will. It's noxious in its own way as the excess of violent drunks and private equity.

This has been an unseemly affair for everyone but I remain confident that sanity will prevail and lessons will be learned. In this way a disaster becomes an opportunity and broken Britain takes one small step towards fixing itself. It's not much but it all helps.

A couple of thoughts:

Firstly, was Justin actually being serious in his post?, I cannot believe he really thinks that Gordon is being savaged, the man is lucky that the press keep letting him off the hook.

Nick, you are 100% right with your astonishment, the problem is that Labour have had 10 years of being able to spin there way out of each mess, however, this time the chickens came home to roost, which I for one find hilarious!.

I too endorse what one of the posters asked, who are these nameless sources, let's have more transparancy and name them, all to often this government hides behind sources who make statments and then deny the statements once they are proven to be typical Labour spin.

As for Gordon being the most successful Chancellor in living memory, I can only laugh at this obvious falsehood, the man will be judged in about 20 years to have been the main reason why so many people are still working, it will become clear once people start retiring that their pension funds will not be able to support them, this man is the most incompetent Chancellor ever.

Saintly PM savaged in rabid jouno-frenzy!!!

Smug Gordon McSpin (eigth avatar of Vishnu) (Master of economics) (sufferer of amnesia) etc. etc. is equally staggered at the number of people blaming media speculation!!!

Smoke and mirrors, Nick!!!

Question. What is happening unoticed and unreported upon the back-burner whilst we are otherwise.....

Keep up the good work Nick.

I wish you would stop repeating the Labour line that Gordon Brown was "the most successful chancellor in living memory". He wasn't. He had a fantastic inheritance from the Conservatives, who, at great political cost to themselves, sorted out the fundamental economic problems this country faced. All Brown did was go on a spending spree that he funded through stealth taxes and borrowing. That is not success. The proper measure is the competitiveness of the UK economy, which is a great deal worse than it was ten years ago.