September 30: Does The Sun switch to Cameron matter?
Does it matter that
The Sun has decided to back the Conservatives at
the next election? It's undoubtedly stirred up a lot of discussion.
I agree with a lot of what Professor Tim Luckhurst
at the Centre for Journalism at the University of Kent said
about the matter today when I interviewed him.
(I declare an interest here - I am an occasional lecturer in the
department. Although I hasten to say that's not why I agree with
him).
His view is that The Sun's declaration of allegiance is now less
important because we live in a world where the way in which we
consume media and are influenced by the media is much more diverse
and diffuse.
Yes, The Sun is still read by six million people every day but
as Tim says it is arguably now a much smaller fish in a pond
surrounded by even smaller fish so far as newspapers are
concerned.
Daniel
Hannan the Conservative MEP makes a similar point in
his blog, too, writing: "The Internet makes monopolies untenable,
and editors can no longer deliver “their” readers, any more than
party leaders can deliver “their” voters."
It's a point echoed by Tony Blair's former spin doctor
Alastair Campbell who wrote witheringly on his
blog: "It is
a big media story, and the media love nothing more than a big media
story."
When The Sun backed Labour in 1997, it had more of an
impact largely because the paper was perceived to be
switching from its traditional allegiance to the
Conservatives. Now it seems to have returned to that allegiance and
it's not so dramatic. If the Daily Mail came out for Gordon, then
that'd be a story.
The other point is that while newspapers may have
influence they do not have power. A bit like backbenchers,
you could say.
Still, Labour will be miffed. But I'm not so sure that Gordon
Brown has played it that well in various interviews about the issue
today, accusing Sky of being propagandists for the
Conservatives.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It is rare to find a headteacher in Kent prepared to put their
head above the parapet and speak out against the selective system
in the county.
I was at a fringe meeting at the Labour party conference
yesterday organised by the campaign group Comprehensive
Future.
On the panel was Vanessa Everett, the head of Mascalls School in
Tonbridge, who made some powerful points about what she regards as
the damaging impact that selection has on those who do not attend
grammar schools and the work that non-selective schools have to do
to restore confidence and self-esteem among pupils who wrongly
perceive themselves to have "failed" by not "passing" the test.
One of the interesting points she made was her view that the
earlier timing of the 11-plus test has not helped primary schools
in their efforts to improve their Key Stage 2 results.
Her view is that pupils who now learn whether they have a place
at a grammar school much earlier (about now) than they used to
simply turn off for the rest of their Year Six and stop working as
hard for SATS they take in May.
The net effect of this, perversely, is felt in grammar schools
as much as elsewhere. "We have grammar schools taking children in
whose attainment levels are way below average," she said.
She also suggested that one of the impacts of moving the test
forward to late September had been to worsen unauthorised absence
levels because parents who had insisted on coaching their children
with tutors throughout the summer were often taken out of
school for a holiday the moment they knew that they had got a place
at a grammar school.
"Their parentstake them out of school for the holiday they could
not have in the summer because they were being coached for the
11-plus," she said.
While the meeting drew a large-ish audience, I couldn't help
noticing that none of Kent's Labour MPs attended.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On the same issue, I hear how, at a meeting of education
officials and others to consider the Kent secondary schools on the
Government's "National Challenge" initiative, there was some wry
musing on the curious symetry about the number of grammar
schools Kent has - 33 - and the number of so-called under-achieving
secondary schools has - 33.
Wednesday, September 30 2009