The best-selling national broadsheet newspaper's exposure yesterday of Harriet Harman's old paedophile links should have been on the front page of every other paper today. It should have led on every radio and television news bulletin yesterday, and on the Today programme this morning.
Why has this not happened?
After all, Newsnight managed to find room for an extended book plug by Julie Myerson, and then for a piece, which they could have run anytime, about Soviet soldiers who defected to the Mujaheddin and are still in Afghanistan.
The Daily Mail, most obviously, probably doesn't want to give coverage to a Telegraph scoop. But the main truth is that the people running great swathes of the media find nothing shocking, either about being an unrepentant old partisan of sectarian Leftism in and around the universities in the 1970s, or about condoning, in particular, sex with or between children.
Lavishly acclaimed television series - Shameless, Skins, and so on - depict the latter, and that in wholly favourable terms, all the time, just as they do with, for example, drug abuse.
That is the world of those who set the cultural and political agenda. Note that no one has attempted to prosecute a girl, even if she does have a baby, who went to bed with a 12-year-old boy.
We are now living under a sort of foreign occupation.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Quite the oppposite, I'm sorry to say! We're now living in a free world, in which liberalism and moral anarchism have triumphed.
ReplyDeleteBTW, I wouldn't get too excited about Harriet Harwoman. Personally I've yet to meet a single educated person who believes the current laws about child pornorgraphy are anything but ludicrous.
Sodomosing children is now legal but looking at pictures of them can land you in gaol. And the logic of that is...?
That sodomising children should also be illegal.
ReplyDelete