Some of the most exciting things happening in Scotland are happening online. That's what I took from the Political Innovation Camp today at The School of Infomatics in Edinburgh. I already knew one of the main speakers, Pat Kane rather well. It was great to put faces to some bloggers I hadn't met in person, such as James MacKenzie of Better Nation, Peter Curran of Moridura, David Farrer from Freedom in Whisky and of course the redoubtable Caron of Carons Musings. Also caught up with an old colleague from the Herald, David Milne, who is now heading STV's hyperlocal service. It was heartening to meet the young women behind mypolice.org, a tool that allows the public to give their feedback to the force in their own area.
I met some new people who impressed me greatly, such as Peter Geoghegan, an Irish writer living in Scotland who edits Political Insight and another Irishman, Mick Fealty of Slugger O'Toole, the Northern Irish politics, community and culture blog who organised the event along with Paul Evans. Slugger O'Toole is a blog that manages to engages all sides of the debate in Northern Ireland, which is quite an achievement - and something we have not managed to replicate in Scotland to date. Much of the discussion was about this - whether we could have a Scottish hashtag that would link disparate online content - like a permanent scotlandspeaks, the twitter campaign that tried to get Scotland's voice heard during the last general election. At the PI Camp, there was a lot of enthusiasm for establishing so-called "aggregated sites" . It seems to me that this desire to create online communities is already happening naturally. Like minded bloggers are grouping together on aggregated sites such Bella Caledonia and Better Nation. Two sites, Scottish Review and newsnetscotland take this further and strive to create online sites that hope to compete with the mainstream. Kenneth Roy at Scottish Review has broken stories. Or these sites highlight news overlooked elsewhere - such as newsnet's campaign on the anti Scottish episode of Any Questions. A couple of weeks later I was invited on the Newsweek on Radio Scotland to discuss the rise of anti-Scottish outbursts.
As I pointed out in the PI Camp plenary session, many bloggers in Scotland have gone online in frustration at the mainstream media failure to engage positively with the independence debate. At least a third of Scots favour full independence and more than half, according to polls, think real economic power for the Holyrood will help Scotland out of recession. Despite this, and the Campaign for Fiscal Responsibility attracting many high profile names, our public discourse continues to frame the debate in UK terms, seldom challenging the block grant system or exploring alternatives.
Bloggers challenge this manufactured consensus. But as a mainstream journalist who now blogs as well, I worry that online activists only reach others with similar views. Established broadcast and print media offer entertainment, fashion, sport, business, breaking news that attracts a wide spectrum of people including, crucially, voters who have yet to make up their minds. And while many of my independista facebook friends would claim that the MSM is completely without merit, it is material generated by these newspapers and broadcasters that they share and comment on. Often this is original material that you need professional journalists to create. The Scotsman, for example, has devoted a lot of resource to exposing the tram debacle in Edinburgh. Newsnight Scotland was the first outlet to think of interviewing Professor Joe Stiglitz and asking specifically about oil in a Scottish context. And Newsweek, the Radio Scotland Saturday morning show, ran a long interview with Professor Andy Hughes Hallett explaining how Scotland was subsiding England. The reason we know about Stephen Purcell et al, and the scandal about Strathclyde Partnership for Transport, is because my previous paper, The Sunday Times Scotland, put a lot of resources into exposing Labour clientism in greater Glasgow.
Now, of course, the Sunday Times Scotland has been effectively closed down. Other newspapers struggle to keep afloat. Circulations continue to shrink with alarming speed. Investigative journalism, in particular, requires resources. Scotland does not have an philanthropic organisation such as the American propublica which funds public interest reporting. When activists complain about newspapers simply "reprinting political press releases", as can happen, it is often a matter of resources as much as prejudice. A hard pressed reporter with an FOI handed to him on a plate, especially if it's "exclusive" and makes for a strong headline, will likely take it to his or her newsdesk. Real, self generated stories take much longer. They require you to speak to lots of people in the first place, really get to know the subject and spend hours on research. They might also require you to ditch the story given to you by a political contact when you realise that the facts just don't stack up...
Bloggers unhappy with the perceived bias of the mainstream media shouldn't crow too loudly about the troubles of print though. We desperately need more quality public discourse in this country. Can we afford to lose the space we do have? Where are the online spaces that attract Scots who are not necessarily political junkies? Some of the self described young geeks I spoke to at the PI camp yesterday confessed they got a lot of their news from the BBC website and The Guardian - but they also complained that they couldn't get coverage for their own digital projects in the shrinking Scottish media...a vicious circle. If we get more news from UK wide sources, do we risk becoming Scotlandshire, North UKania...?
I don't think this will happen, phew! I left the PI Camp today feeling pretty optimistic about the future of blogging and political social media in Scotland. Ideally the rise of aggregated sites would be backed by investment to allow them to break more original stories and attract readers from outwith the politically consumed classes - Huffington Post is a good model. It set out to create an online liberal voice for the US but used entertainment to help drive traffic. Even without this largesse, I predict the blogosphere in Scotland will increase its influence, a view shared by the majority of those at yesterday's event. The thing about all media, old and new, is that it is interdependent. Currently, the agenda of newspapers feeds into radio and television. If the circulation of newspapers continues to decline, bloggers and online aggregated sites will become more powerful influencers. The evidence? A man from the BBC checking out the PI Camp, keen to meet as many bloggers as possible. I already get invited onto the radio occasionally as a result of Go Lassie Go. Social media helps too. The simple act of sharing a story creates a buzz that cannot be ignored. Content producers will take note.
At the PI Camp, Peter Geoghegan was very informative on how independent online commentary already shapes the agenda in Ireland, where economists have taken to the blogosphere to explain the financial crisis. In Scotland, we have a good recent example of blogpower re the Dimbleby debacle. The Question Time from Glasgow which excluded Scottish discussions caused immediate anger that was articulated first through the blogosphere by myself, Gerry Hassan, Scot Goes Pop and Alex Massie among others. I predict that such incidents will become more common. The traditional media are beginning to understand the power of the blogosphere, and cannot ignore what it is telling them.The rise of aggregated sites will accelerate this. If such sites could attract enough investment to fund some original journalism...well who knows where it might go...
Iain I was on Radio Scotland that morning and I think you are being a bit unfair on them. There were dissenting voices among the presenters on GMS and Kaye Adams had her tongue firmly in her cheek when she talked about people ie me - being curmudgeonly. I think she said most of the facebook comments were from people unimpressed with the royal hoopla. Newsnight Scotland the night before rightly concentrated on the budget while Newsnight England devoted space to the nuptials. Even the Today programme on Radio Four was over the top. So on this occasion I think the BBC in Scotland struck a less hysterica tone than London. At least the bits I heard.
Posted by: joanmcalpine | November 22, 2010 at 04:50 PM
I think that Journalism is gradually evolving away from mainstream media towards new media, although it has some way to go. An example of that is how the William and Katie fairytale was covered recently by BBC Radio Scotland. The Beeb happily did its usual sucking up to the royals whereas waves of apathy and cynicism came through from the public; the presenter feeling pompously superior described these sentiments as "curmudgeonly". Listeners apparently should be insulted if they don't feel the love. How easy it is to forget one is a public service broadcaster.
Posted by: Iain Diamond | November 21, 2010 at 05:31 PM
I wasn't able to attend the event but thank you for this interesting account. I have blogged it here: http://f2cscotland.blogspot.com/2010/11/scottish-blogging-political-innovation.html. As a campaigner against the current official fashion of 'denormalising' smoking (because it legitimises hateful language being used against smokers) I agree that there is much wrong with Scottish media coverage on many levels (e.g. the post by Mary White above: reporters don't ask themselves the most basic questions about whether what they are being told in press releases is true). Whatever our take on party politics this is a bad problem affecting the whole UK, not just Scotland. I enjoyed Peter McColl's account too. Thank you.
Posted by: Belinda | November 16, 2010 at 12:40 PM
Good post from Jo. The SNP is engaged in a campaign of conversion which is not well served by the severe ill feeling that exists for instance between Labour and the SNP. I first stood for election (council elections) in 1966 in Lanarkshire and there was a great deal of good natured rivlary between Labour and the SNP at that point. Both sets recognised that the other had a decent cause and there was a considerable common feeling on a lot of things - including a strong pro-independence sentiment among many Labour activists. Many didn't believe it was a likely option however. Then the SNP advance in Labour heartlands provoked hostility which was deliberately stirred up and encouraged in defence of the union.
I first met it at Winnie Ewing's victory at Hamilton at which I was a counting agent. The looks of the Labour activists' wives could have killed.
The media is our final frontier. With an uncorrupt press and media we would be within touching distance of independence.
But don't imagine that is our only barrier. The nearer we get the more unscrupulous will be our opposition and the final stages may be the most dangerous.
On the media issue the way ahead is online radio. You can talk to the whole world through broadband.
Posted by: David McEwan Hill | November 16, 2010 at 12:56 AM
I am wary of attacking individual journalists and think this trend could make matters worse by putting them on the defensive when previously they were neutral. Those concerned about bias would be better concentrating on measurable things rather than their reaction to to this or that interview. (a good example would be the amount of time devoted to the coverage of the SNP conference). The only way you will prove bias is if you commission a neutral academic survey). While you may dislike Gordon Brewer's style, he does tend to give everyone the same sort of treatment. Sometimes he cuts to the core of the issue - which I like - on other occasions he labours the same point and we learn nothing. He was bested quite spectacularly by Michael Russell recently, but he had the good grace to laugh about it in the end.
I think that lack of time and space given to coverage of Scotland on television means Newsnight Scotland is like a fishbowl and I understand why people get angry if they feel it misrepresents them. If we had a greater variety and texture of coverage it wouldn't matter so much. You also need to be aware that the media sees its role as challenging politicians and government policy. The area where we have the strongest case in proving impartiality is the complete failure to explore the independence/more powers debate. It is favoured in degrees by a majority of the population, but this is not reflected - ever - in the lines of questioning. That means, by default, the lines of questioning are pro-unionist.
Posted by: joan mcalpine | November 15, 2010 at 04:34 PM
Oops, I mentioned Campbell of NS, I meant Gordon Brewer (although Campbell was just as bad when he was there!)
Posted by: Jo | November 15, 2010 at 04:03 PM
I think we're forgetting that many homes are still not connected to the internet and that not everyone has the time to surf around looking for news sites. The vast majority still rely on daily newspapers and news radio and tv broadcasts.
The huge issue for me, whether we talk internet or mainstream media, is the failure of both types to simply do what they are meant to do and report the news. What they actually do is report their slant of the news politically and that isn't honest. Reporting Scotland, Newsnight Scotland are both good examples of this where the political bias would take your breath away it is so blatant. Thankfully Isabel Fraser has been a breath of fresh air on Newsnight Scotland recently. But look at Campbell! He revels in sneering at others in his interviews, he is utterly rude and his behaviour is simply appalling when it comes to Party politics.
As for the Scottish papers, well, where to start! They are a disgrace. They tell lies constantly and at times they actually choose to not report particular things in order to protect certain Parties. That is shocking. It is actually a form of corruption.
You will get the same sort of bias on line and by all sides politically. I used to regularly visit one site which is pro-SNP (which I am myself) but I was shocked at the hostility and the outright bullying of people who criticised SNP policy even if it was done constructively. One particular bully claimed you shouldn't criticise the SNP unless you were a member of the Party and even then you should do it quietly, not publicly. That is simply absurd. Most voters do NOT belong to political Parties and these idiots ought to realise the impression THEY convey when they bully others and attempt to shoot people down by (wrongly) labelling them as closet Unionists. How must that come over to anyone who isn't sure yet about the SNP? Not good I would say. And the SNP has a lot of people to reach yet! These clowns are a great deal of the problem.
Scottish Review is utterly free of political bias and gets into real investigative journalism. It belongs in its own category I would say and I haven't seen anything else on line to touch it tarnished as many sites are by the usual types who are simply there to indulge in political sniping.
Posted by: Jo | November 15, 2010 at 04:01 PM
Thanks Craig,
I disagree with you. If you look at a breakdown of the Daily Mail readership you'd find they didn't all hold the same views as the paper. I don't know the cover price off my head, but in Scotland when it first made a sale drive a lot of the new readers were women attracted by the features. Setting aside the ghastly philosophy that drives it, the writing style has a different tone from the red tops tabloids ie it doesn't assume its readers are totally stupid. That it managed to do this while still maintaing a very strident position on most matters is one of life's great mysteries...
Ditto the "quality Scottish press" it will be bought be people of different political persuasions and none who believe that buying a Scottish paper will inform them of what is going on. There is also a loyalty factor. But as we both know that is increasingly weak.
Lastly and most importantly is the broadcast media that reaches the widest spectrum of people of all - both on radio and television and online. The fact that this media in particular doesn't give enough space to intelligent examination of Scottish public affairs, culture, politics et is a real problem. I would love to think that this blog attracted the range of people that watch Reporting Scotland or turn to the BBC Scotland website, but I fear that may not be the case...
However as I try to get across on the blogpost, we are in transition and nobody knows how things will turn out. The blogosphere is a vibrant place in Scotland but disparate and niche at the same time. The MSM still plays an important role in creating content...but the landscape in five years time might be totally different
Posted by: joan mcalpine | November 15, 2010 at 10:57 AM
Joan, as always, a good post but it was interesting to see you talk about bloggers just sticking with people who reinforce their own beliefs/have similar beliefs. While I think you are right, the very same charge could be made at the mainstream media which, for all of its wonders, hardly does much different - or did I miss the Daily Mail being nice to immigrants?
Posted by: Craig McGill | November 15, 2010 at 01:45 AM
I was down to go but am laid up with flu. After reading your blog even more annoyed I didn't make it. How many MSP's attended or councillors or MP's? I fear we are just voices in the ether at the moment ,a little incestuous, a touch navel gazing. I hoped to hear how policy could be influnced and representation widened by the use of MSM and was interested in the suggestion of examining taking back land into community ownership, how did that go down?
Posted by: Nick Johnston | November 14, 2010 at 07:18 PM
Joan, my problem with the Scottish MSM is that even when it takes press-releases, it should be able to do some basic logic.
Take the story about TVs in prisons that is currently making the rounds. It takes nothing more than pressing a few keys on the calculator to see that the fees prisoners will pay for the TVs substantially exceeds the cost. Can you show me any MSM newspapers or the BBC mentioning that little fact? Or that this was a program that was started by Labour which is found out by a simple Google search.
Telling the truth about this story wouldn't have taken anything in the way of resources and was (and is) simply regurgitated to Labour's benefit. So I'm afraid the "lack of resources" excuse doesn't quite fly. Yes, newspapers have a lack of resources. They also have a lack of will to tell the truth, I'm afraid.
Posted by: Mary White | November 14, 2010 at 06:18 PM
It was nice to meet you at the Political Innovations seminar. You've said most of what I wanted to say about the day, Joan, so I must think again about any points. I have already spoken about the apparent low interest at the seminar in YouTube as a vehicle for alternative viewpoints to the MSM (thanks for the abbreviation!) and said a bit about it - with examples - on my latest blog.
Posted by: Peter Curran | November 14, 2010 at 05:06 PM
Interesting as ever Joan. I do feel, though, that you're being too generous to the unionist media. Is the occasional positive item worth all the 'lies, fears and smears' that passes for political coverage in that media? Personally, I believe the unionist media are a 'real and present danger' to Scottish democracy.
Posted by: Hamish Scott | November 14, 2010 at 04:44 PM
As someone who until recently favoured traditional media I found this post extremely interesting. I agree that there are many issues in Scottish politics which do not get the media coverage they deserve, and blogging and social media provides a good outlet.
Posted by: Robin Hall | November 14, 2010 at 02:22 PM
May I be a wee bit shameless and link to my little blog?
http://sheridantrial.blogspot.com/
Posted by: James | November 14, 2010 at 02:04 PM
Excellent exploration of the issues. Many of the frustrations of struggling to get alternative comments into the popular media are repeated in other areas; e.g this week on the relative treatment of tax and benefit 'fraud', 'avoidance' and 'evasion'. For some us these sets of issues - independence, inequality and inequity - are not unrelated. Having a space where they can be discussed with some intelligence across particular divides seems fundamental to moving on.
Posted by: Mike Danson | November 14, 2010 at 01:35 PM
Interesting post showing off the ever widening range of quality bloggers here in Scotland. Refreshing to see such positive attitudes towered the genre as opposed to those in mainstream media who seem to revel all too often on knocking the individual writer who can, and does, have much to contribute to the wider debates in Scotland and further afield. Commentators such as Peter should be lauded for their passion and hugely enjoyable journalism. Having such gatherings seems a worthy way to explore future possibilities.
Posted by: Shaun Milne FRSA | November 14, 2010 at 12:07 PM