ITIS often claimed that the SNP suffers from unfair media coverage, while others claim the Nationalists are simply paranoid. Which is true? Here are a few observations from the past weekend in the middle of a general election campaign.
On Friday the Edinburgh Evening News completely ignored the launch of the SNP's manifesto. On Saturday, BBC's Good Morning Scotland discussed the launch of the manifesto with two "impartial" commentators:
Fiona Ross (a relative of a former late Labour MP) and Charles Whelan (former aide to Gordon Brown). Both concluded that an SNP vote at Westminster was a wasted one.
Elsewhere, the Daily Record trashed the SNP's policy of ridding the country of Trident, while the Daily Mail predicted the Conservatives would gain the SNP seat of Angus and Perth.
Then the Sunday Times claimed in a large pro-Conservative article that a Tory revival in Scotland meant the SNP was in danger of losing at least three seats, while Mail on Sunday readers were treated to Charles Whelan (again), warning of an SNP meltdown in the polls, ignoring recent evidence to the contrary.
The normally fair Sunday Herald published a feature on young voters without apparently managing to find a single young SNP voter, despite the fact that young Scots are more likely to vote for the SNP than any other party.
Media bias or paranoia? You can draw your own conclusions.
Gavin Fleming, 517 Webster's Land, Grassmarket, Edinburgh.
WITH regard to Mr A B Robertson's letter (April 18) about Carolyn Manson, the Labour Party candidate for Argyll and Bute, I have been in her company on several occasions and I have found that she is more than willing to discuss the Iraq war along with other foreign-policy matters. At no time did Carolyn present herself as "a fearless champion" or "a timid party hack", but she listened and responded to the views of local people, who certainly raised important things that were on their minds.
The insulting tone of Mr Robertson's letter suggests to me that he has not spoken to, or had the pleasure of meeting, Carolyn Manson.
F Mehrer, Hanover House, Hanover Street, Dunoon.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article