Over the weekend, Paul Staines, also known as the blogger Guido Fawkes, caused serious damage to the Labour Party by exposing emails that detailed plans for a partisan, sleazy website through which damning (and unsubstantiated) smears on the Conservative Party would be published, in order to destabilise them in the run up to the elections.
Did you get that? A blogger was responsible for this bombshell. On Saturday, I only had access to my blog reader and Twitter, and yet I was able to keep completely up to date with proceedings, which were then reported in much less detail a day later in our regular paper, the Sunday Times. Of course, when negotiating those diverse news sources, I had to think for myself before reaching any conclusions – but that’s no different to when I access the mainstream media, a point which escapes journo Nick Cohen, and too many other people besides.
Daniel Hannan discusses the impact of blogging here, and makes an interesting point about how the Left have, as of yet, failed to effectively adopt an uncontrolled (and hopefully uncontrollable) medium. I tweeted the link for others to read, and home edder Ian Appleby made the following point:
"Hmm, disagree with Hannan. Dislike Draper, but he followed lead of eg Dale, Staines etc. in trying to turn blogs into crude, partisan propaganda. I don't see many libertarian bloggers bemoaning the drowning out of independent voices."
But I respectfully disagree. McBride and Draper had a choice, and they screwed up. In order to effectively compete with someone, you don’t need to ape what they do (especially in a free market environment); you only need to do better than them. You certainly can’t blame your (perceived) competitor for your downfall if you choose to follow their lead. Staines, McBride and Draper started from a position of equality of opportunity and thanks to the freedom of the internet could not rely on equality of outcome – the only “equality” that the Left appear to understand or embrace. And so they lost out.
Some commentators appear to be a little confused as to where the real fight is in all of this. As Guthrum points out here:
"Hundal is limited in his political education in that he sees everything as a Right versus Left struggle, he has missed the point, the real struggle today is between Libertarianism and Authoritarianism.
We do not want to be controlled, fined, told what to think, what to drink, what to eat, we do not want a Police State."
Socialism and Fascism are, of course, two sides of the same unpleasant coin. Both of which have unpalatable consequences for everyone, including parents and children.
You don’t have to agree with Guido. You don’t have to approve of his tactics. You don’t have to follow his lead. If you believe in protecting your own freedom as much he does his (and yours by virtue of this, of course) you will be as enthused by the weekend’s happenings as I am. Unlike McBride (funded by taxpayers) Guido is not paid to blog. He does it because he wants to, and because he can. How, or in relation to what, is pretty irrelevant – the fact remains that he has no more backing than do you or I. He’s not drowning out your voice; he is encouraging it by virtue of his existence.
So, in summary, take some advice from social media blogger Chris Brogan, and separate the lesson from your emotions. Think hard about what you personally can do if your freedom is under threat. Because if it’s not in their interests to do so, your elected representatives and the mainstream media aren’t necessarily going to step in on your behalf.
