The township of 12 people
which sells four million
cans of beer a year
Scotland
in the
heat
Callum, born 100 years ago this week, stood for no half-measures
Tessa Ransford’s anniversary tribute
to her husband
Get SR free in
your inbox three
times a week
Click here
Lockerbie
An overview by Morag Kerr of the Justice for Megrahi Committee
Click here
The Cafe
The Cafe is our readers’ forum. Send your contribution to islay@scottishreview.net
Today’s banner
East End of Glasgow
Photograph by
Islay McLeod
The true motives
for Murdoch’s
change of allegiance
I notice that Kenneth Roy (28 April) totally ignores the motivation that Mr Murdoch’s papers might have had for their switch. While it is possible that Mr Jay [counsel for the Leveson inquiry] was unaware of the Scottish political situation, Kenneth Roy would assuredly not have been.
In 1992 it looked as if the Conservatives under John Major, whom Murdoch supported, might lose the election. However it was unlikely that the Conservatives would make any inroads into Scotland. Ergo Murdoch supports the SNP, not because he believes in them or supports them, but because he prefers to damage Labour and cut their support. Thus in 1997, with Labour on board, the SNP are dropped.
Fast forward to 2007: the Tories gain his pleasure, so, again, the SNP are supported not because of any belief in them, but because it damages Labour. Later strengthening of support for the SNP might be due to Murdoch’s distaste for the British establishment after being disappointed in the BSkyB bid.
Mr Salmond did not need the support of the Sun. He must have been aware of the findings that show that newspapers do not influence political opinion and, in fact, Murdoch, far from being an opinion-former, notoriously follows the trend. But making the switch is a signal of a sort in its own right.
I think there is a perspective missing from Kenneth Roy’s piece, because it ignores what he, with his long experience, has seen regarding Scottish politics and Murdoch, and I think he does himself a disservice because of it.
Bill Wallace
I think that many people in Scotland are in a quandary with regards to how to vote on the matter of independence. Unless some things change, they could very well still be in that quandary in 2014. It’s like so many issues nowadays. Despite TV, newspapers, the internet, the Scottish Review and ‘social media’, the people do not get a clear picture of both sides of an issue and really don’t know what the best thing to do is.
If some knowledgeable person, or persons, could provide the people with a completely apolitical, non-biased analysis of the pros and cons of independence, that would be of great help to many and might ensure that the right decision is made. I guess I’m talking about the sort of thing I thought the universities were supposed to do.
With Kenneth Roy’s incredible knowledge of Scotland – present and past – I feel he has the capability of producing such an analysis. However, as I read his reports, including that on Thursday, I feel he already has a position on the matter and I don’t know if he would be able to keep that sway out of his analysis.
Will the Scottish people ever get straight, unbiased facts regarding the momentous decision they have to make?
Harry McAlister
Ian Petrie
Book a table in The Cafe. Email islay@scottishreview.net
website design by Big Blue Dogwebsite development by NSD Web