The AV Referendum and Planet Guardian

H/T Annie

Tom Clark, writing in CiF on the AV referendum – a public vote on whether to change the system for electing the House of Commons which was overwhelming rejected by UK voters despite the support of the Guardian and, evidently, their readers – noted:

“No one ever claimed that Guardian readers were representative of the wider population.”

Well, actually, as we rarely miss the opportunity to point out, the Guardian aspires to be “the world’s leading liberal voice, which seems to suggest that, well, yes, they do see themselves as representative of the “wider population.”

Clark continues:

“But compare the referendum result with the views you expressed in our own survey a couple of years ago, and you could be forgiven for thinking that planet Guardian exists in an entirely different universe.”

Sorry, I have no pony in this race, but I just couldn’t resist the opportunity to note both how out of touch the Guardian elite is with average British citizens, nor Clark’s vivid and apt characterization of the Guardian as an ideological planet far, far, far away from our moral universe.

Categories: Guardian

Tagged as: ,

5 replies »

  1. Well, Adam, I would add that the designation “planet Guardian” by itself is a bit of an overkill.

    Say “asteroid Guardian”? Or, since we are into celestial bodies, perhaps “comet Guardian”?

    Notice how staunchly I kept myself from mentioning man-made space debris…

  2. Hmm, that only works if for some reason one regards “liberal voices” as being something other than those of a minority viewpoint. As pretty much all the evidence suggests liberal views are indeed those of a minority, I don’t see any claim by the Guardian that it represents a mainstream or widespread viewpoint. Indeed, the fact that it fairly clearly does no such thing I one reason I wonder exactly what the need to spend so much time attacking it is.

  3. I wonder if The Guardian will pay any attention to this:

    It is sometimes said by Israel’s enemies that Israel has no constitution. I assume that this is from the British model. But the fact is that while Britain has no written constitution it certainly has a constitution and a constitutional monarch (of some relevance to Jordan, which has not).

    At the simplest if the Bill became law an incoming government could bind successive governments and this is unconstitutional.