Mailwatch(ed) Forum

Abernathy wrote: ↑Tue Jul 18, 2023 12:02 am Right, so. Apparently, the Tories are considering abolishing inheritance tax as a desperate bribe to try to hold onto power at the election.

What’s the big deal on inheritance tax, then ? Isn’t it just another variety of capital gains tax? It seems to me that this policy is yet another Tory appeal to naked self-interest and greed. Seemingly, it only applies to about 3% of the population, in any case.

Desperate, desperate stuff, though it’s feeding the radio phone-ins.

It certainly would have benefited a friend of mine, who was left a large house in London by a friend. Paying the IHT was, to put it mildly, a nightmare. In the end the house was gutted to the bare walls and divided into three flats, of which they sold two.

Fully explained here, Abers: https://www.gov.uk/inheritance-tax

Some people have to eke out an existence in London with only one free apartment? Will these nightmares of Broken Britain ever end?

MIriam Cates, of Cambridge University and Sheffield Hallam University here.

I thought elite universities were good and it was the other sought that needed culling.

"The people have gone left! The country won't stand for it!"

If the people have gone Left, how come shiterags like the Fail, Torygraph and S*n haven't gone bust?

Or are the people different from the population?

Tories set to lose all 3 by-elections on Thursday.

I reckon at least 1 idiot will start gobbing off about putting letters in to Brady…

https://www.threads.net/t/Cu1JYXaoAB1/? ... BiNWFlZA==

Andrew Bridgen was the champ at that, but he can't do it any more.

Somerton and Frome won't even be close. The other two might, but each would be awful to lose, because the swing required would be huge in Selby and Uxbridge has a very unusual situation of the government having a local issue to attack on.

Friday morning, I predict Gove doing the circuit, saying it's disappointing but to be expected, voters stayed at home, hardly a ringing endorsement for Labour/LDs, unique situations, message on doorsteps was crack on with the 5 priorities...

Sounds like a job for Greg Hands. Maybe he'll write some letters to Starmer and Davey as well.

Yug wrote: ↑Tue Jul 18, 2023 11:00 am If the people have gone Left, how come shiterags like the Fail, Torygraph and S*n haven't gone bust?

Or are the people different from the population?

Telegraph has gone bust but will remain a loss making plutocrat’s play toy for influence. Advertisers are deserting GB News and give it time for the Sun and Mail to see the cliff edge.
Why do broadcast channels still allow dailies to set their agenda for the day? There’s going to be a new generation of millennial producers who haven’t had newspapers in their lives. Look forward to it.

The Telegraph and Spectator are actually profitable in themselves- it's the wider group that has problems. I know, I was amazed. My guess is that they don't spend very much on news gathering. A load of people following up other people's stories and rewriting press releases would be fairly cheap.

I suppose lots of people still read papers online for free, so you can sort of defend the emphasis on them to some extent. But there ought to be a wider array of blogs and podcasts covered. Maybe there is, I don't know. Because there's no phrase that has me heading for the exit more than "coming up next- a look at tmrw's papers".

When breakfast TV was launched in the 1980s, there was considerable kicking off from the press, which claimed having the news on when people were typically munching their cornflakes and reading the freshly delivered paper would undermine their sales. IIRC as part of a deal struck, the TV shows would take their lead from the press and stick to the more trivial areas. How the press dealt with Radio 4 I don't know. But anyway, you need to remember the context of the time - 4 TV channels, no internet, Ceefax/Oracle the closest to 24 hour rolling news. For most people they had their paper and the lunchtime, evening or 10.00 bulletin.

Anyway, onto the present. Stories break online (or on TV/radio), and are put through the papers which give them their particular political slant, which then get examined on news discussion shows (i.e. most daytime TV that isn't antiques or property). Which means that whatever is being discussed is at least a day old, and has less to do with the facts in the case as how the slant of a story supports an agenda.

News discussion programmes are popular because:

1. They're comparatively cheap to produce.
2. Arguments make for 'good telly', which means secondary views, social media mentions, and greater footprint.
3. They're a great way of sneaking in controversial or offensive opinions, either from guests directly or in a "just what other people are saying" way. And people are suckers for this stuff. Lots of "Hang on, they said what?" or "Ooh, it's all kicking off now!" content.

For all of those points, the papers offer an easy lead-in and just enough justification to cover a thing ("It must be newsworthy, it's been written about in a newspaper, duuuuh!"). And yes, paper reviews are a cheap way of filling airtime.

The Telegraph and Spectator are actually profitable in themselves- it's the wider group that has problems. I know, I was amazed.

Daily Herald went bust in the mid 60s before being snapped up by Rupert and becoming the Sun. Had a large mainly older working class Labour readership who didn’t buy much. Guess elderly Telegraph readers are more well heeled and in the market for new 12 bores and red corduroys.

The Telegraph readership demographic:

https://pressgazette.co.uk/media-audien ... breakdown/#

According to Yougov, more of The Telegraph’s readership is male (69%) compared with other newspapers (49% on average).

More than a fifth (22%) are affluent, with an income above twice the median (compared with 15% of readers of other newspapers).

The Telegraph readers also skew older with 38% of its readership aged 60 and above, compared with 30% for other titles.

The Telegraph has a higher proportion of young readers, with over four in ten (43%) aged between 18–39, compared with 37% on average elsewhere. Fewer readers of The Telegraph are, however, aged between 40–59 (19% versus 32% for other papers).

Readers of The Telegraph are also more likely to say that they use advertising to help them decide on purchases (50% compared to 33% for other newspaper readers). The same proportion said they often pay attention to newspaper adverts, compared to less than a third (32%) of readers of other news brands.

Scrounger with six kids demands more state handouts

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Tue Jul 18, 2023 10:42 am MIriam Cates, of Cambridge University and Sheffield Hallam University here.

I thought elite universities were good and it was the other sought that needed culling.

Response to that from elsewhere:
The author of that post was a full-throated supporter of Gove when in the DfE.

Is that Mr John Bald (Questor) by any chance?

I suppose it was inevitable.
- Sunak's talking shit about universities.
- I suppose you think they're perfect.

Immigrants, aside from asylum seekers, do prove their worth according to government criteria, Nick.

Well, you won't get "technical training" at a certain free school, I understand...