Andrew Gilligan: more sock-puppets found

Further reports are coming in of Andrew Gilligan making comments about his articles while pretending to be someone other than himself.

I’m waiting to see a firm denial from Gilligan. When you’re ready, Andrew….

Meanwhile, bloggers who suspect that they may be a victim of these shenanigans may want to check their stats/back-end for visits from ‘Associated Newspapers Ltd’ (and/or the IP range 195.234.240.0 – 195.234.243.255).

UPDATE – Dave Hill challenges Gilligan on sock-puppeting on the Guardian website, prompting this ‘denial’ involving comments made under the ‘kennite’ profile, made using Gilligan’s usual profile:

andrewgilligan

Nov 03 08, 4:06pm

Dave,

Kennite is my partner. Is that allowed? I’ve always been perfectly happy, as you acknowledge, to point out the shortcomings in your journalism under my own name. Even by the standards of the Ken Left, it strikes me as more than usually bizarre to accuse me of concealing my true views about our former mayor and his online fan club.

It’s also good to see such a sure sense of priorities. On the day of a major mayoral policy launch about a trivial subject like knife crime, you’re focusing on the issues that really matter.

Andrew

The ‘fascist’ tag is pretty subtle, but there’s a clear attack on Hill, and the “Don’t you have anything better to do (than catch me cheating)?” tactic is textbook.

And, of course, there’s the statement that ‘kennite’ is a partner, which isn’t quite a denial.

Life partner? Business partner? Did ‘Kennite’ post the comments or did A.G. post the comments using their profile?

And this does nothing to explain the trail of anonymous comments he has left in his wake elsewhere.

UPDATE – Behind the bluster you will find long silences, careful words and few denials from Andrew Gilligan. This thread is now officially interesting. Beware of trolls.








Posted in The Political Weblog Movement | 3 Comments

Election night: a few notices

1. On election night, I’ll be hanging around over at Liberal Conspiracy and chatting/live-blogging as time allows.

2. Early in the evening, I plan to kill time by watching Blazing Saddles instead of coverage. I doubt I’ll need to change gears on the resulting commentary.

3. The fight always gets dirtiest on the eve of an election (example), so watch your step and be careful what you give precious oxygen to.

4. At some stage, you’ll be needing this. Keep a link handy.

Cheers all.








Posted in UK General Election 2005 | 1 Comment

David Cameron (hearts) Rupert Murdoch

And to think that it was only a fortnight ago that the big story was toff Tory-boy Cameron and his toff bean-counter Osborne having secret meetings on the yachts of the super-rich, with the latter being urged to shut the hell up by the servants of Murdoch.

After all, it just wouldn’t do to reveal that Murdoch plans to have as much influence over that Tory leader as he did over the last Tory leader Prime Minister:

Guardian – Memo shows how Blair aided Murdoch: A newly disclosed Downing Street memo has revealed how Tony Blair helped Rupert Murdoch overcome an official investigation which was jeopardising one of his big investments. It shows that Blair, while prime minister, immediately ordered his top officials to help the tycoon who was frustrated that a potentially lucrative scheme was being blocked by a long-running European commission investigation. Blair told the media magnate that “he was instinctively sympathetic to what Murdoch was aiming to achieve”. The tycoon eventually won approval for the plan. BSkyB had teamed up with other big companies to develop an interactive scheme in which people could shop and manage their finances through their televisions. The memo is the first to be disclosed under freedom of information legislation documenting the contents of meetings between Murdoch and Blair. Blair has been accused of granting political favours to Murdoch in return for support from his newspapers; Lance Price, a former Downing Street spin doctor, said Murdoch seemed to be one of the four most influential people in the administration.

[OK, move along, nothing to see here, just a media tycoon wanting to help the little people to manage their finances.]

There was even some talk at the time on many Conservative weblogs about how desperately unfair the BBC had been in their attempts to ‘keep the Obsborne story going’ (example).

But last week things took a suddenly turn sideways as the poor, struggling, put-upon tabloids somehow managed to make that story an irrelevance overnight by giving the BBC a monstering with some good old-fashioned fabricated outrage.

But I’m sure David Cameron is a good man and above an*….

Oh, sorry. My mistake. Turns out he’s an opportunistic twat and a hypocrite after all.

Here he is writing exclusively for the Scum today:

The Scum – Bloated BBC out of touch with the viewers: The BBC has lost touch with the values of the people who support it through the licence fee. How could anyone who works at an organisation that prides itself as socially responsible possibly have approved broadcasting the sick telephone calls made by Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand?

Way to howl with the wolves, Captain Custard. You’re a real man of the people.

(I wonder if David Cameron shares Nadine Dorries’ recent socialist leanings; it seems she wants to carve these ‘bloated’ salaries up and hand them out to struggling families.)








Posted in Rupert 'The Evil One' Murdoch | Comments Off

An open thread

Just in case anybody wants a word. You know; to me and not about me. Cheers.

(Be prepared to be left waiting. Indefinitely. That’s how the pros do it… or so I’m led to understand.)








Posted in The Political Weblog Movement | 2 Comments

Gosh, I wonder where Nadine Dorries learned this trick:

Lib Dem Voice – The curious case of Nadine Dorries’s website traffic: …the claim of 800,000 readers (or any reasonable variation on the term ‘readers’) looks to be wrong. I twice contacted Nadine Dorries’s office asking for an explanation or correction, once by email and once by phone, but have not received any response

1. Perhaps Mark could ask Nadine a question about her claims. On her ‘blog’ that doesn’t allow comments.

More below the fold ————————————->

Continue reading








Posted in The Political Weblog Movement | 1 Comment

Sock-puppeting: it’s a mug’s game

The Tory Troll appears to have caught Andrew Gilligan sock-puppeting. (via)

The part that really stings is the link to the ‘kennite’ profile, and comments like this.

Ouch.

UPDATE – Hahahahahahahahaha! Ouch! Ouch ouch ouch ouch ouch!








Posted in The Political Weblog Movement | Comments Off

And now, a little something I made for the election…

U.S. ELECTION RESULTS: STRESS RELIEF DEVICE

Just a little something to keep handy as we enter the final quarter, approach the endgame, face the moment of truth and start the final countdown.

Stay in your homes, people. Barricade the doors and channel-surf with caution.








Posted in US Presidential Election 2008 | Comments Off

There’s no doubt about it: Sarah Palin has gone rogue

Via Wonkette, a report of Sarah Palin going far beyond any past indiscretions. She’s a right maverick, and looking out for #1…. you betcha!

CNN: Palin Talks 2012, McCain Aide “Speechless”

What a winker.








Posted in US Presidential Election 2008 | 1 Comment

Ross and Brand: bonfire night starts early this year

First, a word from Five Chinese Crackers:

As Septicisle points out, in January 2007, the Mail ran a front page ridiculing the fact that the whole Celebrity Big Brother racism debacle was front page news. The Big Brother thing was seen by a far wider audience, involved a group of people openly bullying an individual over a sustained period while they were all in a confined space and there was a whiff of racism in the air. ‘Why don’t we just switch off?‘ was the reaction then. This time, things have changed for some reason. Despite the fact that only a handful of people had complained about Brand’s show before the paper reported it, these people must be sacked. Ban this sick filth! And so on.

And no, it’s not the licence fee alone that makes this different, and as an issue it certainly wouldn’t warrant this level of coverage/outrage regardless.

Ross and Brand shouldn’t have pulled the stunt, and the BBC should not have broadcast it.

But it cannot be denied that most of the people calling for blood would take any opportunity to damage the BBC, and are blowing this way, way, wayyyy out of proportion to that end.

Further, the hypocrites at the Sun and Daily Mail have a track record of treating far more people with far less respect. Take for example the Sun, who surely have Andrew Sachs’ feelings uppermost in their mind when running with today’s front page headline that introduces a two-page tell-all extravaganza about his granddaughter’s sex life; “BRAND YELLED ‘QUE?’ IN BED”

Bastards.

More from Septicisle right here.

Me, I want to leave you with a thought from regular reader Carl Eve, who points out that the people at the Sun also had a personal score to settle with Brand, after this classic performance at an Amnesty gig in 2006.

UPDATE – Hahahahahahaha! I wish I’d said this:

Don’t you just love it? The BBC, as always, has been forced to pull down its trousers and bend over, while the collective tabloid media buggers it silly with its enormous cock of hypocrisy.

And you should expect more of this in the blogosphere, especially now that the media-facing side of it has been so successfully hijacked by unapologetic ultra-hypocrites like Dale and Staines.








Posted in Rupert 'The Evil One' Murdoch | 2 Comments

Nadine Dorries is either very confused or a big, fat liar

A jaw-dropping interview with Nadine Dorries appears in today’s Metro. My letter to that ‘news’paper follows. Will get a copy of the interview online ASAP.

To: Metro Letters

Your interview with Nadine Dorries only furthers her reputation as a self-publicising fantasist. In it, Nadine claims to get 500,000 hits a month on her website (which is not even a blog as she claims). Elsewhere, she has claimed that she has 800,000 readers a month. Never mind that her traffic claims are so fantastic as to be laughable; because ‘hits’ describes the number of files downloaded (pages, images, etc.), this figure cannot possibly be smaller than the number of readers. Nadine’s either making things up, or becoming very confused again.

Tim Ireland

And that’s just a reaction to the bloody introductory paragraph. You simply have to read the interview itself. With you shortly.

UPDATE – It should appear on this page shortly. If you simply cannot wait and you’re willing to play along with their request for an email address, proceed to ‘e-Metro’ here.

UPDATE – While we’re waiting for Metro to get their main e-dition together, were you aware of this report showing that evangelical Christians are probably getting more red hot (and unprotected) sex than you? Yes, even many of those ‘celibate’ teens. Turns out that celibacy loses its shine when it’s not ‘cool’ any more (“if too many teens pledge, the effort basically collapses” is a key finding).

UPDATE (12pm) – Dorries is now complaining on her ‘blog’ about the part of the interview that raised one of my eyebrows to new heights.

Apologies for cruddy link to cruddy site that only works in some browsers:

I was a little bit upset this morning to see how a short interview I had given, had been written up. It was smutty. For example, my answer to the question “What would you most like to be doing right now” I believe was something like “Having a meal with my girls and everyone I love round one table.” That’s not what was printed.

Although the interview had been light hearted, my answers had been taken out of context.

Oh dear.

Oh dear, oh dear.

Here’s the part that Nadine is complaining about:

What would you most like to be doing right now?

Nadine Dorries: (laughs) You can’t put that in the paper.

Apart from that?

Nadine Dorries: I’d be in Barbados watching the turtles hatch on the beach.

[Pardon me while I vomit…. *bleuuuurgh*…. Damn. All over my handmade Italian leather shoes that were a gift from the Dalai Lama. And now back to the dirt…]

And who would you be with?

Nadine Dorries: I can’t say that either.

You’ve got a secret lover, then?

Nadine Dorries: (laughs) He’s involved in politics. I’m not saying more than that.

All together now; ooooooooooooooooh!

I suppose now we can expect Iain Dale to leap to her defence with The Official Version Of Events.

(Please do watch what you say under comments on my site. No guesses or hints about the identity of secret lovers, for example.)

UPDATE – The article is now live on the Metro website:

Metro – Nadine Dorries reveals her Bridget Jones moment

And, unlike Nadine’s website-that-is-not-a-blog, that page allows comments.

:o)

(contains excitement)
(considers options carefully)








Posted in Tories! Tories! Tories! | 21 Comments