OK, so what are my options?

Iain Dale has ignored my specific request not to be involved in his inherently biased weblog poll, and has just deleted this comment of mine from under this post on his ‘weblog’:

I don’t believe you, Dale.

I blogged about this, and I even emailed you about it weeks ago.

I did not want to be part of this charade, and I said so very clearly and quite specifically.

I regard it to be damaging to my reputation to have anyone in this field think that I would endorse your poll or participate in your poll in any way. That includes allowing myself to be included in it and ranked by it…. even if you do pass it off as a bit of fun when it suits you.

We even went over this A YEAR AGO when you got in touch and were forced to drop me from your Who’s Who for this same reason.

And yet you’ve gone ahead and done it anyway.

WTF?

Have you seriously gone to print including my name and weblog in your charts when I have refused to take part in the past and have clearly expressed my wish to NOT take part this year?

I seriously do not want to appear in his book of charts, and I told him so. Apparently, it’s already gone to print and today I find out that – despite my wishes – Iain has me listed as a participant in the poll.

What are my options?

UPDATE (03 Sep) – May I begin by pointing out that Iain Dale is a big, fat liar?

“Yes, you emailed me privately. And I do what I always do with all of the hundreds of other emails which you hassle me with. I put it straight in the Junk box. And then I did the same with the next one. And the next.” – Iain Dale (Aug 29)

I keep all the emails I get from Ireland. You never know when they might come in useful. I can find no email from him saying he didn’t wish to be included in the poll. Normally when he goes off on one he barrages me with copies of various emails has sent. Some of his emails go straight into my Spam folder anway, so it’s perfectly possible that this one did.” – Iain Dale (Sep 02)

(Note – He wasn’t talking about the ‘poll’ email specifically on Aug 29, but one of the hundreds dozens I’ve sent him earlier this year. These number in the dozens only because Iain keeps ignoring them or pretending not to have seen them. It is also possible that Iain will inisist that there is no lie or contradiction here because he used the word ‘junk’ and not ‘delete’.)

Not that his not seeing the email matters, as Iain himself described my actions as a ‘boycott’, and unless he’s going to claim that he doesn’t know what the word means, my post alone should have been enough for him.

But it’s nice of him to acknowledge – in his own special way – that he would have acted differently had he seen my email.

Then again…

“But either way, I don’t really care if he wished to be included in the poll or not.” – Iain Dale (02 Sep)

Ah. My bad. So what Iain is saying here is that – even if he had known for sure that I didn’t want to be involved in or associated with this poll in any way – he would have included me anyway.

The following point has already been raised (and ignored), but it’s similar to the point I raised with Total Politics yesterday (gosh, I hope they get my email) and it applies now more than ever:

Instead of honouring this request, Iain Dale went ahead and included me anyway, the upshot being that the poll is now – through no fault of mine, because I DID NOT WISH TO BE INCLUDED – actually specifically biased against my weblog because I was included in the poll (against my wishes) as I urged my readers not to vote.

Dale knows this. He’s not a complete idiot, and he must know how voting works because he lost an election once.

UPDATE (04 Sep) – Well, there you have it. I sent several emails seeking a reasonable and peaceful solution to this yesterday, and Iain ignored them all.

Iain Dale, who goes on and on and on about how he gets picked on for no reason, has decided to go ahead and be difficult about it by including me in this chart and peppering this post, which includes the following highlights:

“Liberal Conspiracy encouraged a boycott of the whole exercise…”

No. They didn’t. Sunny Hundal did. Iain knows this and was reminded of it several times. But it’s in his interest to make something more of it than there is, so he just lies about it. Speaking of which…

“Absolute Unique Visitors (is now) the yardstick by which blogs are judged…”

Pfft! As if Iain doesn’t recall why this is the case for him especially. And he’s lecturing newspapers for their misleading use of meaningless use of metrics?

Well, he’s clearly taking the piss.

Remember this any time Iain tries to get anyone to take this poll of his seriously (trust me, he will) or asks you to trust him with any position of power; he diddled this result just to have one over on me.

He’s a vagina.








Posted in The Political Weblog Movement | 16 Comments

Memo to flying monkeys (all sqaudrons)

Closing this thread was not, in my view, an evil conspiratorial act of net censorship.

I wish to make that ab-so-lute-ly clear.

Cheers all.








Posted in The Political Weblog Movement | 4 Comments

“Crazy Ivan! Crazy Ivan!”

(Hey, I did warn you…)

I’ve put out an initial post on the subject of Page 3 today, but apart from that and some action over further image-nickery (later) the Sun-watch project will be chugging along happily without my help for the next week and a bit… because right now I’m in the mood to give The Daily Mail a long-overdue kicking where it hurts.

All those in favour?

(Wait for it, wait for it…..)

[Psst! If you’re a blogger and you’d like a head-start on the action, start browsing through any past articles you’ve written about the Mail now.]








Posted in Old Media, Updates | 1 Comment

Google is *such* a tease

Spotted by Haku, a chap whose recently-installed b3ta.com user signature (*** Julie Moult is an idiot ***) contributed to this result:

The first sign of change in Google Images [screen capture].

It’s only text so far, but it’s a start and an Images database update has come about a lot earlier than expected.

For those who came in late.

UPDATE (01 Sep) – Google Images is still sniffing around b3ta.com, *plus* Daniel’s blog and Bloggerheads, which appears on the bottom row this evening [screen capture].

(Well done, Daniel, who appeared as the first weblog result to get a text mention in Google Images this morning. About 6 hours ahead of me. The bastard.)








Posted in Old Media | Comments Off

This just in: hating the lies of hate-filled liars makes you a hater!

1.

Thank you, Charlotte, for your concern.

2.

Facebook group: “The Daily Mail really are a bunch of fucking twats” (via)
No. of members: 8,213

Facebook group: “I Love the Daily Mail”
No. of members: 20

Not sure what that means exactly, but moving on…

3.

A fresh item about the only other national newspaper stupid enough to hire Julie Moult:

The Sun: Tabloid Lies – Setting up “investigations” with only one possible outcome: Occasionally, the Sun likes to take a break from attacking the “work shy” and on benefits just in print and decides to set-up a fallacious test to prove just what a bunch of layabouts those on benefits are… This time the paper has been completely caught out by its own readers, which happily saves me the bother…

A very promising entry that you should read and take some time to think about if you’re a regular here. I think now more than ever that we stand a very good chance of reaching at least a small percentage of Sun readers with this new project.








Posted in Old Media | 2 Comments

“Our legal advice is that Paul Staines is not a sex offender.”

I just popped into Google on my way to scan Paul Staines’ Wikipedia entry (it’s often educational* to watch who is changing, vandalising or fixing it, just in case you’re wondering) but made a bit of a typo.

This was the result:

Oops!

(A little link for those who came in late.)

[*Psst! Here’s a freebie for you, Paul: one of your most persistent trolls, who appears to have been sock-puppeting on your site and many others, has left fingerprints all over the Wikipedia history for your entry. All you have to do is cross-check a few comment-specific IP addresses. Not that your kiddy-blogging platform will let you do this, but maybe you know someone who uses better technology who has also been trolled by this person. Oh, and I’d go after this twit myself, but I need to settle the Sunlight COPs matter before I do. Latest update on that is here, just in case you missed it. While I have your attention, can you please have a word with these recipients of your hard-earned money and ask when they might get around to processing my membership application? I want to crack on with promoting transparency in politics. Ta.]








Posted in The Political Weblog Movement | Comments Off

David Singleton’s circle of invention

*sigh*

Another ‘journalist’ gives his brain a holiday…

On the matter of Tom Watson Vs. David Singleton, I have the following to say:

Just for starters, it’s not a case of Tom being upset that he didn’t have “input in to this diagram”, as if a sea of reliable data accidentally spat out a result that Tom didn’t like… and I sincerely doubt that Tom is miffed that he missed his chance to take part in the creative process.

It is instead a case of David Singleton airing a rumour and presenting it as a fact in the same breath.

Take a look at the diagram produced by Singleton (reproduced here by Sam Coates).

Tom Watson is clearly illustrated as being part of “a formidable network of political strategists and communications professionals working behind the scenes to smooth (David Miliband’s) path to power”, while his call-out box merely states that Tom is “now said to have switched allegiance from Brown to Miliband”.

At a stretch, Singleton might be able to get away with a bit of hearsay (around here he is said to have switched allegiance to the Camden goat-blowing set), but only if the illustration places Tom in a separate ‘maybe’ or ‘unknown’ position outside the network. And it doesn’t. A picture can tell a thousand lies, and all that.

Here, take an even closer look at the diagram. Can you spot any unbroken lines between Tom Watson and David Miliband?

And to those who may *still* be uncertain about what the problem is, I offer this alternative diagram:

David Singleton does not blow goats in Camden or anywhere else as far as I know

David Singleton – who claims to be a journalist and news editor and is therefore subject to the same rules guidelines most journalists and news editors claim to follow – did this thing without consulting Tom Watson. At all.

And yet if you read the article that introduces the ‘circle’ nonsense, you will see that he found the time to extend that courtesy to others *and* note publicly where he tried and failed to make contact (highlights are mine)…

[Psst! Here’s a quick note for people who may not be aware of one very good reason why doing the latter is often important.]

PR Week – Miliband eyes up comms chief for leadership drive

When approached by PRWeek, Collins refused to be drawn on how often he talked to Miliband, saying only: ‘I speak to a lot of people.’ Collins also declined to say whether he would accept a job as Miliband’s communications advisor.

Kestenbaum is a former chief of staff to private equity pioneer and Labour donor Ronald Cohen, and is also close to former Labour Party chief fundraiser Lord Levy.

Miliband is said to have approached Kestenbaum this summer, asking him to forge links with business in return for a key role in his entourage. A source close to Kestenbaum said: ‘He sees himself as Miliband’s chief of staff – a Jonathan Powell-type figure.’

Kestenbaum was on holiday and unavailable for comment as PRWeek went to press.

Donnelly is an MEP-turned-lobbyist who is well connected in Labour’s ‘North East mafia’. Labour sources said Donnelly had spoken to Milband about helping to run his leadership campaign in a private capacity. One said: ‘Alan Donnelly is the campaign manager.’

Donnelly was unavailable for comment but issued a statement saying: ‘I am the chair of the South Shields Labour party – nothing more and I don’t believe there is a leadership campaign. The speculation is nothing more than summer mischief.’

And yet none of the above courtesies were extended to Tom when – and I hear this kind of thing is taken quite seriously by most politicians – it was being claimed that his political allegiances had changed dramatically.

I am informed by Tom that this claim resulted in a disruptive and needless barrage of phone calls from lobby journalists wanting to know what the score was.

I think David Singleton needs to start with an apology involving far more honesty and sincerity than his first effort.

Perhaps he would even care to explain why he appears to have sought a response from some MPs and not others.








Posted in Old Media | Comments Off

The Wrong Door: awesome

I wish I’d mentioned this sooner so more of you could’ve experienced the half-hour I just enjoyed:

The Wrong Door on BBC3 is like hanging around the b3ta.com/board, but on telly. I chuckled and gasped and guffawed all the way through tonight’s episode.

It’s. Awesome.

Ben Wheatley has produced something that I would rank up there with The League of Gentlemen, and I don’t say that lightly.

(“Hey! Hey! hey! Look! … No, loooook! Look there! There! … It’s my finger! Ahahahahahahaha!”)








Posted in Consume! | 4 Comments

Gordon Brown wearing a nappy on a rocking horse

If you’ve arrived at this page via Google, you are most probably searching for an image that does not exist.

If so, then you are wasting time chasing a vicious rumour that has been peddled and published endlessly by a drink-driving (hopefully former) bankrupt by the name of Paul Staines (aka ‘Guido Fawkes’).

Sorry to disappoint.

Here, instead, is a picture of a fat nappy-wearing bastard who is so drunk that he has fallen off his rocking horse and sh*t himself:

Guido Fawkes: drunk again

In other news, the question that every insider in Westminster is asking is; “Does Margaret Thatcher have syphilis? “

(I kid, I kid… the question that every insider in Westminster is really asking is; “Is it true that Paul’s drinking problem has become worse since he’s been locked up at home and unable to drive anywhere?”)








Posted in The Political Weblog Movement | 9 Comments

When will this right-wing publisher start acting like a grown-up?

Recently, Iain Dale has begun to claim that he refuses to answer questions from me because I blog about him so much, when the truth is that a great deal of the bloggage about Iain on this site results from his earlier refusal to answer questions (and if just reading that sentence gives you a headache, try living through the experience sometime).

For example, when Iain Dale tagged me as a nihilist on 18DoughtyStreet, he denied doing so (and even denied even knowing the meaning of the word ‘nihilist’), then frustrated every effort to confront him over my recording of him doing so. He then complained about the ‘ill-tempered’ manner in which I responded to his evasiveness, claiming that I insulted him by calling him a liar… after he lied about insulting me. The whole thing took over a month to sort out and involved many posts that were published at this weblog purely because Iain was censoring any mention of it under comments on his so-called ‘weblog’.

And he does this sort of thing All. The. Time.

He’s doing it now, in fact.

Recently (example), Iain has claimed that his latest poll of blogs is the result of votes from; “the readers of more than 60 UK political blogs and the readers of TOTAL POLITICS Magazine”.

Leaving aside that the number of voters originating from his magazine warrants an ‘et al’ position, I would like to know which 60+ UK political blogs Iain is talking about here, and I don’t think that’s too much to ask, especially if his guide ranks or even excludes Bloggerheads from its listings.

If Iain knows there are 60+ weblogs sending him voters, then surely he knows which 60+ weblogs are sending him voters… unless he’s playing games with numbers again.

I emailed Iain and asked if he would provide a list of participating weblogs. Politely.

He ignored me.

I left a comment under a relevant post and asked again if he would provide a list of participating weblogs. Even more politely.

He deleted that, and both follow-ups.

So… and I really can’t believe he’s forcing me to play this childish game, but… *sigh*….

Can someone please ask your mother Iain Dale to provide a list of the “more than 60 UK political blogs” whose readers participated in that blog poll? Because she’s not talking to me.

(Please be warned that if you do so, Iain may refuse to answer on the grounds that you are my ‘bitch’. No, seriously.)








Posted in The Political Weblog Movement | 15 Comments