Who are the newspapers supporting?
SCROLL through Twitter and Facebook and you will discover all media outlets are always biased against everybody.
Social media is – of course – a bin fire of misinformation at the best of times, never mind during a polarised General Election campaign.
But the big vote today does, at least, help put to bed myths about press bias. Why? Because this is when papers who have political colours display them upfront and centre.
This year political endorsements are all over the place with no clear winner. In fact, rather like, the public many papers are not too keen on any of the parties.
The Daily Record
Its English sister, the Daily Mirror, has been the main cheerleader for Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn. And the Daily Record says it wants a Labour government too.
But the tabloid reckons the best way to get that north of the Border is usually to vote SNP. That, it says, does not mean it supports constitutional change.
The Scottish Sun
Rupert Murdoch’s tabloid in England has monstered Mr Corbyn and championed Brexit. In
Scotland it has flirted with independence and formally backed the SNP.
Not this time. The Scottish edition on the eve of the General Election slated the First Minister’s handling of health. “Nic in a N.h.mess,” read its headline. It did not endorse Boris Johnson – but it did attack Mr Corbyn as an “extremist” and a “security risk”.
Scottish Daily Mail
There are no surprises from the voice of staunch unionism and Brexit. The tabloid agrees with the Daily Record that voting SNP helps deliver a Labour government. It just doesn’t like the idea. “We can’t let a squalid stitch-up between a Marxist crank and a Nationalist zealot wreck the UK,” the paper declared.” The alternative? “Only the Tories.”
The Guardian
Both Tory and Labour voters feel “estranged from their parties”, according to the liberal daily. “A sourly introspective and inwardlooking campaign mood is further curdled by political misinformation.”
The Guardian does not like Mr Johnson. “He has lied to the Queen, lied about Brexit and runs scared of serious interrogation. He is a divisive figure with a record of deliberately offensive comments. He bullies institutions such as the BBC and the judiciary for daring to hold him to account. His party’s manifesto dog-whistles with slogans hinting at a hardline approach to immigration. Hate and division have flourished under him. The claim that he can bring Britain together is risible.”
The paper doesn’t have much time for Mr Corbyn either. “His obdurate handling of the antisemitism crisis has disrupted the message of hope. Anything less than zero tolerance against racism tarnishes Labour’s credentials as an anti-racist organisation.” But it adds: “Yet Labour remains indispensable to progressive politics.”
Its conclusion: back Labour and other parties with a better chance of defeating Tories, including the SNP and Liberal Democrats.
The Financial Times
The smart money always looks to see what the FT thinks. And it thinks both main parties “have put ideology before the national good. Neither commands our backing”.
The paper usually supports
Tories “in normal times”. However, it argued “Mr Johnson has played fast and loose with democratic norms. His word is rarely his bond.” The paper said Mr Corbyn was
“dangerous”. So it is backing “moderate, centrist candidates, pro-business and internationalist.” It explained: “The UK needs a political realignment, a swing back from the extremes to the centre.”
The Times
The FT suggested some business readers might reluctantly back the Tories. It might well have been talking about The Times.
The establishment daily did not sound impressed with Mr Johnson. The “unedifying” election campaign, it said, had been “characterised to a degree unusual even by recent standards of British political debate by bitterness, exaggerations and falsehoods. It has pitted an evasive prime minister against the most unpopular opposition leader in polling history.”
But it wants to see a big Tory majority. The theory? Mr Johnson will drift in to the middle ground – and retain a close relationship with the EU – if he has enough MPS to brush off extreme Brexiters.
It was the ERG, after all, “whose demands for a deep rupture with the EU destroyed Theresa May’s premiership”.