Campbell's success

The massive publicity given to the publication of his diaries shows what a master of manipulation  Alastair Campbell is.   
The thing is, Campbell - and New Labour's spin machine generally - has been an appalling failure in government.
One thing testifies to this - that between the 1997 and 2005 elections, New Labour lost 3.9 million votes. That's equivalent to the entire electorate of Scotland.  By contrast, Labour's vote actually rose between the 1974 and 1979 elections.
That's right. The New Labour government that presided over falling unemployment, economic stability and growing prosperity managed to lose 3.9 million more votes than the old Labour one that presided over double-digit inflation, rising unemployment and the winter of discontent.
And in 2005, Labour got 1.9 million fewer votes than it got in 1979.
But the meeja thinks New Labour has a successful media operation.
Campbell has been awful at spinning New Labour. But he's done a fantastic job of spinning himself.

Comments

[Bob B]

Absolutely but I really did enjoy this insight from Campbell's diary:

"At what should have been the two men's most euphoric moment, the victory day when Labour came to power on May 1 1997 after 18 years of Conservative rule, there were 'bad-tempered conversations' between Mr Blair and Mr Brown over the reshuffle of the frontbench team into Cabinet positions, Mr Campbell records.

"Within five months, the failure of communications between No 10 and No 11 was so already so pronounced that Mr Brown gave an interview to The Times ruling out joining the EU Exchange Rate Mechanism for the life of Labour's first parliament without Mr Blair being aware of what he was going to do."
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article2048818.ece

Sorry Europhiles!

[Matt Munro]

New labours reliance on spin grew out of the misplaced belief that the "right wing press" had kept them in the wilderness for so long. The fact that the sun were behind them from the start proves that the press reflects public opinion more than it forms it. The other point is that under new labour the media cognoscenti have grown significantly and the deluded idea that the press are hugely influential in shaping public opinion just serves to reinforce the Tarquins sense of self importance.

[Bob B]

There's another crucial insight.

Tony Blair, Kenneth Clarke, Michael Heseltine, and Peter Mandelson, along with Charles Kennedy for the Lib-Dems, were all going to stand up there on the same platform and tell us that joining the Euro would be vital for our national interest. And they would have had illustrious support too from the likes of Adair Turner from the CBI as well as Lord Layard from the LSE.

Thank heavens HM Treasury kept us out.

[Bob B]

In Monday's news

"The head of US forces in Iraq, Lt Gen David Petraeus, has told the BBC that fighting the insurgency is a 'long term endeavour' which could take decades."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6285156.stm

Campbell wouldn't put that into the government's dossier on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction published on 24 September 2002 with a forward signed by Tony Blair, would he?
http://www.archive2.official-documents.co.uk/document/reps/iraq/iraqdossier.pdf

William Lind (retired US Marine Corps) discussed the likely challenging problems of fighting Fourth Generation wars back in 1989:
http://www.d-n-i.net/fcs/4th_gen_war_gazette.htm

The fundamental problem was probably this: "In an interview with the Spectator Lord Jenkins of Hillhead observed that his friend and protégé, Tony Blair, might have only a 'second-class mind'."
http://www.economist.com/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3046

But that might not be too evident to someone whose early career in journalism included a stint writing pornography for Forum magazine.
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/labour/story/0,,587908,00.html

[cityunslicker]

it jsut shows how excited the media get with themselves. Is this not what we are trying to fight by blogging?

[jameshigham]

Goebbels would be proud of him.

[James]

What about the increase in voters from 1994 to 1997?