My articles take a lot of research and time, and it’s undertaken in my spare time in hopes of informing people with verifiable facts. If you have not already done so, please consider clicking ‘subscribe’ button below.
EVIATAR ZERUBAVEL, Professor of Sociology at Rutigers University is one of my favourite academics to read. His penchant for examining the sociology behind silence and denial in everyday life is particularly useful and informative. In his book ‘The Elephant in the Room: Silence and Denial in Everyday Life’ one of the aspects of the subject matter he touches on is the politics of silence and denial.
If I were to imperfectly and grotesquely simplify a few key concepts Zerubavel touches on in the area of politics, it would be the following:
Attention and power
This is to say, who controls the media? If the media are reporting on this thing over here, what is it that they aren’t talking about over there?
The scope of our attention and discourse is delineated not just by normative constraints, but also by political ones. “What we see, hear and talk about is affected by both normative and politics pressures”1; so to understand conspiracies to silence in our culture, and denialism of realities we must look at politics.
The key thing about power is that it involves the ability to control the scope of other peoples attention. So when a small clutch of ‘legacy’ or ‘established’ media organisations and tech giants are able to control the agenda, they control perception.
Think about the last Presidential election, late in the day news was broken by the New York Post revealing that Joe Biden’s son Hunter’s laptop had been discovered. The newspaper - founded by a founding father - reported Hunter’s potentially corrupt ties to Ukraine energy firms and even Biden family links to the Chinese communist party2. Did you hear about this news story? No? I’m not surprised because Twitter within hours banned the New York Post twitter account, censored any twitter user from sharing the news story. This was followed up by news organisations such as Politico brainlessly reiterating talking points from retired never-Trumper (russiagating) spies like John Brennan. Outfits like Politico at the time were insisting the revelations were just ‘Russian interference’.3 Now of course it turns out the news story was true, Politico itself has confessed it was 100% wrong to dismiss the New York Reporting at the time4. So they were either wrong or lied, and Twitter enacted election interference to censor a newspaper with an accurate piece of investigative journalism5.
But the point was, he who controls the agenda has the power to dictate the scope of what people pay attention to.
Wag the dog
Linked to the above concept is ‘wag the dog’. An easy idea to grasp, it’s simply the politics of distraction. Think Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky. In late January 1998 Clinton claimed that he “did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky” (spoiler, he did, lied and subsequently proceeded to try to ruin Ms Lewinsky’s life). But the point is, on August 17 1998 Clinton confessed in taped grand jury testimony that he had engaged in an "improper physical relationship" with Lewinsky. On August 20 1998 Clinton ordered the US bombing of Al-Shifa pharmaceutical factory. It was the largest pharmaceutical factory in Khartoum and employed over 300 workers, producing medicine both for human and veterinary use. Despite Clinton’s claims, it never had any links to al-Qaeda or nerve agent production.
But guess what the news story was the US media all talked about? Was it the revelation in August that Clinton was a liar as well as a betrayer of his marital vows? Nope, everyone talked about the US bombing one of Africa’s very few medicine manufacturing plants.
The point here is obvious, don’t look here! Look over there! What is that?! If you’ve never seen it, I advise you to go see the film ‘Wag the Dog’.
THE reason I am labouring these points is because here in Scotland we really need to avoid falling foul of attempts to limit, misdirect or artificially control the scope of what we pay attention to. As the relentless noise about No.10 grotesque partying through the pandemic fills the airwaves, the SNP are quietly and busily burying some bad news concerning their economic prospectus for separation. I for one don’t wish my readers to miss SNP attempts to bury the lede.
A key problem for the economic case for independence has always been economic. Within that is the issue of Scottish pensions, who would pay for them? The SNP had previously accepted that responsibility for paying the pensions would become the responsibility of the Scottish Government if we voted for separation,
“For those people living in Scotland in receipt of the UK State Pension at the time of independence, the responsibility for the payment of that pension will transfer to the Scottish Government”6
But that was 2013, that was Salmond’s White Paper called ‘Scotland’s Future’. Now, the SNP have - while the media are distracted with partygate - quietly abandoned this position for a ludicrously brazen new one.
Ian Blackford on February 3rd, told ITV ‘Representing Borders’ that
“the point is, it is an obligation on the UK Government to meet the commitment to pensioners that they have paid national insurance contributions. They have paid for the right to receive that pension”7
See what he did there? A screeching U-turn on everything the SNP had previously asserted, in one overlooked interview. In that interview Blackford argues that upon separation, the UK taxpayers (England, Wales, Northern Ireland) would continue to pay Scottish taxpayers pensions.
Even more brazenly, Blackford insists the current UK pension is too low, too paltry and only independence could see it be enhanced.
So Ian Blackford’s position is the farcical idea that independence will mean our pensioners will suddenly overnight have better pensions, and we’re going to make the English pay for it all.
I honestly wish I was making all of this up, but I am not. And this sort of ludicrous incoherence on key fiscal issues concerning their case for independence ought to be what our media class is talking about. But sadly, the only people I can find discussing this is (fantastic) writers such as John Ferry at The Spectator or the good chaps over at These Islands.
If the SNP cannot articulate a credible answer to a question as important and basic as ‘who will pay for Scottish pensions if we vote for independence?’, then they really have no business making any case at all. But more importantly still, the Scottish and UK media need to stop with the attention-deficit-disorder news reporting. Voters hunger for facts, deep dive reporting and can increasingly live without the ‘drama’ of the 30 second soundbite and hysteria-driven ‘rolling news cycle’.
Lastly, we must all as Scottish voters be vigilant, as this SNP-led government has an astounding talent for the dark arts of the politics of denial and silence. Nicola Sturgeon’s team have demonstrated time and time again an impressive talent for ‘wag the dog’ and ‘attention and power’ politics. Pity our news media is so lame that large swathes of it falls for it each and every time.
Perhaps it has something to do with the pathetic sight of ‘access journalism’? But that would be a discussion for a different article.
Disclosure: This article was edited once after being emailed to subscribers to correct two spelling errors in the original piece and a grammatical error.
Zerubavel, Eviatar, (2008), ‘The Elephant in the Room: Silence and Denilan in Everyday Life’, Oxford University Press, page 34
Morris, Emma-Jo and Fonrouge, Gabrielle (2020, October 14) “Smoking-gun email reveals how Hunter Biden introduced Ukrainian businessman to VP dad”, New York Post, https://nypost.com/2020/10/14/email-reveals-how-hunter-biden-introduced-ukrainian-biz-man-to-dad/
Bertrand, Natasha, (2020, October 19), “Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former intel officials say”, Politico, https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/19/hunter-biden-story-russian-disinfo-430276
Wulfsohn, Joseph A (2021, September 22), “Politico confirms Hunter Biden laptop emails after media declared story 'Russian disinformation' amid election”, Fox News, https://www.foxnews.com/media/politico-hunter-biden-laptop-story-russian-disinformation
Post Editorial Board, "(2021, October 12), “One year later, The Post’s Hunter Biden reporting is vindicated — but still buried”, New York Post, https://nypost.com/2021/10/12/one-year-later-the-posts-hunter-biden-reporting-is-vindicated-but-still-buried/
Scottish Government, (2013, November 26), ‘Scotland’s Future: Your Guide to an Independent Scotland’, Produced for the Scottish Government by APS Group Scotland, pg 8, https://www.gov.scot/publications/scotlands-future/pages/8/
Blackford, Ian (2022, February 3), ITV Representing Borders:
I'm no supporter of SNP or their compromised leader, Dean, but that 'These Islands' tweet has almost 100% comments rebutting, successfully, the idea Scotland would somehow be unable to provide a State Pension* As one comment points out: an independent Scotland should no more be expected to pay for a foreign country's pension liabilities any more than England and Wales should.
These Islands. Sigh... Tweets with a sticky dollop of fallacy, inaccuracy and disinformation - the current tweet displaying the account's usual penchant for belittling the notion of Scotland's self-determination. These Islands has a bias of renown, coupled with a derisory and dubious disinformation-base - not a great source, Dean.
*sturgeon's SNP will not deliver independence, therefore the point is moot. On the other hand, Scots pensions in Salmond's independent Scotland would be under no less threat of delivery than that of Scotland's endless and enviable supply of Hydro, Wind and other renewable energy.
Apropos of nothing, Dean: Loch Ness holds more fresh water than all of the lakes in England & Wales combined. Scotland exports power to England: if we suddenly pulled the plug, the whole of Manchester would be plunged into darkness.
Keep well.
(Must check out 'Wag The Dog')