[Abernathy]

This has been puzzling me too. when I was growing up in the 1960s and 1970s, only just beginning to become semi-aware of politics, it seemed that there were basically only two choices for government : Labour or the Tories. Wilson or Heath, and there was also a mentality that said “time to give the other lot a chance” and that they just took turns at being the government. Things changed a bit with the rise of the SNP, and in particular, the rise of Thatcher.

The notion of a third party being the government was risible. The Liberal Party (as it was then called) was around, of course, led by Jeremy Thorpe, but hardly anybody took them seriously in any way at all.

The very notion of a party like Reform UK forming a majority government, or a fucking racist grifting chancer like Farage becoming Prime Minister, was not just completely unthinkable, it was quite ridiculous. And it still should be - but apparently, it no longer is. If you believe large parts of the news media.

I still struggle to understand why. Farage’s credibility and/or acceptability as a potential PM is, in my view, non-existent. The man is disgusting.

If you look in even the most cursory way at the policies of Reform UK, it is clear that they would be disastrous for the UK. Liz Truss on steroids. It was Reform UK that gave us Brexit and knocked billions of pounds worth of growth off our economy. Most of them are former Tories, including Farage, and the thickest and nastiest Tories to boot. They shouldn’t be being given the time of day.

And yet, and yet. Is it that they are riding the crest of the whole disillusionment-with-politics-in-general wave ?
Is it “time to give the other lot a go” writ large ?

Answers on a virtual postcard to Abernathy, c/o Mailwatched, That Internet, Planet Earth.

[Andy McDandy]

Politics is the new showbiz, reported by people who are financially insulated and have little experience of "real life". They look for easy copy, and Johnson, Fargle etc provide it.

As for the public, we have almost infinite choice of crap, and very high expectations for content and delivery, if not quality. We want the shit we demand, and we want it now.

[Abernathy]

As for the public, we have almost infinite choice of crap, and very high expectations for content and delivery, if not quality. We want the shit we demand, and we want it now.

Well, maybe. But Johnson, Farage and co don’t deliver what the punters want, unless it’s a totally shite Brexit. They certainly don’t deliver the sinking of immigrant boats, thank fuck. But they keep bloody harping on about it.

[Youngian]

The greatest political quandary of our age must be why Reform/,Farage (they're increasingly indivisible) get so much slavish media coverage.

One theory I heard is that Farage will boost woefully low viewing figures for political programmes but he won't come back if challenged. The BBC isn't a commercial broadcaster so what's it's excuse?

[davidjay]

I can see why supporting them is do attractive - as Abers said, "give the other lot a chance" is a long-established political doctrine and the Liberals in whatever guise have always punched above their weight in by-elections. Add to this the English belief in deference to their betters, particularly ones who show they're just like us really, plus an easily identifiable scapegoat for the nation's ills and you have the perfect storm for a party to come from nowhere. But that still doesn't explain why they're still unchallenged.

[Boiler]

The BBC isn't a commercial broadcaster so what's it's excuse?

"Balance" - as it takes the licence fee from most everyone, it has to be seen to represent everybody.

If, as Nandy (IIRC) has suggested, it becomes mutualised it'll be even more the case.

[kreuzberger]

How is fellating live on air Farage and Tice construed as "balance"?

Fact is, the BBC and other broadcasters are shit-scared of them taking their toys off to TikTok, so they let them and their press bezzies lie without contradiction.

[Oboogie]

The BBC isn't a commercial broadcaster so what's it's excuse?

"Balance" - as it takes the licence fee from most everyone, it has to be seen to represent everybody.

If, as Nandy (IIRC) has suggested, it becomes mutualised it'll be even more the case.

It's also ratings and relevance. no Farage means lower ratings fuelling the "Privatise the BBC nobody watches it anyway!" argument.