Liberal media land a couple of feathers on Boris via dodgy iman*

A pretty poor televised debate last night on the BBC featured all 5 remaining candidates. It was poorly managed by E. Maitlis. She was obviously lacking in credibility and authority, and partisan and tried to hector Johnson a couple of times, mostly over his remarks about Muslim women. She looked like a poorly-prepared teacher trying to manage a class she didn't know. Everyone ignored her. She later claimed on Newsnight that that was because they were all men. 

I think they ignored her because she was a virtue-signalling lightweight. For example, Gove repeated that he had a detailed plan to accomplish Brexit and I (and maybe some other viewers) wanted to know what it might be. No chance --off she went on another tack, no doubt unable even to think that anyone could plan to leave the EU. Later, on Newsnight, she seemed pompously lectured a TV innocent who wanted to disagree with M Hessletine's prophecies of doom: he was, she insisted,nothing less than  'a former Deputy Leader of the Conservative Party' and thus, presumably, infallible, or at least vastly superior to a young (female) commentator.

Having invited Hesssletine to speak first (uninterrupted),the rest of the panel had to address his agenda, Maitlis insisted, in a classic ideological move.

Newsnight commentator, oleaginous N Watt offered his usual sly and self-satisfied  'interpretations' to argue Boris was sliding out of commitments --he had only said leaving by October 31st was 'eminently feasible' which wasn't the same as promising to do it, and he detected similar 'backsliding' on tax reform. Does Watt just repeat the views of the others? Is it the other way around? Do they all work as some Midnight's Children- type thought community?

Johnson-backing I DuncanSmith tried to argue back, on Newsnight. He was particularly effective when Maitlis suggested Johnson was anti-Muslim because he had forgotten the name of one of the voxpop, a Muslim iman. As IDS pointed out, Maitlis would also forget names if she did not have prompts in her ear all the time.

The Gurdian continues the desperate refrain today, beginning with J Freedland. He began reasonably enough, despairing that one of these idiots would actually become PM.It soon took a familiar anti-Johnson form though as the petit-bourgeois worldview actualised itself:

[Johnson]  came over as lacklustre and badly flawed....Twice he failed to remember Abdullah’s name [see below]: not ideal when trying to demonstrate that he’s no anti-Muslim bigot. He ignored the moderator, Emily Maitlis, so often, she was eventually forced to ask: “Can you hear me, Mr Johnson?” [He was obviously too polite to reply "Yes but I am ignoring your silly questions"] Again, not a good look for a party with an all-male top table [sad playing of the gender card] ... he flailed on Brexit, unable to offer any coherent idea, let alone plan, for how he would deliver British withdrawal from the European Union by 31 October, still less cope with the multiple consequences of crashing out without a deal....He came unstuck again and again. His signature tax promise, raising the threshold for the higher rate – a move that would benefit high earners – was reduced to a mere “ambition”

 Maitlis forced the former foreign secretary to listen back to his own words, quoting his off-the-cuff suggestion that the British-Iranian citizen Nazanin Zaghari Ratcliffe had been training journalists in Iran. “It didn’t make any difference,” said Johnson. And yet those words of his were cited by the Iranian judge who extended her jail sentence. “Words have consequences,” said Maitlis acidly.[actully quoting a voxpop iman whom Maitlis seemed to take very seriously and uncritically,rather sadly in the circumstances -- see below] 

Then we had this in another piece by H Stewart (The Guardian)

Boris Johnson defensive, evasive, and favourite for No 10 

Frontrunner comes under pressure over issues including tax cuts and Islamophobia

cracks appeared in some of his positions under scrutiny from viewers’ questions and his rivals’ replies during the BBC programme....Johnson claimed his comments – such as comparing Muslim women in burqas to “letterboxes” – were sometimes taken out of context. [IDS said the same -- the article was actually about not banning the burqa in public, no matter how silly wearers looked]. And he referred to his Muslim great-grandfather, whom he said came to Britain because it was “a beacon of generosity and openness”...He went on to insist that his mistaken remark that the imprisoned British-Iranian citizen Nazanin Zhagari-Ratcliffe was teaching in Iran “didn’t make any difference” [again because it was Iran who had imprisoned her]...Johnson also appeared to wobble over his pledge of a tax cut for high earners, saying: “What we would bring forward is a package to help primarily the poorest people in society,” – but that he thought it was right to have an “ambition” to raise the higher rate.

It was left to a Tory campaign manager on Newsnight to explain Tory policy -- duff in my view but coherent at least -- that tax cuts promoted economic growth which would help the poor. None of these subtleties for the self-righteous Maitlis though...

The Guardian is still chasing da yoof:

One of the most notable moments came when all five candidates were given a scathing review by a 15-year-old climate striker named Erin, who asked them to commit to net zero carbon emissions by 2025.

Why not 2020? And there is the constant admiration for Stewart:

Rory Stewart continued his effort to distinguish himself from the other candidates, insisting that now was the wrong time for the Tories to be promising tax cuts....“I’m going to be very straight with people: I don’t think this is the right time to be cutting taxes,” he said. “Our country is suffering huge pressures on public services.”...Stewart only joined the cabinet in May, and began the contest as the underdog – but received 37 votes on Tuesday, after picking up many of those MPs who backed the health secretary, Matt Hancock, in last week’s first round of voting. [Newsnight insisted this made him 'the candidate with momentum']

Meanwhile, the iman, who every one seems to know by his first name, later was allowed a comeback, the only contributor to get one:

But Abdullah later tweeted expressing his disappointment with the Tory hopefuls’ “deluded” responses to his question about Islamophobia [he had asked whether they agreed that "words have consequences" , which Maitlis immediately assumed was a specific criticism of Johnson, and not, say, of Muslim preaching,or, indeed, of his own words] ....He said: “What I got as a response was nothing short of disappointing and deluded: Boris Johnson forgot my name [diddums], spoke about his great-grandfather and about Iran. Gove used the opportunity to have a dig at Jeremy Corbyn. Jeremy Hunt used it as a chance to say he can’t be racist because he has an immigrant wife and Rory Stewart forgot that this is also our country.”

So -- journalism or spin?  Will it convince anyone?

Meanwhile, hilariously and inevitably, it turns out the imam also had a few skeletons in his cupboard, at least by Beeb standards:

BBC faces questions after TV debate imam's 'disturbing' comments 

Patel later said he had asked the question because of “numerous reports of blatant racism against members of my community”, saying he “wanted the candidates to admit that they’ve played a role in peddling this hate, and that things would change”...However, it later emerged that Patel had previously tweeted: “Every political figure on the Zionist’s payroll is scaring the world about Corbyn. They don’t like him. He seems best suited to tackle them!”..He also tweeted a map of the US, suggesting Israel should be moved from the Middle East to North America as a solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict...A BBC statement said Patel seemed to have deactivated and then reactivated his Twitter account and if the corporation knew of the views he had expressed he would not have been invited on to the programme.

The problem is that very few public figures can meet the BBC's standards.Time it elected a new public.