Two important reads today on the reporting of Brexit. First, @davidallengreen on the ability of anonymous "No. 10 sources" to flood the media with fake loopholes, get-outs & "dead cat" stories - none of which were legally plausible - to drown out the reality of a govt in retreat.
@davidallengreen Every day the papers led with some breathless new plan to thwart the Benn Act: by an Order in Council, or the Civil Contingencies Act, or some secret loophole no one had spotted, or the PM defying arrest, or the three letters stunt. All garbage, but it led the news day after day.
@davidallengreen Second key read: the @ConUnit_UCL on the failure of too many journalists to understand basic parliamentary procedure, which has allowed Number 10 to spin "a parliament versus people narrative" and set up artifical confrontations with the Speaker. constitution-unit.com/2019/10/24/par…
@davidallengreen @ConUnit_UCL "Put simply", it concludes, "reporters can no longer trust in govt briefing of parliamentary events to be fair or accurate". "A combination of unreliable briefings & limited procedural knowledge risks...spreading misleading information and feeding a damaging populist narrative".
@davidallengreen @ConUnit_UCL No one expects journalists to be experts in constitutional law or parliamentary procedure, but there are plenty of sources readily available. They may lack the glamour of "Number 10 sources", but the job of the press is to "lift the veil", not admire how neatly it's embroidered.
