Share this page!

Phil Syrpis Profile picture
Twitter logo
21 May, 6 tweets, 1 min read
A BBC journalist used 'deceitful' methods to secure 1995 interview. Wow.

Have the 'outraged' press forgotten about phone hacking?

Has the 'outraged' government forgotten about its relationship with the truth?
See eg…
And on the Govt side, see eg:
And some gems from the Dyson report. They apply to the BBC, but they have resonances elsewhere.

We have a ‘sensational triumph’ - but did ‘questionable methods’ justify the end result?
The organisation ‘fell short of the high standards of integrity and transparency which are its hallmark’. Nolan principles, anyone?
And, it can still be prone to an ‘ends justifies means’ mentality… and there’s a ‘general culture of hostility towards whistleblowers’.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Phil Syrpis

Phil Syrpis Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @syrpis

Phil Syrpis Profile picture
16 May
Seeing lots of reaction to proposals for a progressive alliance, and have been struck by one thing.

Members and activists tend to reject it; while 'mere' supporters of opposition parties tend to embrace it. 1/7
Obviously, there are a lot more 'mere' supporters than members and activists.

But, I don't think that there can be any chance that a progressive alliance will happen without the strong support of members and activists.

So, why might the two groups think as they do? 2/7
Members/activists might oppose a progressive alliance because:
a) they are familiar with the party rules (which make it much more difficult);
b) they are likely to think their party can win; 3/7
Read 7 tweets
Phil Syrpis Profile picture
13 May
The Higher Education (Free Speech) Bill is more than a little incoherent - as @michelledonelan seems intent on demonstrating.

The Bill is here: bills.parliament.uk/Publications/4… 1/8
It aims to secure free speech 'within the law', so... there will be debates about what the limits of the law are (see eg Prevent; IHRA anti-semitism definition etc). 2/8
It aims to stop discrimination based on an individual's 'ideas, beliefs or views' (for academics, 'within their field of expertise'), so... there will be debates about what each of those means. 3/8
Read 8 tweets
Phil Syrpis Profile picture
11 May
I have commented before on the hypocrisy and double standards which characterise the actions of this Govt. From that perspective, the debate about Scottish independence is going to be... an interesting watch. 1/8

The Govt, once the champion of 'sovereignty' and 'taking back control' now finds itself... defending the Union.

The contortions Ministers are going through are quite something. 2/8
So, for example, we are hearing...

1. That absent a clear majority in the popular vote, the SNP, which received 48% of the vote, lacks the mandate to have a referendum.

Remind me what % of the popular vote David Cameron won in 2015? [Answer: 37%] 3/8
Read 8 tweets
Phil Syrpis Profile picture
10 May
A couple of thoughts on Scottish independence and Brexit, prompted by this thread from @paulwaugh.
1/11
Self-determination and sovereignty are powerful concepts, which supporters of Brexit/Scottish independence do rely on.

Yet, they are difficult concepts, given the extent of international interdependence and cooperation (on trade and beyond) 2/
One should think about both the sovereignty gains and losses associated with participation in the relevant 'Union' (UK/EU); and also the future relationship with ex-partners after 'independence'. 3/
Read 11 tweets
Phil Syrpis Profile picture
9 May
Watching as the Labour party, once again, descends into uncivil war. It cannot coalesce around any policy position or agree on who is best placed to deliver it. 1/6
We've been hearing a lot from ghosts of the past - Mandelson, McCluskey, McDonnell, Pidcock, Flint, Adonis and more. Much of 'the analysis' harks back to either Blair or Corbyn. It makes for grim reading and grim viewing. 2/6
We've been hearing a lot about the need to 'learn lessons' and 'listen to the people' and 'engage with voters' real concerns'. But what if (outlandish thought this) 'the people' disagree, and are sending a range of different messages? 3/6
Read 7 tweets
Phil Syrpis Profile picture
7 May
The Labour party is not in a good place. On almost every issue there are strong voices within the party calling for a decisive policy/strategy move. Problem is, these voices are calling for moves in diametrically opposite directions. 1/5
If it is to recover, it needs to discover a sense of purpose and narrative. That is a huge task (and I'm not going to go there now).

But. 2/5
There are (to be simplistic) two reasons why Labour is losing. One is that the Labour offer doesn't appeal. The other - much more significant factor - is that the Johnson offer does appeal. 3/5
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @syrpis has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @syrpis!

Read all threads by @syrpis

:(