1/ Short 🧵 on #Beergate.
It's something of a cliché that many news organisations, asked if it's raining, will ask "experts" to come and give opposing opinions, when a proper journalist would open the window.
It's something of a cliché that many news organisations, asked if it's raining, will ask "experts" to come and give opposing opinions, when a proper journalist would open the window.
2/ Throughout #Beergate, many news organisations are piling in, speculating about the potential consequences for Labour/Starner. Generating enough hot air to ward off the energy problems for weeks.
3/ Yet, only on Twitter, have I seen people who understand what the rules were at the relevant points in time, and looked to see whether Starmer/Labour and Johnson/Conservatives were compliant with the rules applicable at the time.
4/ Why can't journalists say "we've looked into the details of the rules that applied, and… [conclusions]". Are they so frightened of accusations of partiality if the police make a contrary decision?
5/ I am sick to the back teeth of all this speculation without any attempt to work out the answers, other than to say that only the Durham police can decide.
6/ Let's hope that, if it becomes clear that Starmer/Labour were compliant with the rules that applied at the time, the mischief-makers are punished one way or another.
And that includes news organisations.
And that includes news organisations.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
　
