When the Guardian’s story literally doesn’t add up
Earlier today, I commented on an article in The Guardian entitled ‘Will the Liberal Democrats survive the coalition?’. Apart from the forced political commentary, there was another point which really annoyed me. In trying to make a case that Nick Clegg’s leadership had damaged the party’s finances, Andy Beckett states:
‘ in 2009 the Lib Dems received a quarter less in donations than they did in 2005′.
The difference is that 2005 was a general election year, 2009 wasn’t. Donations always rise in the year of a general election. And 2005 was a particularly unusual year for the Liberal Democrats after the now infamous donation of £2.4 million from the now-disgraced Michael Brown. Figures lodged with the Electoral Commission show that donations to the Liberal Democrats have shown a consistent increase over the last two electoral cycles. So why twist the facts in this way?
Related posts:
- Lord Ashcroft and his ties to Watford
- Why spoil a good story with a bad headline?
- The George giveth and the George taketh away
Comments
Leave a Reply:
