Gideon – a PR disaster!

Home Forum Chat Forum Gideon – a PR disaster!

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 75 total)
  • Gideon – a PR disaster!
  • gwaelod
    Member

    He wasn’t driving….a copper was

    Dunno which is worst tbh.

    rogerthecat
    Member

    It’s more the image it projects of him, no one will care that it was a CPO driving.

    Premier Icon jamj1974
    Subscriber

    This thread is surely mis titled?

    Should it not be…

    ‘Gideon, a human disaster’

    Sancho
    Member

    To me this is just another non-event non news story just like the train ticket affair.

    It is again crummy journalists trying to make a story out of nothing.

    In reality it was a copper reversing into the bay but not parking up and not staying in the space, not even worth printing on my toilet roll for my later consumption.

    what is interesting is the nonsense about his comments yesterday.

    now if you can seperate the comments from the sentencing and the benefits lifestyle which was the intention, then everyone agrees on having a debate its just rubbish reporting and rubbish political posturing from all sides, and none of it allows a proper debate or proper solution to issues around benefits.

    rogerthecat
    Member

    Just heard about Gideon’s latest pr faux pas!

    After visiting a nursery, he heads to a well known burger chain for a nutritious snack and parks in the disabled parking bay.

    Now, after his gaff re Philpott yesterday mentioning the sentence and benefit lifestyle in the same interview you would have thought his pr would have been a bit sharper.

    In his defence, having no discernible soul may be sufficient to qualify him to park in the disabled space.

    It’s like In the Thick of It, come to life. 😀

    EDIT – oops wrong forum – mods can you shift it? Sorry!

    rogerthecat
    Member

    @Sancho It was not a comment on the validity of the actions but the inability of him, and his entourage, to manage the sensitivity of any given situation. It’s all fuel for the media we have at the moment. It’s either a bit dim or completely ambivalent to the effect it will have bearing in mind the way the media currently works.

    soobalias
    Member

    bearing in mind the way the media currently works.

    i missed it. wgaf

    big_n_daft
    Member

    It was not a comment on the validity of the actions but the inability of him, and his entourage, to manage the sensitivity of any given situation. It’s all fuel for the media we have at the moment. It’s either a bit dim or completely ambivalent to the effect it will have bearing in mind the way the media currently works.

    how do you suggest the police officer driving the vehicle should be disciplined assuming that he not George Osbourne made the decision to park in the spot?

    sacked? suspended without pay, formal warning?

    rogerthecat
    Member

    I don’t, the Police Officer is not the one who should be looking after the public perception of Gideon, he has a ruck of pr professionals who seem incapable of doing so. I am assuming his job is to get Gideon to and from places in one piece, which he seems to be doing.

    Premier Icon slowoldgit
    Subscriber

    You know he’s in the mire when Iain Dale defends him. It happeed on his watch, he takes the blame. For like any politician he’d be quick enough to take any credit.

    bencooper
    Member

    everyone agrees on having a debate

    I don’t. I think we should be having a debate about the billions of pounds hidden away in British tax havens, we should be having a debate about how the financial crisis was caused by rich bankers not the poor, and we should be having a debate about how the UK isn’t going bust by any sensible financial measure.

    We don’t need a debate on benefits, unless it’s a debate on how we can raise them to help more people.

    Besides, we all know that a proper debate is the last thing they mean when they say “have a debate” – what they mean is we should listen more to their right-wing newspaper friends.

    Sancho
    Member

    so yet again a non story not worthy of print.

    its just a shame our media is so crap. that this is the garbage they concentrate on.

    Sancho
    Member

    so why isnt the media concentrating on the debate about tax havens etc instead of this worthless article.

    Id like to see a debate about a local business tax instead of rates which are completely killing the high street.

    why for example should rates for a shop be four times higer than a office. why should a self employed builder not pay a business tax etc, Im sure thay make more money than a lot of self employed shop keepers.

    and why should charities get a discount when that are the only growth sector on the high street – seems they are the only ones making money.
    (rant over)

    cranberry
    Member

    <Bullsh*t>After visiting a nursery, he heads to a well known burger chain for a nutritious snack and parks in the disabled parking bay.</Bullsh*t>

    But don’t let that get in the way of what was otherwise a very interesting story.

    brakes
    Member

    what’s worse than non-stories is people talking about non-stories, even if it’s to label them as non-stories.
    there should be a non-story filter on the internet, where there’s an algorithm that has the ability to e-rubber stamp web content such that it, and all reference to it, disappears from the world-wide web.
    it’s sister algorithm for non-entities could do the same with all reports on non-celebrity non-activity.

    Premier Icon chakaping
    Subscriber

    As if that chinless **** has enough of a sense of shame for this to be anything more than a blip.

    ****.

    Premier Icon mikewsmith
    Subscriber

    considering the number of twunts who can’t park then I am assuming he is just getting down with the people.

    Not a story really just some media being bored and not being able to find anything useful to report on (or working hard enough to find something interesting)

    bencooper
    Member

    so why isnt the media concentrating on the debate about tax havens etc instead of this worthless article.

    Who owns the newspapers?

    Id like to see a debate about a local business tax instead of rates which are completely killing the high street.

    I’d agree with you – except in Scotland small businesses get 100% rate relief, so I don’t pay any rates on my shop 😉

    I think we need something similar to VAT. VAT is a tax paid by the public as a percentage of stuff they buy – we also need a simple tax as a percentage of stuff sold. Sell something, pay a percentage. The problem with corporation tax etc is it’s very easy to shift profits offshore, and make a loss for tax purposes.

    cranberry
    Member

    Q.

    Who owns the newspapers?

    A Shareholders.

    rogerthecat
    Member

    cranberry – Member

    <Bullsh*t>After visiting a nursery, he heads to a well known burger chain for a nutritious snack and parks in the disabled parking bay.</Bullsh*t>

    But don’t let that get in the way of what was otherwise a very interesting story.

    Just relating what was reported in out wonderful media.

    Clickety

    bencooper
    Member

    Interestingly, it’s the Guardian who have been pushing the tax haven story most.

    There is a deeper problem – companies have a duty to their shareholders to minimise the amount of tax they pay, they can actually get in big trouble if they don’t. Is it really right to blame the companies for this?

    lemonysam
    Member

    One of the real hallmarks of the current era of british politics (say Gordon Brown to present) seems to be incredibly poor PR work on both sides of the house.

    Speech writing seems to be a dead artform, soundbites (“aspiration nation”, “downgraded chancellor”) have become so utterly banal that they only ever get taken up as a stick with which to beat their issuer and then minor blunders like this seem to be par for the course.

    Did Tony Blair steal all the talented stage managers and spin doctors before he left office?

    Premier Icon Rusty Spanner
    Subscriber

    [video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ead7EOypKDE[/video]

    The mighty Biscuit had this covered ages ago.
    There the new lolcats, don’t you know. 🙂

    A dirty rounder, a no-good fraud
    A ne’er-do-well of the highest accord
    I’ve got the supermarket sympathy vote
    I’ve got a ten year old doctor’s note

    ‘Cos I’m a Blue, Blue Badge Abuser
    I’m a Blue, Blue Badge Abuser

    I park up in the pouring rain
    The space was empty, who’s to complain
    And if they did, I’d say I’m due for the op
    And sprint wilfully off to the shop

    ‘Cos I’m a Blue, Blue Badge Abuser
    I’m a Blue, Blue Badge Abuser

    (Fetch my stick, Margaret!)

    I used to favour Justice and Truth
    An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth
    One day I know I’ll have to face his wrath
    A walk in hell for a walk-in bath

    big_n_daft
    Member

    so why isnt the media concentrating on the debate about tax havens etc instead of this worthless article

    GMG and tax havens?

    A Tip-Off For the Guardian Investigations Team

    grum
    Member

    what is interesting is the nonsense about his comments yesterday.

    now if you can seperate the comments from the sentencing and the benefits lifestyle which was the intention, then everyone agrees on having a debate its just rubbish reporting and rubbish political posturing from all sides, and none of it allows a proper debate or proper solution to issues around benefits.

    He cynically tried to exploit a completely unrelated and horrific case to try and bolster support for the government’s campaign to demonise/punish the most vulnerable people in society. What on earth does that have to do with a ‘proper debate’?

    GMG and tax havens?

    http://order-order.com/2013/04/04/a-tip-off-for-the-guardian-investigations-team/

    Yes the Guardian doesn’t practice what it preaches – so would it be best if they just STFU about tax havens then?

    rogerthecat
    Member

    Did Tony Blair steal all the talented stage managers and spin doctors before he left office?

    @lemonysam – my point in a nutshell.

    big_n_daft
    Member

    He cynically tried to exploit a completely unrelated and horrific case to try and bolster support for the government’s campaign to demonise/punish the most vulnerable people in society. What on earth does that have to do with a ‘proper debate’?

    I think what is happening is that all the vested interests in the status quo are cynically demonising anyone who challenges the current way benefits are paid.

    Ed & Ed, will not commit to rolling back any of the changes, they just keep on with the defunct class war rhetoric, what policies do they actually have at the moment?

    40,000 families have 5 or more kids, at what point does the support from benefits become subsidising life choices?

    allthepies
    Member

    Yes the Guardian doesn’t practice what it preaches – so would it be best if they just STFU about tax havens then?

    Well, people in glass houses and all that.

    grum
    Member

    40,000 families have 5 or more kids, at what point does the support from benefits become subsidising life choices?

    The fact is that those kids exist, and they haven’t ‘chosen a life on benefits’ etc – so what do you want to do? They should starve while we give £100,000 tax cuts to millionaires?

    Ed & Ed, will not commit to rolling back any of the changes, they just keep on with the defunct class war rhetoric, what policies do they actually have at the moment?

    Find me an example of anyone in opposition committing to anything at this stage in the electoral cycle. But yes I agree Labour are not much better – that doesn’t make what the government is doing right.

    I think what is happening is that all the vested interests in the status quo are cynically demonising anyone who challenges the current way benefits are paid.

    Who are all these mighty vested interests? You mean the poorest and most vulnerable people in our society? Yes, they have far too much influence don’t they. 🙄

    Well, people in glass houses and all that.

    To my mind it’s better that someone is highlighting/campaigning on these issues than not.

    big_n_daft
    Member

    The fact is that those kids exist, and they haven’t ‘chosen a life on benefits’ etc – so what do you want to do? They should starve while we give £100,000 tax cuts to millionaires?

    I thought that taxation was the government taking your money that you earnt. I would have thought that you would celibrate that the current government is averaging a higher rate of taxation on the highest earners than the previous labour government did for 95% of it’s tenure

    I suppose you support limitless benefits then, more kids, more need, more cash? Or do you have an alternative proposal?

    any more class war rehetoric?

    Premier Icon stumpyjon
    Subscriber

    The fact is that those kids exist, and they haven’t ‘chosen a life on benefits’ etc – so what do you want to do? They should starve while we give £100,000 tax cuts to millionaires?

    Which is why we should be debating how our welfare system works. If it was simple even the politicos would have sorted it.

    Not defending the tax cut by the way. That really was a crass move even it allegedly did raise more tax.

    big_n_daft
    Member

    Find me an example of anyone in opposition committing to anything at this stage in the electoral cycle. But yes I agree Labour are not much better – that doesn’t make what the government is doing right.

    If they had any real political philosophy rather than just “getting into power” they would have policies now.

    Who are all these mighty vested interests? You mean the poorest and most vulnerable people in our society? Yes, they have far too much influence don’t they

    the vested interests aren’t the poor, I don’t see them on the the media, instead I see third sector organisations, labour party and others that need the continuation of the status quo to support their existence

    grum
    Member

    I suppose you support limitless benefits then, more kids, more need, more cash?

    Total straw man argument. 🙄

    I would have thought that you would celibrate that the current government is averaging a higher rate of taxation on the highest earners than the previous labour government did for 95% of it’s tenure

    Evidence? Is that before the higher rate tax cut? I’ve already said I’m no fan of Labour BTW so I don’t know why you keep bringing them up.

    Which is why we should be debating how our welfare system works.

    If only we could have a sensible debate without people constantly bringing up myths half-remembered from wildly slanted Daily Mail articles, or trying to link benefits with completely unrelated crimes.

    the vested interests aren’t the poor, I don’t see them on the the media, instead I see third sector organisations, labour party and others that need the continuation of the status quo to support their existence

    AKA people with morality and a conscience – something you and your chums in power seem to be lacking.

    And whatever anyone thinks about ‘benefits culture’ etc – the fact remains the vast majority of people on benefits are pensioners and people who are working and receiving working tax credits. So all the relentless focus on shirkers etc is a total red herring.

    Junkyard
    Member

    Wow so Gideon is a in insensitive person who does not care for the disabled – given his policies he has hidden this well

    Who owns the newspapers?
    A Shareholders.

    why did you use the guardian as your example – its owned by a charitable trust created to stop it falling into the hands of an owner rather than being owned by shareholders

    In fact a few of the newspapers have a sole owner still and in the case of News International both – iirc Murdoch has 51`% of [voting]shares so always has a majority but may be wrong on that one.

    The Guardian is part of the GMG Guardian Media Group of newspapers, radio stations, print media including The Observer Sunday newspaper, The Guardian Weekly international newspaper, and new media—Guardian Abroad website, and guardian.co.uk. All the aforementioned were owned by The Scott Trust, a charitable foundation existing between 1936 and 2008, which aimed to ensure the paper’s editorial independence in perpetuity, maintaining its financial health to ensure it did not become vulnerable to take overs by for-profit media groups. At the beginning of October 2008, the Scott Trusts assets were transferred to a new limited company, The Scott Trust Limited, with the intention being that the original trust would be wound up.[86] Dame Liz Forgan, chair of the Scott Trust, reassured staff that the purposes of the new company remained as under the previous arrangements

    big_n_daft
    Member

    Total straw man argument

    no it’s a real one, there has been a example of a family with considerably more kids in the media recently, so again

    I suppose you support limitless benefits then, more kids, more need, more cash? Or do you have an alternative proposal?

    AKA people with morality and a conscience

    so no financial interest in it at all? Who pays them? Where do your third sector friends get their money from? what would they do if there was no “need”?

    morality and a conscience – something you and your chums in power seem to be lacking.

    any more class war rehetoric?

    big_n_daft
    Member

    Wow so Gideons police CPO driver is a in insensitive person who does not care for the disabledgiven his policies he has hidden this well he’ll get a promotion when the dust settles down

    FIFY 😉

    grum
    Member

    so no financial interest in it at all? Who pays them? Where do your third sector friends get their money from? what would they do if there was no “need”?

    Maybe, but do you truly believe all those people, church leaders etc, are motivated only by personal greed – and not because they have a social conscience, and actually care about vulnerable people? Really? Perhaps you shouldn’t judge others by your own cynical standards.

    I suppose you support limitless benefits then, more kids, more need, more cash? Or do you have an alternative proposal?

    I don’t buy the argument that the level of extra benefits you get from having extra children really encourages significant numbers of people to have lots of children purely to ‘milk’ the system. Do you have some evidence that this is the case (please try to avoid using Daily Mail articles as a reference)?

    I don’t have any children so perhaps I should demand no tax breaks/tax credits for the people that do eh?

    any more class war rehetoric?

    How about trying to engage the arguments, rather than just resorting to meaningless sub-Richard Littlejohn soundbites?

    brakes
    Member

    straw man argument

    extrapolated

    hyperbole

    non-sequitor

    is there an app that pumps out these phrases?
    there seems to be an abundance of them lately.

    Premier Icon wwaswas
    Subscriber

    Surely these police protection bods are selected because they’re above reproach, aren’t they?

    http://www.basildonrecorder.co.uk/news/10331479.Royal_security_chief_found_guilty_of_downloading_child_porn

    Former Home Office security chief, David Tracey, 48, admitted accessing more than 60,000 photos and 30,000 movies of children

    Premier Icon footflaps
    Subscriber

    Former Home Office security chief, David Tracey, 48, admitted accessing more than 60,000 photos and 30,000 movies of children

    To be fair he was training for the Priesthood…..

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 75 total)

The topic ‘Gideon – a PR disaster!’ is closed to new replies.