The commenters seem to have taken their cue from the article and its name-calling. Even the one that complains about the paper attacking his father instead of his policies calls the PM 'Cameragoon' (just as bad as 'red ed', no?|) and calls the paper 'pathetic'.
Some of the most highly rated comments are also in the worst rated list, so what's the point of that system anyway?
This is a really interesting example of the ambiguous and contested line between the political persona and the private man - what conclusions can we really draw about Ed Miliband's politics from those of his father? And is Miliband being over-sensitive to robust political debate by objecting on the basis of offence caused or felt. Conservative minister Michael Gove waded into the debate on the latter point: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24363765
ReplyDelete