GIVEN he is earning his living from the Scottish media, who’s surprised at Stuart Cosgrove’s upbeat piece defending it (Sunday National, October 14)?

Perhaps narrowing his discourse to the Scottish media, when most would refer to mainstream media to include UK written and broadcast media, conveniently allows Stuart to support his argument with largely cultural rather than the overtly political output which has had such a strong effect in moulding public opinion.

Hooked in by undue columns of politically diversionary sport reporting – mainly football and then principally Glasgow’s Old Firm – puzzle pages, fashion, advice and celebrity gossip nonsense, readers are fed, almost subliminally, a diet of accompanying establishment-biased news reporting and editorial comment that shapes public opinion to maintain the status quo and obviate potential dissent of the readership to the many inequalities we can see that exist in our society.

When The Sun says “vote Tory”, or supports Brexit, or tells us how to vote through headlines like “will the last person to leave Britain turn off the lights?” they know they’ve already skilfully moulded the views of their readers and that they will deliver. And they did, job done, compliance achieved.

When the Daily Record gave front-page prominence to “The Vow” it wasn’t simply a benign reporting of the news, it was done in the full and certain knowledge of the full impact it would have. And it clearly did.

When the Paul Dacre-type news barons espouse their editorial views, they do so knowing full well that they are achieving the compliance of their readership to deliver their choice of government to maintain the status quo that delivers profits for them and wealth for the controlling class.

And when the BBC gave undue prominence to Nigel Farage and Ukip when their parliamentary presence didn’t warrant it, and has given the same imbalance of prominence to Brexiteers in its Brexit programming coverage, and the obvious lack of balance when reporting Scottish independence news and issues, it can only be conducting itself to a carefully crafted policy from an establishment that is prepared to sacrifice the BBC’s integrity for its own purposes.

Aren’t the public now wising up to these old media streams, which are losing circulation, readers and viewers in droves as we move to newer journals and programming breaking the market mould, and online where the views being expressed in responses illustrate the growing recognition of the public to the realities of contemporary societal structures and increasing demand for change?

If any of these older media streams are to survive, don’t they need to reflect the desires of their readership rather than attempting to shape them in a narrow interest?

And, in Scotland, shouldn’t they reflect the significant and daily increasing desire for self-determination through independence and the more egalitarian and fairer society we could build by making our own decisions?

Jim Taylor
Edinburgh

READ MORE: Whisper it ... the mainstream press may be changing for the better​

SOME correspondents commenting on Stuart Cosgrove’s piece are well off the mark. Just to remind everybody the issue of the Daily Record that featured the infamous “Vow” had alongside that on that front page a moving appeal from the late Canon Kenyon Wright for us to vote Yes for our children. It is debatable which of these had the greater appeal.

The Daily Record is traditionally a Labour-supporting newspaper. It is entitled to be so. Against a mainstream media almost entirely Tory, that has been quite refreshing over the years. Unlike the rest of the tabloid press in Scotland it is also largely written in Scotland and majority Scottish in content. It readers’ letters display a lively range of views for and against the SNP and independence.

Yesterday’s Record had a full page for Mhairi Black and almost a full page generous to Nicola Sturgeon, and it has had significant SNP input for several years. Many of its editorials are very generous to the SNP – and many are not. Quelle surprise! And tell me any newspaper (The National excepted) that wouldn’t have majored on the Alex Salmond issue if it had been given it.

Dave McEwan Hill
Argyll

I NOTICED the Record is more sympathetic to the idea of independence. It’s had a few illusions shattered a bit I think, and is very in tune with the dangers of Brexit. But it always did have some balance, and indeed other titles had the same. We tend to notice those articles that are “against” us, and pass over ones that are “for”.

Peter Piper
via thenational.scot

I MUST try to cheer up, it may not happen. Thinking of stockpiling, particularly medicines, I wonder how it is going.

We know that our hospitals will be concerned if this does become one impact of Brexit. But the elderly among us who now enjoy longer lives benefit because of the wonderful medication that we take regularly. When we meet old friends and see how we have good health, how often do we say “keep taking the pills”?

But what if the pills cease to be available? Will we see a sudden increase in the death rate among our parents and grandparents? It has made me wonder if there are arrangements in hand to stockpile coffins to meet increased demand. Perhaps being manufactured at secret locations so as to avoid panic as it was during the Blitz. And could we soon see the appointment of a minister of coffin allocation, and will there be queues at funeral parlours unable to deal with the increased business?

This may well be viewed as scaremongering, but if it does scare us into coming to our senses it may be no bad thing. And it has its upsides. If as we are told it was the older generation that mainly voted for Brexit, well, the numbers will be fewer if a “people’s vote” does come along. And Tory ministers may well say it just shows that there can be more than one way to solve the elderly care crisis.

Robert Johnston
Airdrie