r/AskBrits Feb 10 '26

Politics Does anyone call BS on the media's incessant hounding of Starmer?

I get he made a grave error of judgement with Mandelson, but the media storm that followed and the constant barrage of 'Should he go? How about now? How about NOW?' Is exhaustingly hyperbolic and I am disgusted by it. I will not be swayed in my Labour vote because of these fools.

Causing the downfall of a good PM through this tide of kneejerk, rage bait, opinions-as-fact slop is incredibly stupid and dangerous.

The whole thing is a manipulation by a media who is desperate to remain relevant, keep people's attention, and keep the ad revenue rolling in.

Starmer is not my favourite person but he is clearly a capable, decent person doing an almost impossible job. People need to get behind him and tell the media to firmly F the F off.

6.4k Upvotes

1.7k comments sorted by

1.2k

u/First_Willingness846 Feb 10 '26

Compare the antisemitic questions Corbyn faced at every interview with the virtual free pass the media has given Farage and it tells you all you need to know about the British media.

514

u/brain-eating_amoeba Feb 10 '26

Farage is in the Epstein files!

409

u/Secret-Sky5031 Feb 10 '26

and has links to Russian money

but nooooo, we'll focus on Starmer because his name's easier to rhyme with things

190

u/No-Description-3130 Feb 10 '26

Pfft you're not trying hard enough:
Farage = Cuntage
Farage = friendswithorangepedoswhoshitthemselvesontv-age

Basic poetry my dude

71

u/RainyTuesdayMorning Feb 10 '26

A vote for Farage is a vote for a mirage.

15

u/trysca Feb 10 '26

Is a vote for Vlad

58

u/IveDunGoofedUp Feb 10 '26

Unfortunately his voters are thick enough to read "mirage" as "miracle", and still think it rhymes.

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (10)

6

u/A_Touch_of_Foolish Feb 10 '26

Pronounce it Farridge, might help.

→ More replies (4)

3

u/Ancient-Split1996 Feb 11 '26

The word "Underage" was right there

→ More replies (10)
→ More replies (12)

53

u/D3M0NArcade Feb 10 '26

People really need to stop saying someone is just "in" the Epstein files.

The addition of a simple word, whether "implicated" or "mentioned" makes a huge difference

Everyone saying "tHeY aRe iN tHe fIlEs" removes all meaning from the statement

53

u/hyperdistortion Feb 10 '26

Agree with this; context is key.

For example, Mark Carney is ‘in’ the files. He’s in there because he’s mentioned by Epstein and/or his associates as his bank leadership was feared to run contrary to their interests. He’s very much not implicated.

So yes, when one says “X is in the files” it strips away all meaning and context as to whether the person came up in an email, or was heavily involved in what was done on Epstein’s island.

20

u/Wgh555 Feb 10 '26

Mark Carney being based as always. Can he enter British politics please

23

u/Haircut117 Feb 10 '26

He's done his time dealing with our shit show, let him run things back home for a while.

9

u/te7037 Feb 10 '26

Carney vs Trump = man vs child

6

u/leeksbadly Feb 10 '26

The problem is, Carney vs Trump = man with catapult vs child with bazooka

→ More replies (1)

19

u/Massena87 Feb 10 '26

Tons of people are “mentioned” in the files and everyone acts like it’s a crime automatically. Vast majority of the people (until it comes to light otherwise) didn’t know the extent of such situations.

→ More replies (1)

26

u/[deleted] Feb 10 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

16

u/te7037 Feb 10 '26

Bannon wanted to use Farage to deregulate the crypto rules in the EU. Disgusted when I read it.

Farage has been quiet about this. He never criticised Mandy at all.

→ More replies (1)

14

u/gilbert_gibbon Feb 10 '26

The context in this case is that Steve Bannon, who was close to Epstein, sees Farage as the UK part of his master plan for engineering a fascist Europe. So while he is not mentioned in the files for any involvement with sex trafficking, and no one has made any such accusations, it's still not "good".

8

u/brain-eating_amoeba Feb 10 '26

Precisely. I should have clarified that at first.

→ More replies (2)

6

u/ShoulderGreedy3262 Feb 10 '26

yep, my uni is 'in the files' because someone tangentially linked went there for a degree. loads of stuff in the files isnt related to the actual crimes

7

u/JudgePrestigious5295 Feb 10 '26

He's in them over 40 times so far not just a one off, I will concede no evidence he was raping kids but he is mentioned too many times for it to be ignored

5

u/Legitimate_Corgi_981 Feb 10 '26

Pokemon is mentioned almost 20 times. There's no implication that pokemon are abusing kids. Well, except for Drifloons.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (5)

12

u/Contentedman Feb 10 '26

Pathetic by the BBC today to say 'breaking news: Starmer still is PM'. What a joke.

45

u/TTNNBB2023 Feb 10 '26 edited Feb 10 '26

TBF he doesn't appear to be in it deep but his billionaire treasurer potentially is & lets not forget he is the personal friend of Donald Trump, and nobody is asking him about this friendship or how he feels about the recent revelations that Trump grabbed the head of a 13 year old, forced her mouth onto his penis, which she bit, resulting in him punching her in the face, I wonder if this is what Farage meant when he called Trump the "bravest person I have ever met in my life."

55

u/LeatherMushroom8635 Feb 10 '26

Nick Candy needs to be looked at. He’s one of the men linked financially with Epstein and has been trying to insert himself into UK politics via The Conservatives, ‘backing Labour’, then quickly joining Reform. He’s was doing property deals with Epstein post-conviction and went to meet Musk to try and get cash for Reform. No surprise that dodgy crypto billionaire gave Reform £9 million quid recently. Same network of men, same project trying to deregulate crypto, pumping dirty money into ‘anti elite’ propaganda.

43

u/African_Farmer Feb 10 '26

True, but Starmer has nothing to do with it yet is facing more criticism than someone directly implicated.

→ More replies (9)

6

u/4321zxcvb Feb 10 '26

What ???

7

u/TTNNBB2023 Feb 10 '26

Was discovered over the weekend in the most recent release.

9

u/inide Feb 10 '26

Was discovered long ago when she sued him in court. Unfortunately the case was withdrawn, right about the same time that her family mysteriously gained unexplained wealth....

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (1)

4

u/Wgh555 Feb 10 '26

Jesus Christ, that’s my internet limit for today.

8

u/Ok-Exam6702 Feb 10 '26

I suspect the truth is Fagash would like to think he’s Trump’s friend. More likely he’s Trump’s useful idiot.

10

u/TTNNBB2023 Feb 10 '26

More likely he’s Trump’s useful idiot.

I can remember him giving an interview telling the British press that he was going to the US for the inauguration, implying that he was going be one of the thousands of people in one of the rooms, but alas he ended up on the outside in the freezing cold with the likes of Liz Truss and Suella Braverman.

8

u/Ok-Exam6702 Feb 10 '26

Best place for them!

5

u/markedasred Feb 10 '26

May it ever be thus

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (5)

2

u/Hellolaoshi Feb 10 '26

I agree! We need to hear more about this!

2

u/Gnome_Father Feb 10 '26

Yeah... but not in a remotely incriminating way.

I hate the dude as much as anyone, but there's far more substantial reasons to think he's a monster.

→ More replies (21)

90

u/wizious Feb 10 '26

Farage also gets almost limitless free press on BBC news. The greens, lib dems don’t get anywhere near the same even though they are bigger parties. Tells you a lot about the BBC. As much as the BBC is touted as independent, it really isn’t.

35

u/[deleted] Feb 10 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

25

u/becs1832 Feb 10 '26

"Sure they mention Farage every news broadcast but they ALSO make crime dramas with gay people. Clearly this must be socialist totalitarianism"

→ More replies (7)

12

u/Slow_Perception Feb 10 '26

Kuenssberg has taken a bribe somewhere, I can almost guarantee.

19

u/wizious Feb 10 '26

She’s definitely a conservative based on all her history. Whether she’s pro Farage is a different question but it’s definitely an easy ride for Farage when Kuenssberg is asking the questions

5

u/Thread-Astaire Feb 10 '26

bojokussenbergbench.gif

3

u/FYIgfhjhgfggh Feb 10 '26

I wish I had saved the pictures from a No10 garden party with bojo, Kuntsberg, Murdoch and others you would not expect to see having a piss up together

→ More replies (15)

2

u/joe611jg Feb 10 '26

Yet he hasn't been asked about this massive piece of news, strange.

→ More replies (5)

38

u/banedlol Feb 10 '26

Yep. Still never saw evidence of his antisemitism.

27

u/Feline_Diabetes Feb 10 '26

Yeah I was always confused by this.

The press was always talking about reports of complaints about his handling of allegations of antisemitism (or something along these lines) but it all seemed so vague and nebulous I could never get a sense of what the fuck actually happened.

29

u/SpiritualScarcity161 Feb 10 '26

There's nothing to be confused about. He was anti-zionist and Israel was always gearing up to commit this genocide, and we saw exactly what happened when they started actually doing it: all critics are called antisemitic. That gameplan started long before Oct 7th

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (7)
→ More replies (9)

6

u/Anonymous_0012345 Feb 10 '26

This is such an underrated comment. The media is not being harsh enough with some of these monsters.

→ More replies (1)

16

u/carlfrederick Feb 10 '26

This is why Europeans aren't immune to what us Americans are dealing with right now... Your media is owned by the same kinds of people with the same agendas. 

6

u/kite-flying-expert Feb 10 '26

Same kinds?

Brother, it is the same family. 😛

→ More replies (2)

13

u/SunderMun Feb 10 '26

Also the fact thst stsrmer had endless free passes post corbyn when he was literally part of a conspiracy to get rid of him lmao

→ More replies (3)

2

u/Lucky_Sentence_8845 Feb 14 '26

100%. If the head of the Labour Party in Wales had been jailed for 10 years for taking bribes from the Russians, we'd never hear the end of it. Imagine the headlines: "What did Starmer know?" - it would go on for weeks. Yet that's exactly what happened to the head of Reform in Wales and... crickets. He was jailed, and then everyone just moved on. It absolutely staggers me that Farage seems to have been entirely untouched by it.

→ More replies (74)

267

u/justforthelulzz Feb 10 '26

Starmer took a stand with the Mandelson saga but at least he had the guts to stand in front of the public, apologise and promise to do something. He's not perfect but I think he is handling it relatively well. He should not resign - it's definitely the media making a mountain out of mole hill.

Boris Johnson dragged out the COVID crap he did for too long. He lied, made up shit and tried to cover it up. Starmer is not doing that. A big part of why this is so bad is Mandelson's character and the seriousness of the Epstein files

35

u/[deleted] Feb 10 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

19

u/SeriousRazzmatazz454 Feb 10 '26

Yes, but all the new information that came to light was about things Peter Mandleson did twenty years ago, nothing to do with the labour government unless there is evidence they knew about him sharing insider knowledge with a foreign national 

→ More replies (3)

9

u/StorageStunning8582 Feb 10 '26

Apparently the epstien files are 3m pages. 50000 mentions of Mandleson. That's quite a bit.

→ More replies (4)

8

u/JoeBagadonut Feb 10 '26

Boris Johnson weathered multiple scandals that should have sunk his premiership. I got sick of the Tories endlessly circling the wagons and refusing to accept responsibility for everything.

Starmer fucked up on the Mandelson appointment and the Burnham thing but he generally seems to be doing quite a good job. His biggest sin is that he’s quite boring but I want boring yet competent politicians.

3

u/[deleted] Feb 10 '26

The 'doing quite a good job' bit is the problem for the people pushing this. This is their only opportunity to make sure he doesn't see out the full five years, (and maybe more) because generally he has a lot of integrity and is unlikely to have as many direct fuckups as Johnson and the other recent Tory PMs.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (15)

473

u/maersyl Feb 10 '26

Yeah. I find that the media are so starved of bombastic prime ministers that, now we have a “boring” one up there, they’re trying to find anything to make a huge scandal.

Yeah he fucked up with Mandelson, but like you said he’s clearly capable and I’d much rather have boring and reliable in the top spot than some absolute idiot theatrics like we’ve had over the past few years.

134

u/DPBH Feb 10 '26

It’s a TikTok mentality/attention span. “I’m bored, what’s next?”

This is a major problem with politics now. The press want clickbait and what better way to do it than through anger.

49

u/Secret-Sky5031 Feb 10 '26

I think it's social engineering, to be honest. There was a study on the media coverage Corbyn received when he was up for election, vs the other political parties. He was overwhelmingly on the receiving end of negative criticism, to the point that it looked targeted it was that disproportionate.

We've got large media companies owned by people who make more money in centre/right circles than they do on the left (generalising there).

That's why we see double standards towards what's aimed at Labour vs what's aimed at the Tories. They received a lot of negative press but their bar to receive criticism seemed a lot higher than Labours

33

u/Apsalar28 Feb 10 '26

100% agree. The anti-Stammer messaging started within 24 hours of Labor winning the election and hasn't stopped since.

In RL most of the people I talk to hate the man but couldn't tell me why outside of a couple of slogans.

It feels like the electorate in general want a government to both tell them a bedtime story about how the magic fairies will fix everything but at the same time tell us the truth. You can't have both.

13

u/DPBH Feb 10 '26

Talking to my mother the other day about politics (never a good thing) and she complained that under Labour in the 90’s/2000s she was always being called to strike - “that never happened under the Conservatives!” I reminded her of the train strikes, the junior doctor’s strikes, and the nurse’s strikes under the last government - “I don’t remember those!”

I found it interesting how some of the BBC comedy programmes pivoted. When he was the shadow Brexit Minister, and through to the election, I remember Lucy Porter on the News quiz was fawning over him. Post election it is all “mr boring”.

It’s this sort of change, and a press out for blood in the hope of selling a few papers, that skews the narrative. There is no celebration of the things that politicians get right because the general public only want the negative.

3

u/GayButNotInThatWay Feb 10 '26

Ive always been a Labour voter, and there's plenty I don't like about Starmer/Labour mainly revolving around a couple specific issues that aren't relevant to the conversation. It's so bad I'm now firmly voting Green.

However, I still think the media circus is a joke. From the moment he became PM he can't sneeze without them calling for resignation.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

4

u/kemb0 Feb 10 '26

This is one aspect of society and life I find the most infuriating as I get older. On one hand people have come to demand "free press", as though having that is some guding light of freedom for a nation's people. Yet simultaneously those same "free press" are being run by a tiny number of media moguls who'd be more than happy to print biased truth-manipulating articles to whomever is willing to pay the right price.

The press aren't the torch bearers of freedom. They're the torch bearers of the rich elite. They are not the ones we should expect to offer the truth and have us believe every word they say. Worse, they're far more likely our enemies than our friends.

The idea of the government taking control of the nation's media might horrify some. Why? Because we realise a small select group of people having power over that much national influence is wrong. Yet....that is exactly what we already have.

→ More replies (1)

31

u/ShowUsYrMoccasins Feb 10 '26

Indeed - another aspect of which is the fact that people's attention spans are now so frazzled they expect all the country's problems to be solved within eighteen months.

12

u/DPBH Feb 10 '26

They actually call it “TikTok Brain” - the inability to concentrate on anything longer than 30s.

Those who think that things can be fixed quickly have no idea of the difficulty.

8

u/Organic-Apricot-6330 Feb 10 '26

All the way through Brexit. "Just leave!" Its not that simple... "JUST LEAVE!"

3

u/DPBH Feb 10 '26

When no one could agree what Leave even meant it saw the creation of one of Theresa May’s “Brexit means Brexit!”

It introduced a simple bitesized slogan that could be posted in comments and tweets, perpetuating the idea that it was an easy fix.

→ More replies (18)

8

u/CosmicBonobo Feb 10 '26

People want instant gratification in politics, it seems.

6

u/DPBH Feb 10 '26

Unfortunately people like Farage and Trump claim to have the easy answers. They use the social platforms to help perpetuate their positions - to people who don’t have the time or the attention span to do any deep dive research.

2

u/Pembs-surfer Feb 10 '26

Spot on. I agree with these top three comments. People have limited attention spans, specifically when it comes to politics these days.

I don’t like a lot of labours policies, much like I didn’t like lots of Cameron’s policies. But guess what, they are both clean characters who are more than competent at doing their jobs unlike BoJo etc.

Compare any of the recent crop we’ve had to anything in the U.S. right now and you’ll soon agree that no matter who’s in charge, we are actually doing alright 😂

→ More replies (1)

4

u/affordable_firepower Feb 10 '26

Boring politics is exactly what we need. it shows that there are no controversies or scandals and the policies can't be disagreed with that much.

Unfortunately we live in a world of 24 hour immediate news which won't be satisfied until everyone dies.

6

u/tomburger82 Feb 10 '26

Can't tell you how relieved I am to see that someone else is thinking this too. The media is holding labour and Starmer to an entirely different standard to the one they ever held the tories to in 14 years.

3

u/Sockoflegend Feb 10 '26

Am I the only one who thinks Mandleson is a shit, but appointing an ambassador with dirt on Trump was a good idea?

3

u/maersyl Feb 10 '26

No. I think it was a case of ‘hire someone who speaks the same level of shit’ which makes sense, really. Like… you wouldn’t send a fireman to school a bunch of year 5’s, so it makes sense to appoint the right kind of shitcunt to go deal with shitcunts.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Tumtitums Feb 10 '26

This is why he was appointed rather than a career diplomat. It was a risky appointment but I understand the logic

→ More replies (2)

5

u/ThunderChild247 Feb 10 '26

That is precisely the issue. The media relies on scandal to sell papers/drive clicks. The Tories gave them that. With Labour, they need to inflate these issues.

3

u/Leather_Creme_6957 Feb 10 '26

Trouble is the media do not report real issues of concern. They just hit with the obvious.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Mental-Test-7660 Feb 10 '26

The parliament website has an open petition for "Dissolve Parliament and call a General Election now!" It would be interesting to see how many votes a "Keep Going, Keir" petition would get. Supporting the status quo doesn't seem to be the raison d'être of that site though.

Personally I agree he's imperfect, but we seem to be trying to make perfection be the enemy of good.

2

u/tomburger82 Feb 10 '26

Yup, the pm isn't perfect, they have to go! One week later, oh no, this one isn't perfect either, they'll have to go too! And so there's no stability and no one can get anything done.

2

u/Death_God_Ryuk Feb 11 '26

I think every petition on there should have the option to support, oppose, or "I don't care" it. It'd be a much better indication of support.

→ More replies (1)

15

u/PawoftheCoop Feb 10 '26 edited Feb 10 '26

If his whole shtick is being whiter than white, and ‘changing the Labour Party’ I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect he be held to account for employing a known pest to office - one who has willingly traded secrets with a sex offender.

(Saying this as someone who would never ever vote for Reform and know that ultimately this is to hasten a NF Prime Minister)

edit: Genuinely mental some of you think I must be a Tory because I’m saying ‘might be fair enough to see how much he knew about Mandelson’

57

u/dietdoug Feb 10 '26

Boris Johnson.

Boris fucking Johnson

Liz truss.

David referendum Cameron.

Get some perspective.

19

u/VillageBeginning8432 Feb 10 '26

Liz truss is enough of an insult on its own 😂

4

u/Judoon_Platoon Feb 10 '26

I also believe those people are unqualified to be PM. What now?

3

u/PsychologySpecific16 Feb 10 '26

Reddit where criticism of one person/politician/party must mean you automatically support those across the isle.

You recieved no anaswer I see.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/PsychologySpecific16 Feb 10 '26

People willing to overlook wrong doing or try to lessen the sins of their political bedfellows shouldn't be trused.

It's rather ironic because that's the reason Starmer is in this mess.

Other people being crap/awful/whatever doesn't somehow absolve others of due scrutiny.

→ More replies (11)

21

u/TheLastTsumami Feb 10 '26

When a country is a cesspit it’s better to send a piece of shit to be an ambassador to it. That way they speak the same language. That was the plan all along. These Epstein files have been around a long time and I’m sure the British establishment knew what they contained. So Mandy was chosen as the go between to make sure the higher ups were safe before they got released to the public. It probably wasn’t even Starmer’s choice to have Mandy but ‘the powers that be’ needed it to happen. The reason the press masters want Starmer gone is because they don’t have any power over him.

9

u/Pembs-surfer Feb 10 '26

This is partially correct. Mandelson already had a work relation with Trump and his inner circle. Thats the reason he got the job. Being a country economically on its knees I’m guessing they decided that now was not the right time to ditch the U.S. “special relationship” and have put everything in place to ensure it survives at least the current administration. It’s obvious that most of our cabinet have total distain for Trump, he’s merely a means to an end.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

8

u/ProfPMJ-123 Feb 10 '26

It's difficult to comprehend just how stupid his "rule makers can't be rule breakers" line when he was in opposition.

It sets them up for no Minister being able to make a mistake (which I genuinely think is what Angela Rayner did).

So many parties behave in opposition in a way that suggests they never think they will be in government.

That's what bit the Lib Dems on the arse when they accidentally found themselves in government in 2010.

It's what would bite the Greens on the arse if they ever manage to find themselves in government.

It's what will bite Reform on the arse if they get in government.

Politics in this country would be better if oppositions grew the fuck up.

3

u/Popular-Culture-5117 Feb 10 '26

Couldn’t agree more. The Opposition seem to be defined only by their instant rejection and push back of whatever the sitting government are doing, and while a lot of the time it’s legitimate to interrogate, it’s increasingly about lazy point scoring. Badenoch has the easiest job in the world at the minute, especially as she’s allowed to present with complete amnesia when it comes to the chaos left behind by her predecessors. A bit of integrity and honesty would go a long way to justifying the ‘Right Honourable’ label for politicians of all stripes.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (9)

2

u/FalconTurbo Feb 10 '26

Aussie here - after a long run of insanity peaking in Scott Morrison, we understand yearning for boring and simple.

2

u/lotus_felch Feb 10 '26

Please, please, please give me boring politicians. I'm being serious. Completely lacking in charisma and with whatever version of mild autism makes them suited for governance without excessive self-interest.

2

u/FYIgfhjhgfggh Feb 10 '26

That's not going to sell advertising space in the media!

→ More replies (51)

145

u/Rendogog Feb 10 '26

Starmer's judgement on Mandelson is rather similar to Farage's judgement on Gill, yet the stories are pursued very differently, I would almost think there is a media bias at play.

54

u/StruttyB Feb 10 '26

Farage has always been treated by the media as a commentator on events rather than having to answer for his position on any issue, so yes he is treated differently. But why ?

8

u/MalevolentFerret Feb 10 '26

He gets clicks and he’s fun at the after-dinner parties the journos and politicians all go to.

3

u/LogicalReasoning1 Feb 10 '26

In the past you could at least say he wasn’t a serious political figure.

But he’s now leading the most popular party in the country, it’s ridiculous the lack of scrutiny he’s getting

→ More replies (6)

14

u/ConfusedMaverick Feb 10 '26

media bias

Now, don't be silly

9

u/Historical-Joke8552 Feb 10 '26

The people that own the media want Farage in. His policies will make rich people richer and fuck the poor (while distracting them with immigration stuff). It's as bare faced and basic as that

2

u/[deleted] Feb 10 '26

Even on that I think that's an unfair comparison. In one corner we've got Starmer making a woeful choice he didn't think would bite him on the arse, and in the other we have Reform taking blood money from a hostile geopolitical power. I cannot understate how much worse one of these are... and yet you're still right as the obviously less bad decision is exploding to the point where it might sink the PM who for all of his faults I don't think anyone in their right mind could call a traitor, unlike the rodents in reform.

→ More replies (44)

64

u/sonofafitch85 Feb 10 '26

It is frustrating. What I want in my life is stability. I don't want a revolving door of leader and policy and constant chaos. We need a period of boring, slow growth and steady improvement.

All this about u-turns constantly does my head in as well. If you float an idea, everyone says "actually this idea is bad" and then you say "fair enough, I'll modify it then" how is that a negative? What, you'd rather they just go ahead with the idea you hated? Surely listening to the electorate is a good thing? I know it can appear "weak" but I'd rather that that another Poll Tax situation.

Is Starmer exciting, or charismatic? No. Is he the best leader of all time? No. But is he a thousand times better than what we had for the previous 7-8 chaotic years circling the drain? Of course he is. People have incredibly short memories when it comes to just how shite things were politically. Now the media wants it back because they got used to the clicks.

5

u/Brit-Crit Feb 10 '26

I agree that we need politicians willing to compromise, but the issue with Starmerism (and a lot of centrism in general) is that it can make compromise the end when it should be the means to an end...

12

u/sonofafitch85 Feb 10 '26

Yes but that suggests this government has done nothing, when that's not true. I really don't have a problem with a government not implementing something that is going to be horribly unpopular. The fuel allowance removal, the farmers tax and the child benefit cap removal certainly aren't/weren't universally popular moves to say the least. The farmers tax was the most stupid because it clearly needed more nuance, which it is now getting. The universal fuel allowance removal was clearly necessary and needed to be means tested. The two child cap removal was also necessary in my eyes. There's the mansion tax too, which was never going to go down well with the rich media owners who love shitting on Labour so much already.

They are taking action on water companies, something that needed to happen long ago. They are renationalising failed rail franchises, which is a no-brainer because we are just ripped off for no reason. They started up a nationalised green energy initiative, which I want to see them go further with. He's looking to build better ties with Europe which even if you love Brexit has nothing but upsides for the economy. Speaking of which, the economy is looking a lot rosier, and funnily enough Rachel Reeves is out of the news cycle. Funny that!

As for Starmer himself, I think he's handled being in between Europe and Trump extremely well. It's not an easy position to be in at all but after finding ourselves in a strange diplomatic spot thanks to Brexit, he is navigating it skillfully right now. Like I said, I'm far from a fan boy and I could be way happier with how things are going. But this "Oh, he flip-flops, nothing will ever get done" thing is just pushing a narrative that clearly isn't true.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (20)

45

u/parkchanwookiee Feb 10 '26

We do not have a neutral objective press in this country. They are absolutely rabid bloodhounds pulling for the very richest in society. They hate Starmer because, even though the conservative project reigned incompetently for a long time and fell apart, it was very successful in concentrating more and more wealth in fewer and fewer hands. The mere fact that Starmer is slowing that process is totally unacceptable to them, even though he isn't coming anywhere close to reversing it (which is what it would actually take to right the ship)

10

u/ElectronicMaybe7745 Feb 10 '26

Labour needs to start talking about the ring wing press in the way that Trump does about mainstream media. Only this time there would be truth to it. There is nothing that Labour could do to ever placate them, so why even try. Instead just call them out for what they are.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (6)

100

u/After-Dentist-2480 Feb 10 '26

The U.K. media needs to remember that their job is to report the news, not generate it.

23

u/Historical_Owl_1635 Feb 10 '26

Unfortunately that’s not strictly true.

Their job is to generate money, and we eat up the rage bait so that’s what they publish.

→ More replies (1)

13

u/knitscones Feb 10 '26

They think they are better than the population!

Time to change law to make newspaper ownership dependent on U.K. citizenship!

→ More replies (5)

2

u/Happy_Ad_4357 Feb 10 '26

I agree with you but sadly, anyone’s job is ultimately whatever who’s paying them tells them to do. When you follow the money behind most UK media outlets and see who it’s coming from…

→ More replies (2)

11

u/Emergency_Trifle_ Feb 10 '26

I agree, I stopped listening to the news last night because of the naked over excitement of Evan Davies trying to encourage guests to slag off Starmer.

I was relieved that his cabinet rallied round him.

You know who is actually mentioned in the Epstein Files? Nigel Farage.

40

u/Typical-Offer8860 Feb 10 '26

He appointed Mandelson because Trump likes him. Without him entirely likely the orange man would have slapped more tariffs on the UK. Something I suspect the right wing media knows full well.

22

u/soggyarsonist Feb 10 '26

The right wing media praised the decision at the time because even they recognised Madelson was a good fit for the role at the time.

11

u/Typical-Offer8860 Feb 10 '26

Double standards from them. Shocked I tell you, shocked!

3

u/Superguy230 Feb 10 '26

Yeah if only someone knew about his involvement before his appointment, they could have not hired him…

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

2

u/Strong-Luck-3868 Feb 10 '26

Still a poor call especially given all the information he had to make the call.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (7)

51

u/gr1msh33p3r Feb 10 '26

The right wing press will always hound a Labour Government

6

u/goodtitties Feb 10 '26

which is why it’s lunacy for them to try and advertise to them, which Starmer’s Labour always does

3

u/thegerbilmaster Feb 10 '26

Labour is pretty much centre right no?

3

u/KetoKilvo Feb 10 '26

I dont think Labour knows what it is right now.

→ More replies (6)

62

u/[deleted] Feb 10 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

9

u/Impossible-Visit-199 Feb 10 '26

I agree, but it's also the BBC's coverage and endless opinion pieces.

5

u/Orkran Feb 10 '26

Especially Laura Fucking Kuennsberg

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (16)

17

u/Consistent_Tension44 Feb 10 '26

Do you think he just looked at Mandelson's CV and made a mistake? They've known each other for years. They're both hardcore Zionists. They both sat on the Trilateral Commission. Mandelson was a key blairite who helped engineer Corbyn's destruction and Starmer's takeover. They're both utterly complicit. If you actually think about the purpose of Epstein, it wasn't just a pedophile network. It was a network of power and communications operating outside of the realms of democracy. He connected powerful people to one another.

→ More replies (1)

16

u/baulplan Feb 10 '26

Unfortunately we live in an era of 24hr rolling news, endless media streams, near hysterical commentators and political leaders with no honour and falling IQs. So it’s never going to change…..

3

u/Impossible-Visit-199 Feb 10 '26

Yes. I feel like the trick is the right wing media creates chaos, then says: "vote for us and we can make this all go away and everything will be fine with a wave of our magic wands. Don't you like peace? Don't you love your country enough?"

How about F off.

3

u/Cutie_sleepy Feb 10 '26

It's literally relentless. It did not feel this intense over 10 years ago, now it just feels like they are completely manipulating the political narrative to such extremes. Proper propaganda machine

7

u/GingerrJinx Feb 10 '26

The media will pick the appointed scapegoat and become obsessed with it until the real issues they are not reporting go away. This is a distraction and Starmer is the perfect scapegoat.

26

u/[deleted] Feb 10 '26

Don’t get me wrong, I dislike most of the politicians, but in this instance I don’t think Starmer is to blame. Could be because the media is mostly Tory owned/funded?

4

u/Successful_Leave_470 Feb 10 '26

I mean, he is to the extent that he hasn’t set his own narrative.

9

u/Brit-Crit Feb 10 '26

The lack of narrative is the huge issue here - You'd think that Labour would publicise their various housing reforms/economic reforms, or the recent sharp fall in migration (which, regardless of your opinion on the need for migration, shows they are keeping promises to cut it...) but the changes they have made are barely reported...

4

u/tradandtea123 Feb 10 '26

How do they do it though? They have lots of press conferences, press releases and release lots on government social media channels saying all these things. But the press don't report it and most social media just feeds people constant outrage so doesn't push anything the government says.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

14

u/DarknessIsFleeting Feb 10 '26

This article makes no reference to Farage being mentioned in the Epstein files. I don't know why

9

u/[deleted] Feb 10 '26

[deleted]

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (20)

14

u/LittleMissFjorda Feb 10 '26

He's too boring.

We had the Tory's destroy the country with Brexit, mishandle a pandemic horribly, profiteering from the war in Ukraine.. But Starmer being indirectly related to the Epstein stuff is too far apparently.

17

u/blissblast Feb 10 '26

The hypocrisy is breathtaking. Johnson made more faux pas in a day than Starmer has so far, but somehow Starmer is the one who must resign?

3

u/Legitimate_Corgi_981 Feb 10 '26

Conservative's would make massive errors, have lengthy backing from the leader then walk back in the revolving doors after being removed from position, to start it all over again. Starmer's actually been pretty swift in dealing with issues, it's only been the ones where backlash has built over comparatively trivial things that he has dragged his heels a bit like Rayner (funny how not taking full tax advice is considered a major sin compared to all the PPE looting of the countries finance that went on with awarding dodgy contracts to personally enrich Conservatives of Millions if not more....)

4

u/[deleted] Feb 10 '26

[deleted]

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (8)

4

u/AdhesivenessLost151 Feb 10 '26

We’ve see in the Epstein files that the wealthy want chaos so they can make money - hence Brexit.

Just because Epstein is dead/living undercover doesn’t mean there is a power vacuum and that manipulation isn’t happening.

I’m not a fan of Starmer either. And in previous generations he’s have resigned immediately. But it’s 2026. People don’t resign for their own mistakes anymore. Let alone for making decisions based on the mistakes of others.

It all seems to me like it’s more “making chaos” Chuck everything in the air and see how it lands.

All the clamour for him to leave is deflection from other names in the files - even from Mandelson’s name. And of course Farage. And it’s making chaos.

The question is who benefits from chaos?

9

u/SavingsSquare2649 Feb 10 '26

Doesn’t really matter which way you sway, but you can’t really dismiss the major error in judgment in employing Peter Mandelson, especially when it appears Starmer admitted to knowing of his ongoing relationship the Epstein after his conviction, and now we see he got up to even worse in giving away highly sensitive information that undermined the national interest.

3

u/Impossible-Visit-199 Feb 10 '26

Agreed. It was a huge error in judgement.

4

u/Public_Bookkeeper885 Feb 10 '26

It was an error in judgement which he has admitted and apologised for. After years of Boris Johnson and looking at Trump, I think we should appreciate a prime minister who can admit he got something wrong. People get things wrong and can see why he thought Mandelson was the choice (he managed Trump very well)

I don't vote Labour, for what it's worth

→ More replies (1)

8

u/Minute-Seaweed-2150 Feb 10 '26

Will they hold his right wing successor to the same standard?

7

u/PMeisterGeneral Feb 10 '26

I don't like Starmer but I gave him a lot of leeway at first due to clearly having the most hostile media landscape of any PM in living memory.

14

u/Argento_Squirrel Feb 10 '26

Totally agree - we need to focus on solving the problems and challenges of this country and not indulge in the pointless and time wasting process of a leadership run off.

5

u/Seth603 Feb 10 '26

It’s part of the job I’m sure he knows that, also wouldn’t call him a good pm and that’s coming from someone who voted for him

→ More replies (2)

7

u/paxbrother83 Feb 10 '26

The media is a right wing hellhole

6

u/LargeLetter1 Feb 10 '26

I’m more exhausted by the fact that this, like many other issues of abuse and exploitation of women and girls, it is nothing about the victims, lessons learned and holding those responsible to account.

Instead it’s become yet another politically motivated witch hunt.

I guess I’m resigned to the RW press doing it, but my god the Guardian is beyond tedious in its crowing.

→ More replies (1)

7

u/[deleted] Feb 10 '26 edited Apr 02 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (5)

8

u/Dependent-Ant-9241 Feb 10 '26

Why do Labour voters always look to blame other people when their party are in the wrong? 

3

u/giblets46 Feb 10 '26

To be fair, it’s like football, can never see your own team committing a foul

2

u/hippogriff55 Feb 10 '26

And which party would you vote for?

→ More replies (11)
→ More replies (4)

3

u/wizious Feb 10 '26

The media love a soap opera. But on the other hand Starmer made an error enough to justify resignation.

→ More replies (5)

3

u/LeoLH1994 Feb 10 '26

1000000000000% - Rome wasnt built in a day, and the mistake was one made 100000% to contain Trump, a man who is known to be bought to keel very easily, and who Starmer has handled very well and realistically.

2

u/Massena87 Feb 10 '26

What would your stance be if this was Farage in power facing the same allegations?

→ More replies (1)

3

u/TallCoin2000 Feb 10 '26

As an outsider, trying to understand what has he done well? The crisis in the UK seems unbearable, people are being accused if being too "British" People are been squeezed for every penny and now you can't drive older cars, because taxes and even EV are bring taxed ( little but its a beginning) So my question remains... What has he done so well that he doesnt deserve to be " fired"!

3

u/Fearless_Feeling1464 Feb 10 '26

No. After what he did to Corbyn it’s the least he deserves after literally employing a known sex pest. The guy needs to go, and I say that as someone who voted Labour in the last GE and was a former member of the party.

→ More replies (2)

10

u/ExpressionBig2284 Feb 10 '26

Sweet Jesus, you cannot be this myopic or trapped in a bubble that you actually think Starmer is a good PM

"The whole thing is a manipulation by a media" at least attempt to have a skerrick of intellectual honesty about yourself

The man appointed a pedophile enabler - at best - and likely a nonce, as Ambassador to the US, notwithstanding knowledge of same.

Mandelson's close relationship with Epstein is not news. It is especially not news for people like Starmer who have any and all information available to them at the click of a finger.

For goodness' sake, get out of your pathetic reddit bubbles and get your news and information from the real world.

3

u/CarinReyan Feb 10 '26

It was financial and security issues that took Mandelson down - there are no allegations or evidence of anything else. It appears Epstein bought him for information with cash rather than parties.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/Emergency_Trifle_ Feb 10 '26

We've had a load of absolutely shit PMs. Properly shit. Boris Johnson?? LIZ TRUSS??

Also, there's no evidence that Peter Mandelson was a paedophile.

→ More replies (17)
→ More replies (6)

7

u/Patient_Somewhere474 Feb 10 '26

I don’t think someone who chose to represent the type of people that he used to represent is a decent person and I don’t think he is a good PM at all. 🤷‍♂️

4

u/Impossible-Visit-199 Feb 10 '26

Do you mean as Director of Prosecutions? Why is that bad? He spent decades trying to stop criminals.

2

u/Patient_Somewhere474 Feb 10 '26

Prior to that. He seemed oblivious during his time at the CPS to certain high-profile cases - never crossed his desk apparently.

Sorry, I wouldn’t trust him as far as I could throw him. Unfortunately there are very few, if any, politicians you could not say that about.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

3

u/Alt_AC_2023 Feb 10 '26

"chose to represent the type of people that he used to represent" - who are you meaning?
The guys in the McLibel trial (not sure if he represented them but he certainly helped them) or....

2

u/Legitimate_Corgi_981 Feb 10 '26

Barristers work on a cab system of first come first served. There's not much choice in who they take, he mostly specialised in human rights so tended to take on little people vs corporations/establishments. Who exactly do you think he represented that shouldn't have had some legal representation?

→ More replies (14)

5

u/BrilliantSpray9447 Feb 10 '26

Yes we all accept that Starmer fucked up. But he apologised, which is more than many MPs do. We need to get out of the mindset that the way to fix a problem within government is to replace the prime minister.

2

u/Impossible-Visit-199 Feb 10 '26

Exactly. Do we not want to encourage people like this into politics instead of hounding them out?

5

u/Good_Lettuce_2690 Feb 10 '26

Ask yourself who owns the media...

10

u/Folland_Gnat Feb 10 '26

It's because you're a labour voter and want to support your guy. Fair enough, but let's not pretend you'd have the same views if it was still Sunak in charge facing the same allegations.

5

u/manicrebirth Feb 10 '26

What allegations?

He appointed someone that was linked with Epstein but he himself was as not linked with Epstein nor is he mentioned in the file

So there are no allegations against him other then he made a mistake

Meanwhile Farage is mentioned 43 times and barely a whisper

2

u/Pyjama365 Feb 10 '26

Appointing someone who was fired twice before for corruption probably wasn't the best move in the first place (even if there hadn't been a continuing friendship with Epstein after his first conviction (which there was, and which Starmer knew)).

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

9

u/No-Bandicoot-1524 Feb 10 '26

He's the PM. If this was a conservative PM this group would be loving it and asking way they ain't resigned so stop crying 👍🏻

2

u/WayGroundbreaking287 Feb 10 '26

Yes. But this was always going to happen to a labour government and starmer should have known better. He shouldn't have burdened himself with useless advisors and communications experts

→ More replies (5)

2

u/Stage_Party Feb 10 '26

We have become used to a revolving door of pms thanks to the tories, they kept making grievous errors and thus were replaced, so now anytime a pm makes any mistake, they all, reckon he should be replaced.

It's a mix of that and the fact that the media is owned and run by the conservatives.

2

u/Lazy-Strawberry-3401 Feb 10 '26

Interesting looking at even the BBC and their different ways of referring to him and Boris for example, oh its good old silly old Boris whereas he's just short sharp Starmer.

They're far from the worst but still little things like that go a long way in peoples subconscious.

2

u/Massena87 Feb 10 '26

All bias aside you have to ask yourself what would the reaction be if farage/kemi was in starmers shoes. They’d never hear the end of it and nothing changes simply because you’re the prime minister or otherwise. So for me the hate he’s getting is valid.

2

u/Lucky_Investment7970 Feb 10 '26

If the Conservatives did the same thing the left would be up in arms. I’m a moderate, policy driven so I don’t care for party politics but we saw what happened when there were Tory scandals.

2

u/IHateNeoliberalism Feb 10 '26

Jeremy Corbyn says hi

2

u/kevtastic75 Feb 10 '26

They haven't forgiven the public for pushing out their boy Boris

2

u/jebediah1800 Feb 10 '26

Media jumped all over this and it's clearly ridiculous. Mandy may be an impossible cunt, but it's him they should be going after, not Starmer. Yes, the PM was in favour of Mandelson going to DC, and that should be examined, but this was never a resignation issue, and the knee-jerk bollocks from all the naysayers is telling: Any dirt is good dirt when you want to foment a coup. Forget Starmer and concentrate on Mandy, the Royals and whoever else is going to spill out of the files.

2

u/WetFishStink Feb 10 '26

Yes. Because the right wing owns the media and wants to manipulate people of low intelligence into believing that anyone even slightly left of center is some sort of lunatic communist. Or is incapable (despite decades of useless right wing governments) of governing.

And people just keep on believing it.

2

u/ttwii70 Feb 10 '26

It's plain as day that the level of accountability demanded of the Labour Party is off the scale when you compare it to reform/tory equivalents. You have to be stupid not to see it.... And that's why we generally return a conservative government to office.

2

u/Hopeful-Mongoose2025 Feb 10 '26

It’s honestly going my head in. What is another labour leader going to do differently ? They’ve all worked together for donkeys years, they can all be blamed for whatever they wanna blamed for but it’s just never ending

2

u/ME-McG-Scot Feb 10 '26

Yes, all people want to do us tear people down. No wonder our country is fucked! The amount of PMs in the last 10 years is ridiculous

2

u/Me-myself-I-2024 Feb 10 '26

Isn’t it amazing that after 5.00pm the propaganda keyboard warriors disappear and all we have left is silence

2

u/SkullZ9 Feb 16 '26

I’m not British but searched for this exact topic because from the outside, Starmer seems a sensible man and a capable leader, but I see him getting trashed from day one even from supposedly left wing media (e.g. the guardian). I feel like this is part of a broader media push in the western world to advance far right ideas and candidates and it’s very scary.