Morning Call: pick of the papers

The ten must-read comment pieces from this morning's papers.

1. Eastleigh by-election is a warning for the Tories (Daily Telegraph)

The withered state of the Conservative Party’s grassroots bodes ill for the general election in 2015, says Paul Goodman.

2. The Lib Dems must not stand for any more lies over the NHS (Guardian)

The Tories have misled their coalition partners – and us – repeatedly over the true extent of their health service vandalism, says Polly Toynbee.

3. Settler policy imperils Israel’s foundations (Financial Times)

The country is losing legitimacy among allies around the world, writes Philip Stephens. Netanyahu bears responsibility.

4. Follow Marco or stay out of the White House (Times)

The smart young Republican has shifted on immigration, writes David Taylor. If his party wants power, it must follow suit.

5. Barely noticed, civil war is raging in Whitehall (Independent)

Government ministers are riding roughshod over the civil service, and that leads to government by cock-up and a loss of morale in Whitehall, writes Andreas Whittam Smith.

6. Juries? It's time they went the way of the ducking stool (Guardian)

The soap opera that is the Vicky Pryce trial shows the archaic rituals of our courts to be little more than legal parlour games, writes Simon Jenkins.

7. Weaker pound is welcome but no panacea (Financial Times)

The challenge is to connect monetary and fiscal policy to promote demand while enhancing supply, says Martin Wolf.

8. A degree of good sense (Daily Telegraph)

With people working for longer, and jobs for life becoming a thing of the past, it makes sense for older people to return to higher education, says a Telegraph leader.

9. The Robin Hood tax takes a step closer (Guardian)

The aim of the financial transaction tax is to make banks and markets contribute more – and it's coming to 11 EU states soon, writes Algirdas Šemet.

10. A poorly disguised raid on Britain's aid budget (Independent)

If David Cameron wants to up military spending he should have the courage to say so, says an Independent editorial.

Getty
Show Hide image

The economics of outrage: Why you haven't seen the end of Katie Hopkins

Her distasteful tweet may have cost her a job at LBC, but this isn't the last we've seen of Britain's biggest troll. 

Another atrocity, other surge of grief and fear, and there like clockwork was the UK’s biggest troll. Hours after the explosion at the Manchester Arena that killed 22 mostly young and female concert goers, Katie Hopkins weighed in with a very on-brand tweet calling for a “final solution” to the complex issue of terrorism.

She quickly deleted it, replacing the offending phrase with the words “true solution”, but did not tone down the essentially fascist message. Few thought it had been an innocent mistake on the part of someone unaware of the historical connotations of those two words.  And no matter how many urged their fellow web users not to give Hopkins the attention she craved, it still sparked angry tweets, condemnatory news articles and even reports to the police.

Hopkins has lost her presenting job at LBC radio, but she is yet to lose her column at Mail Online, and it’s quite likely she won’t.

Mail Online and its print counterpart The Daily Mail have regularly shown they are prepared to go down the deliberately divisive path Hopkins was signposting. But even if the site's managing editor Martin Clarke was secretly a liberal sandal-wearer, there are also very good economic reasons for Mail Online to stick with her. The extreme and outrageous is great at gaining attention, and attention is what makes money for Mail Online.

It is ironic that Hopkins’s career was initially helped by TV’s attempts to provide balance. Producers could rely on her to provide a counterweight to even the most committed and rational bleeding-heart liberal.

As Patrick Smith, a former media specialist who is currently a senior reporter at BuzzFeed News points out: “It’s very difficult for producers who are legally bound to be balanced, they will sometimes literally have lawyers in the room.”

“That in a way is why some people who are skirting very close or beyond the bounds of taste and decency get on air.”

But while TV may have made Hopkins, it is online where her extreme views perform best.  As digital publishers have learned, the best way to get the shares, clicks and page views that make them money is to provoke an emotional response. And there are few things as good at provoking an emotional response as extreme and outrageous political views.

And in many ways it doesn’t matter whether that response is negative or positive. Those who complain about what Hopkins says are also the ones who draw attention to it – many will read what she writes in order to know exactly why they should hate her.

Of course using outrageous views as a sales tactic is not confined to the web – The Daily Mail prints columns by Sarah Vine for a reason - but the risks of pushing the boundaries of taste and decency are greater in a linear, analogue world. Cancelling a newspaper subscription or changing radio station is a simpler and often longer-lasting act than pledging to never click on a tempting link on Twitter or Facebook. LBC may have had far more to lose from sticking with Hopkins than Mail Online does, and much less to gain. Someone prepared to say what Hopkins says will not be out of work for long. 

0800 7318496