Morning Call: pick of the papers

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

1. Miliband needs Balls the pragmatist (Financial Times)

The shadow chancellor is a useful corrective to the Labour leader, says Janan Ganesh.

2. Why this year's freshers are just part of a failed experiment (Guardian)

Higher education is pumping out people with degrees into a jobs market that doesn't need them. It's blighting lives – and undermining the university system itself, writes Aditya Chakrabortty.

3. The west must act judiciously over Somalia if these horrors are to end (Independent)

Somalia’s problems have been worsened by bungled intervention from outside, writes Ian Birrell.

4. It was Iron Balls' best shot, but will Tory scare tactics win the day? (Guardian)

Cameron's economic policies are in disarray, but his team's supreme skill is in sticking the stiletto into Labour, says Polly Toynbee.

5. Merkel the visionary is misunderstood (Financial Times)

The chancellor sees that German voters’ interests do not conflict with keeping the euro alive, writes Gideon Rachman.

6. RBS's mad rise and catastrophic fall can't all be blamed on Fred Goodwin (City AM)

The rise of RBS is a very simple one about hype and the human tendency to manias, says Iain Martin.

7. Ed is haunted by the ghosts of politics past (Times)

The Labour leader’s heart lies with old socialism, but his head knows he must appeal to the centre, writes Rachel Sylvester.

8. Angela Merkel’s triumph is good news for Britain (Daily Telegraph)

David Cameron must seize his moment to reverse the drive towards closer union, says Mats Persson.

9. Why is Apple so shifty about how it makes the iPhone? (Guardian)

The paragon of modern tech risks losing its shine by dodging queries about Indonesia, and an orgy of unregulated tin mining, writes George Monbiot.

10. Now I know why I hate the nasties of UKIP (Times)

It’s because it starts from a belief that Britain is under siege from enemies, then goes looking for them, says Hugo Rifkind.

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