Starmer’s self image is “I never lie, I always follow the rules”. Jeremy’s self image was “I have been an anti-racist all my life”. Look at the sniffy fury both of them display when their self-image is challenged. That inability to accept criticism and grow is their original sin.
@stephenkb.bsky.social it’s why Sayeeda Warsi is the Home Secretary or Communities Secretary we never had. Bubbly, kind woman who believes in her country, is obviously proud of her faith and has actual constructive ideas about social cohesion.
“He” being Starmer not Stephen
Well I think this is why I find our Mr Bush’s journalism so interesting on this front. He can’t see that structure, ideas and comms should work together. Currently reading Sam Freedman’s book on what’s wrong with Downing St and it’s remarkable how much more well run Blair’s was.
I have to say it’s taken me longer to admit he’s disappointing than it has others.
I don’t think I have ever willed someone to succeed quite as much.
Though I will also say I don’t get the people who really hate him. I think he’s a bit of a dull techocrat who is sadly set in his ways?
Sorry, but I enjoy his writing, often learn a lot from him both in terms of content and style and think he’s always got a humorous take on what can often feel like absurd events. Can I also not just engage with another person on here and support their work? It really was as simple as that.
Stroke, Blair’s dad had stroke.
I’ve also worked for CEOs who told me to fix their comms and I ended up wanting to scream “but you refuse to define what you sell” so Starmer is also an avatar of every mediocre manager I’ve met.
Sure I get it, I also for instance had a mum who was quite unwell large chunks of my childhood and often feel for the guy. Bu then you remember Blair’s dad had a heart attack, he lost his mum as a 21 year old and he was also a fairly successful lawyer and well….
Who are these people? I almost can’t believe they exist? They’re like some weird hill tribe. I mean I could just wade into your conversation threads but oh god my sanity please no
It’s particularly bad with AI. This morning on the Today Programme an AI expert had to gently remind Amol Rajan that Claude boasting billions of dollars in annualised revenue is not the same as saying they’re profitable.
There is a good YouTube montage of every time Musk has predicted driverless cars “next year”. It goes back to 2014.
Another rhetorical technique is the compressed timeline. The prediction is always close enough in the future to scare the crap out of you, while also being far enough away to ensure that you probably won’t remember the prediction by the time the date in question arrives.
For these predictions to work, AI boosters need an enemy. So it’s always the dismissive sceptic with their head in the sand.
Since this prediction by Schulman about mass AI unemployment seems to be doing the rounds on my feed, thought it’s worth sharing my fairly blistering take down of another such warning back in February.
open.substack.com/pub/itsallst...
Wrote a (very cathartic) take down of one of these predictions a couple of months ago. They’re turning into their own sub-genre.
open.substack.com/pub/itsallst...
Oh and didn’t we try a version of “lots of people don’t go to work and the government pays your wages” six years ago and hasn’t it caused untold damage to mental health and young people’s life chances?
Their predictions also don’t track with the commercial strategy of AI companies today. Most AI companies are pivoting to enterprise software. Who buys your product if there is mass unemployment?
@samfr.bsky.social I also wonder if these people understand how wider economies work. Unemployment on that scale surely means knock on effects for shops, hospitality, the housing market? Some of your highest paid workers lose their purchasing power.
I didn’t even need to miss a flight to learn that lesson. Nearly didn’t make my gate at Heathrow Terminal 5 because I forgot getting to said gate involved taking a shuttle bus.
I’ve known that reference since I was 27
And fear not @aliceolilly.bsky.social I’m a newsletter writing and publishing nerd so we’re all as bad as each other 🤣
I unsubscribed to Playbook for that reason. The sort of cutesy, informal way they approach all politics got on my nerves. Bloomberg does a much better job of giving you a newsletter that sounds conversational while still respecting technical details and not insulting your intelligence.
It also over inflates their abilities. Mandelson’s advice was quite often ill suited to the challenges of 2020s Britain. Cummings was well-suited to Brexit but mostly terrible in government
As others like @lewisgoodall.com have also flagged - the “we all knew he was a wrong un” narrative coming out of Westminster is BS.
We treated him like a guru. We treat all these political advisers like gurus until they’re not. See also Dominic Cummings.
Could you direct me to the statement in question?
An example of what I was talking about in my piece last week. Just stop overanalysing Trump.
itsallstorytelling.substack.com/p/the-end-of...
How did we go from “we choose to go to the Moon” to “dead raccoon penis”in one generation?
Well exactly. And I find it about as useful as a spreadsheet. Which is to say it’s a valuable tool for work but also capable of pissing me off. I’m just tired of people trying to convince me I should love it.
Yeah but as is typical with this government they did a good thing in a ham-fisted way.