farronforleaderI thought it would be useful to bring together all the blog posts written in support of Tim Farron’s leadership campaign into a single post. I’ve gathered these from Tim’s site, the Lib Dem Blogs aggregator and others I’ve seen links to. If you’ve written a post supporting Tim and it’s not linked here then please let me know about it, either in the comments or on Twitter, and I’ll add you to the list.

One of the earliest blogs to back Tim was Jack Davies. In his post, Why it’s #time4tim to be the Liberal Democrats’ next leader, he talks about how Tim supported him in his efforts to become a Parliamentary candidate, and how Tim’s standing up for liberal values has inspired him.
Another early Tim backer was Richard Morris. His post, Why I’m supporting Tim Farron to be the next Leader of the Liberal Democrats talks about how he shares Tim’s views, how Tim’s not a conventional politician and how he can unite the membership.
Some bloke called Nick Barlow also wrote a couple of posts backing Tim here and here. They’re probably worth a read.
Stephen Tall notes that he hasn’t had a good record in predicting leaders, but in his post on why he’s supporting Tim, he says that Tim is a ‘gut-instinct liberal’ and ‘exactly what the party needs right now’.
Jennie Rigg gives us a list of reasons why she’s supporting Tim, all of which are great including ‘I have seen him change and learn; every time I have seen this happen he has been consistently, instinctively Liberal about how he applies new information.’
Chris Whiting gives us a bit of anticipation about who he’s going to be endorsing, but his presence in this list probably gives away that he endorses Tim for leader as ‘the best choice we have of rejuvenating the Liberal Democrats’.
Will Wilshere began the campaign as a Norman Lamb supporter, but he’s since switched to supporting Tim because of Tim’s ability to inspire campaigners and his views on foreign policy.
Sean Ash gives us 1906 reasons to support Tim Farron. Luckily, that’s not a very very long list of reasons but a link between Tim and the great Liberal general election victory of 1906.
Rich Clare is supporting Tim because we need a lion in the party leadership who can ‘explain complex issues in simple language, somebody who doesn’t sound like all the other voices in Westminster.’
Paul Walter writes that he’s supporting Tim because he’s a ‘lode star of liberalism’ who can ‘re-establish our identity as liberals’.
Stephen Glenn is proud to be supporting Tim as leader because he’s ‘the general to lead us into the sound of gunfire’.
Hannah on The Liberal Queen blog believes that Tim is the right man to lead the Liberal Democrats because he ‘will stand up for Liberal values and will help the Liberal Democrats rise again.’
Cllr Tony Robertson of Sefton Focus blog is supporting Tim.
The LibDemFightback blog has made Tim their choice for leader because of his record of rebellion during the coalition.
Joe Young urges a vote for hope and change in his endorsement, saying that Tim is ‘the best bits of what it is to be liberal all tied up in one package.’
David Shaw’s post, Looking into a Liberal’s soul, looks at Tim from the perspective of another Liberal who’s also a Christian.
Simon Foster’s Get Tim comes from someone who first campaigned with Tim at Newcastle University and says we now ‘need a liberal radical who will lead the rebuilding of our party.’
Simon Banks has backed Tim in a guest post on this blog, saying that Tim is “passionate in his love of liberty and Liberalism and his hatred of injustice and oppression. He can communicate this passion, excite and motivate.”
Also on this blog, Tony Hutson has shared in a comment the endorsement he wrote for Tim on the party’s CIX chatroom. He believes that Tim is “someone who instinctively ‘gets’ the campaigning base of the party.”
Veteran blogger and long-serving AM Peter Black uses his blog to tell us he’s backing Tim because he’s the best placed to repeat what Charles Kennedy did for the party and “has the best chance of changing the narrative quickly.”
Jenni Hollis says that if the party is to rebuild with ‘Operation Phoenix’ we need Tim as leader because he’s “the popular, media savvy, liberal man with a plan.”
Paul Hindley says Tim can deliver ‘values, vision and liberalism’ and knows “that in order to enact change you need to create a movement.”
James King says it’s time for Tim, saying that he can offer the party both “a reason for existence, and a means of getting that through to voters.”
Mark Valladares has chosen to back Tim, saying he has the boldness, integrity and passion we need in a leader.
New member and blogger Sam Willey is backing Tim after seeing him in action at the Newcastle hustings.
Ryan is another new member convinced that Tim is the best choice for leader after seeing him at a hustings – in Bristol this time. He thinks that “Tim has a natural gift on how he engages with people and inspires them to get involved.”
Jonathan Harrison gives a series of reasons for backing Tim, including his passion, his dignity, his ability to organise the grassroots and his commitment to radical policy for the party.
David Warren thinks we have two excellent candidates in the race, but he’s backing Tim because he’s “the better campaigner and therefore the best person to lead us in rebuilding this party”.
An early backer that I missed including in this update is Tom King. He wrote a long post at the start of the campaign looking at what kind of leader the Liberal Democrats need, concluding that Tim was his choice because he’s capable of “taking control of the party and helping us to create a new identity for ourselves.”
Gareth Epps makes his case for why Tim has to be the next Lib Dem leader on a number of points and concludes that “in the position we are in it just has to be Tim.”
Another guest post on this blog comes from Nigel Quinton, who explains why he believes Tim should be our next leader because of his energy, positivity and effectiveness.
Jonathan Calder of Liberal England, and famous for his role as Lord Bonkers’ amanuensis, has announced that he’ll be voting for Tim.
Keith Watts says now is the time we need a charismatic Liberal Democrat leader, and the person for that role is Tim Farron.
Dan Falchikov has also voted for Tim, but has words of warning that if the party wants to recover this is only the start of it.
Dipa Vaya set up some of the early Facebook groups for Tim. She’s now taken to the world of blogging to tell us more about why she’s backing him because he’ll given an energising and empowering rebuild for the party.
Neil Monnery has a long post on his decision in the election, but comes down to voting for Tim because we “need the person who’ll get the best out of the resources they have and put the party in the best position to grow and recover.”
I’d missed Ed Goncalves’ backing of Tim early in the campaign, so apologies he’s so late to the list. “I’m supporting him because his vision speaks to me. Because I believe he speaks for me, and for people like me. And because I strongly believe he is unequivocally the right leader at the right time.”
Chris Whiting has chosen to back Tim for many reasons, including because of the way “charisma and passion shines through in his speeches.”
Joanne Ferguson is a new member backing Tim because he has the ability to inspire people outside of the party, like Charles Kennedy did.
In a guest post here, Grace Goodlad explains her reasons for supporting Tim, saying it’s time for the party to have a fresh start with him as leader.
Another guest post endorsing Tim here came from several dozen Liberal Youth members who are impressed by the way his experience helps him connect with students and young members.
I’d missed Caron Lindsay’s endorsement of Tim, even though she’s not sure how to deal with a leader younger than her but she gives a detailed list of reasons for backing Tim.

That’s all the blog endorsements I could find so far, but if I’ve missed you out, please let me know and I’ll add you to the list. Also, if you want to write about why you’re supporting Tim but don’t have a blog or anything of your own then please get in touch with me, and I’m sure we can sort out a guest post for you here – and if any other bloggers are happy to take guest posts, let me know!

, ,

libdemblogsAs three of my fellow Liberal Democrat bloggers (Mark Valladares, Alex Marsh and Jonathan Calder) have tackled this subject without using the most obvious of headlines for it, I decided to wait no longer and throw my tuppence of opinion in before someone else realised it was available.

Despite the headline, I think a lot of the decline in political blogging isn’t just limited to the Liberal Democrats. Sure, there’s now a smaller pool to draw from, and previously high-profile names like James Graham aren’t Liberal Democrats anymore, but to me, there don’t seem to be as many political bloggers as there used to be, or if there are they’re now much more congregated into sites with multiple authors rather than individual blogs.

There also doesn’t feel to me that there’s the same level of networking being political bloggers that there used to be. Again, this is personal perception, but I rarely see (or write) posts like this one, where they’re written as a response to something another blogger posted. Back in the Good Old Days of blogging, many posts seemed to be ‘in response to X, who was enraged by Y’s post about Z’s statement’ but now that kind of post is rare, and the self-contained post more common.

I think there are two main reasons for this change. First, there’s been a decline in blog aggregators and readers, the most notable of which to disappear was Google Reader, though I still lament the disappearance of the UK Political Blog Feeds page most of all. It feels to me that what tools of this sort that do exist generally tend to favour aggregating content from a single site or platform. WordPress will aggregate content from WordPress blogs, Blogger from its users and Tumblr from its, but people are less likely to range across platforms than they were. (For those of you who miss Google Reader, I do recommend The Old Reader, though) It’s much harder for a new blog to get noticed and find readers than it used to be, especially if you don’t have access to large number of social media contacts to promote yourself to. (One thing I have just realised – Lib Dem Voice doesn’t appear to have done a ‘welcome to the new bloggers’ post in a while)

Perhaps more importantly, though, the rise of social media has changed the way people use the web and stolen a lot of the niches that were previously only filled by blogs. Short points, sharing links and conversations are much better done on Twitter than blogs, and it’s much easier for a councillor to keep in touch with residents through a Facebook page than a blog – primarily because much more of the population use Facebook regularly than read blogs. It used to be that the answer to a lot of ‘how do I do X online?’ questions was ‘set up a blog’, but now it’s the answer to a much smaller set of questions. Even if you just want to expound your opinion on things, there are enough group blogs looking for content that you don’t need to set your own up and post regularly.

I don’t think blogging – even Liberal Democrat blogging – is dying, just evolving as the web and political ecosystems it sits within change. I would like to see more blogs and bloggers, especially from people who like discussing ideas in depth, but who knows how things might change after May?

,

Thoughts on internal elections

The results from the Liberal Democrat federal internal elections came out this morning, and you can see the results here (for a list of who was elected) and here (for the full voting breakdown).

Various people on blogs (see Jennie and Andy, for example) and Twitter have been discussing the results and the way we run elections before and after the results were declared, and I wanted to jot down some thoughts I’ve had before I forget.

How many party members read Lib Dem blogs? And how many of those are voting reps?

There was a lot of discussion about these elections on various blogs and Twitter, but how many of the relevant people were actually reading them? I noticed that many people who I expected to do well in the elections because of their prominence as bloggers did pretty poorly.

So the question has to be whether the debates we have on Lib Dem blogs (up to and including those on Lib Dem Voice) are actually being seen by much of the party membership. And even if blogs do reach lots of people, are they the same people who vote in these elections? (Have there been demographic analyses of how elected conference reps compare to the membership of the party and the population of the country?)

One other thought – why not just call them ‘Federal representatives’ and ‘Regional representatives’ and not mention Conference? Would that encourage more people to take on the role, if it’s not thought of as being just about going to Conference?

And one last point – the people who get to vote in the 2014 internal elections will actually be getting elected as voting reps in about twelve months time. People planning campaigns for then perhaps should be getting organised a lot sooner than they think they should.

Should the party be encouraging more internal debate?

We pride ourselves on being a democratic and open party, so we shouldn’t be afraid of debating openly amongst ourselves. Indeed, the fact that so many candidates wanted to stand for the different committees shows that there is an urge for that to happen. However, is that debate best accomplished by giving each candidate one sheet of A5 to set out what they want? (And then only letting most people see that if they’re a voting rep) Should the party be encouraging candidates to supply more information online and enabling virtual hustings and debates?

(Jennie pointed at the Pirate Party’s system this morning, which makes a distinction between a campaigning period and a voting period – that could be something worth considering)

Andy makes a good suggestion in the LDV comments:

If there were a dedicated website, a really useful feature would be for it to ennable an online hustings system, where anyone can submit a question to all candidates, subscribe to replies to a question they or someone else have asked, etc. A kind of clearing-house for questions. If it was a reasonably formal part of the way the election was run, then it would avoid the issue of some candidates not supplying their contact details, making it difficult for people like Jennie Rigg and myself to step up to ask questions and broadcast the replies. When you look at each candidate’s details on this website, it could then show not only their original election statement, but also their replies to any questions they’ve been asked.

That would be very useful, and having that in one official location would make it easy to direct people to, while allowing others to campaign and promote people based on what’s being said there.

Following on from Andy’s thought, it occurs to me that if you were to build a system that enabled people to contact candidates, ask questions and receive public replies, there’d be uses for it outside of internal elections. Imagine at the next General Election if, rather than just having their bio on the party website, people could pose questions to parliamentary candidates through it? (It could even be extended to be available for local council candidates, if they wanted to use it) If the party was to start working on a system like that now, then the internal elections in two years time could be the test bed for it – and you could increase participation in the debate and questioning by telling people this is a test of an important part of the General Election campaign – and then it could be rolled out publicly a few months later for the General Election.

That’s all for now, but I reserve the right to bore you all with more thoughts about this at another time.

, , ,

As part of my realisation that it’s been nearly ten years since I started blogging (along with the whole ‘Has it really been that long? God, I’m getting old…’ thoughts) it occurs to me that I don’t follow as many British political blogs as I used to. Part of this is for the very good reason that most British political blogs aren’t very good and are merely about point-scoring and emphasising repeatedly how wonderful your party is while reminding us how evil everyone who doesn’t agree with you is.

But, I’m sure there have to be other blogs out there that I would find interesting if I only knew about them. So if you know of a blog – or even have one yourself – that you think I might find interesting, then please recommend them to me in the comments. I’ll even collate all the recommendations into a post so even if they don’t end up appealing to me, there’ll be some free promotion and linkage for you.

And by political, I mean that in the widest sense – I don’t want the the diaries of party hacks written in the style of press releases, I want interesting views and news from across the country, with perspectives I’ve not seen before. What would you recommend that might educate, inform and entertain me?

, ,

Career opportunities

With almost ten years of blogging experience behind me (and just typing that makes me feel old) I think it’s time that I found some ways to cash in all the time I’ve wasted on it to make a quick buck. Sorry, what I meant to say there was ‘utilise my extensive cross-platform social media communication skills to monetise my experience and provide a variety of value-added activities to my valued clients’.

The problem, of course, is that I’m not shameless enough to even attempt some of the con tricks that others use as a business model. As a councillor, I’m regularly bombarded with invitations to conferences on important policy issues, all of which appear to be the opportunity to spend several hundred pounds to sit in the poorly ventilated ‘conference suite’ of a mid-market London hotel while someone reads out a PowerPoint presentation of easily downloadable information at you, as the precursor to a limp ‘discussion of current challenges’ (aka ‘tell us what other issues we might be able to sell you a conference on’). If I was savvy and soulless enough, I wouldn’t be complaining about these, but creating my own company to do the same.

Rather than set up a company to do this, I could do it in the name of a think tank instead. That way, not only could I establish spurious conferences, I could publish reports and discussion papers on topics that were in no way determined by whoever wanted to sponsor me, and with robustly independent conclusions that just happened to coincide with their needs. I could even give something back to the next generation by creating a Junior Associate programme that would teach them all the skills they needed to be effective policy professionals, including the best search terms to put into Google, important errors to avoid when copy-and-pasting and just how much you can get away with charging people for admittance into this exclusive programme.

Has anyone founded the Michael Stone Institute yet? A few years ago, myself and another blogger (whose identity I’ll protect unless they’re happy for it to be revealed) did discuss creating a spoof ‘Straw Man Institute‘ with the promise that we’d ‘make the arguments no one else will’. We thought there’d be a ready market amongst commentators and other blowhards. ‘SMI (a noted liberal think tank)’ would happily have provided reports on why everyone in Britain should be forced to be gay Muslims for Peter Hitchens to bloviate against.

I think the project foundered on two problems. First, we didn’t have the enthusiasm to carry it on beyond the initial idea, and second, the market was far too skewed by existing companies. There’s no point in advertising yourselves as being willing to make the arguments that no one else will, when there are plenty of people willing to do that and actually mean what they say, often for free. When we’re living in a world where Demos not only has a ‘Progressive Conservatism Project’ but its director can write what amounts to ‘Iain Duncan Smith must destroy the welfare state in order to save it’, what hope is there for a mild and humble parodist to make a living?

In a world where an internet get-rich-quick mogul can make it into the Cabinet, I suppose I need to rebrand myself as an expert in hashtag virality. I can do you a quick seminar for £350, maybe even £250 if you want to use our special early bird booking rate.

, , , , ,

Solidarity

Somehow, I’d missed this story until I saw it mentioned on Aaro and Cohen Watch – blogger Dave Osler and others have been taken to court seemingly for listing a few facts and because of someone posting a slightly insulting comment.

Not being a lawyer, a judge or anyone else who can help in the legal proceedings, all I can do is offer them is my support and a hope they win, so as to enable all of us to continue posting without fear. Good luck to them all.

,

Meanwhile, in Blogtopia

Here’s a positive blogging story for you. An intrepid blogger reads a story in the paper (or ‘the MSM’, as I believe the cool kids refer to it) and then does some research and investigation into it which reveals that the whole thing has been manufactured in an attempt to create a scandal. The whole thing leads to lots of coverage across the media and the newspaper in question admitting that their entire article was based on lies. The investigations also revealed that the people behind the scam were supplying similarly unreliable information to an MP’s office, and so the bloggers let the MP concerned know this.

So, a feelgood story all round, right? The sort of thing you’d expect the self-appointed champions of blogging to be shouting from the rooftops about, as proof that it can achieve something other than just the spreading of gossip. Yes, surely this is a day of triumph that all bloggers can share in.

Meanwhile, in the real world, Tim Ireland is being smeared and harrassed online as a result of his work in exposing the Sun’s ‘terror threat to British Jews’ story as being a fantasy. People are lying that he’s a paedophile or an ‘electronic stalker‘ and ignoring his requests for help by not letting the MP concerned know what’s being done through his office.

I’ve known Tim almost since I began blogging back in the far distant days of 2009. I may not agree with him on everything, but he’s a decent bloke who doesn’t deserve the fields of crap he’s being dragged through by people who really should know better. So, if you can help him out in any way – and no, he’s not asking for money – please do what you can.

(More support for Tim can be found here, here, here and here, for starters)

, ,