We hereby resign from PoliticsHome… (updated)


by Sunny Hundal    
9:41 pm - September 22nd 2009

      Share on Tumblr

Following Andrew Rawnsley’s resignation today from PoliticsHome, we also feel that the decision to sell a majority stake in PoliticsHome to Michael Ashcroft, the deputy chairman of the Conservative Party, will not ensure the continuing political independence of the website.

PoliticsHome has a panel of 100 ‘opinion formers’ that it polls every morning, and then publishes the results of. We have decided to resign from this panel.

Sunny Hundal, Liberal Conspiracy
Tom Watson MP
Denis Macshane MP
Anthony Barnett, ourKingdom
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, columnist
Sunder Katwala, Fabian Society
Neal Lawson, Compass
Sian Berry, Green Party
Lynne Featherstone MP
Catherine Mayer, Time magazine
Martin Bright, journalist
Polly Toynbee, The Guardian
Hillary Wainwright, Red Pepper
Catherine Fieschi, British Council
Stuart White, Oxford University
Rafael Behr, The Observer
Kitty Ussher MP
Sir Jeremy Beecham

Others who have also resigned of their own accord:
Charles Clarke MP
Matthew Taylor, RSA
Nick Cohen, columnist
Tom Harris MP
Nick Assinder
Stryker McGuire, Newsweek
Paul Webster, newspaper executive

This list of names will be updated on an ongoing basis.

If you would like to resign too, please post a comment below or email us.

Update: A follow-up article is here.

    Share on Tumblr   submit to reddit  


About the author
Sunny Hundal is editor of LC. Also: on Twitter, at Pickled Politics and Guardian CIF.
· Other posts by


Story Filed Under: Blog ,Media ,Westminster

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Reader comments


A dark day.

Where will the world find its opinions now?

Let me get this straight… You’re worried, with justification, that PoliticsHome may grow more right wing. Your response to this is to withdraw all left wing support from the site, thus ensuring the site grows more right wing.

And no doubt within months you’ll be telling us that PoliticsHome has gone all right wing now the lefties have disappeared, and that this clearly justifies your original position.

Well done. Round of applause to you all.

Dear PoliticsHome,

Here are some Cascading Style Sheets with a blue theme:
http://csscreme.com/colors/blue

I mean… why wait, right?

Tim

EDIT: Stu, I’d be perfectly happy to see any Conservative on that panel show an equal level of integrity over the matter of impartiality.

(waits)

How mature.

Why did you have no problem being on the panel when it was owned by a different tory before?

Or are you just using this as an excuse to throw toys out of the pram as per usual?

Let me get this straight… You’re worried, with justification, that PoliticsHome may grow more right wing. Your response to this is to withdraw all left wing support from the site, thus ensuring the site grows more right wing.

My personal position is that I don’t want anything to do with a website that I think will grow more right-wing and help the right, but claim to be balanced.

If it becomes openly right-wing, that’s fine with me. Best to wear your political colours on your sleeve.

Oh, good; Harry ‘Tory Bear’ Cole is here to make a childish accusation about toys and prams.

(It’s the ones who grew up listening to Alanis Morissette you have to watch out for.)

Stu, presumably if you thought the organisation you worked for had completely sold out and betrayed its principles, and made itself pointless, you’d not expect others to frown upon you if you decided to resign from it?

9. William Blakes Ghost

Good Riddance!

I was invited to join the panel before the launch by Martin Bright, who was involved in the set-up. He was quite open about the ownership, but pointed to the involvement of himself and Andrew Rawnsley and gave me names of others who would be on the panel, demonstrating that a good deal of effort was going into ensuring it was politically balanced. I had every reason to trust that, and believe it has worked in that way.

Reading Andrew Rawnsley’s statement, and hearing of the resignations of sensible people like Matthew Taylor on receiving it, it is clearly no longer possible to have the same confidence in the panel. So it is perfectly sensible to withdraw, given that our names and reputations are used to promote it If the basis on which it was set up fundamentally changes.
http://page.politicshome.com/uk/about-the-panel.html

If the new ownership structure had been done in a way where Andrew Rawnsley retained confidence in its editorial integrity and independence, that would be a different issue. Even with the best will in the world on the part of the editorial team, it is in the nature of the panel that it requires broad confidence among possible participants for that to be viable.

Maybe someone who isn’t working out which voice in his head to listen to today could actually explain.

Last time I read TP it seemed neutral, I flicked through it and nothing screamed bias, (if anything it’s leaning to the left in an attempt to prove it’s neutrality,)

Why the worry if Michael has no editorial control. It’s gone from being owned by one tory to another. why the orchestrated hissy fit?

Okay, sorry, I’ll be a bit clearer: I absolutely agree that the Ashcroft buy-out is somewhat disappointing and could be worrying for a politically neutral website, but what you have done is create a self-fulfilling prophecy that will turn a potentially bad situation into the guaranteed destruction of what was once a pretty good site.

PoliticsHome was already owned by Stephan Shakespeare, after all, and similar worries were expressed over neutrality when it started, with you guys giving only tentative support at first. So far there hasn’t been any evidence that Lord Ashcroft will take a stronger interest in the editorial line than Stephan Shakespeare did.

The tentative support of the left, though, is what actually made the thing work; and work it did – it turned out not to matter too much who owned the thing, as long as the panel was balanced and the coverage was neutral. A change of ownership won’t necessarily change that – what’s really going to make the difference is that you guys have decided this time not to even try to extend that same support, in the hope of seeing if it can still work.

So what’s going to kill the site is not necessarily Lord Ashcroft’s purchase of it, but the fact that unless they can find someone very suitable to replace Andrew Rawnsley and convince you guys to give them a second chance, they won’t be able make it neutral without any left-wing commentators on the panels.

Good!

This is soo wrong. WTF? Talk about the worst thing that is wrong with this country-selfish obsession with money and economics..

Spread, spread the word…

Stu@14 is a correct analysis.

Doing straight news aggregation in a straight way is one thing: the audience can judge that.

Maintaining a cross-partisan neutral and independent anonymous expert panel relies on everybody involved having good reasons to have confidence in it. In any event, it depends on critical mass and broad confidence.

but what you have done is create a self-fulfilling prophecy that will turn a potentially bad situation into the guaranteed destruction of what was once a pretty good site.

But nevertheless, our names would be on the site while it would be run by someone who is vice chair of the conservative party. I object to that on principle alone.

“Why the worry if Michael has no editorial control. It’s gone from being owned by one tory to another. why the orchestrated hissy fit?”

Good point Tory Bear!

After all, Richard Desmond has no editorial control of the Express, he’s just the proprieter – right!?

And Rupert Murdoch certainly does not interfere with the editorial lines of his publications.

Life – it turns out – is that simple! Hurrah!

But nevertheless, our names would be on the site while it would be run by someone who is vice chair of the conservative party. I object to that on principle alone.

And it’s not just that he’s deputy chairman of the Tory party, is it?

Let’s be honest there are other considerations too.

Of which we shall not speak even a whisper for fear of getting sued. But instead we shall all google “Matthew Oakeshott Lord Ashcroft Resident” and various combinations thereof to see what teh Internets says.

Harry Cole: Again with the playground taunts. No wonder you hide behind a child’s toy over at ‘Tory Bear’ and everywhere.

It is interesting that Tim Montgomerie linked to the earlier “andrew Rawnsley resigns from Politics Home” post on LC saying this on twitter ….

“Hat tip to @libcon for understanding the significance of Lord Ashcroft’s investment in ConHome http://bit.ly/9aeFh about 3 hours ago”

ha spare it “Manic”, not going to take lectures from the puppet master when it comes to childish crap.

Going back to the point I was making though, until there as an obvious breach of these “editorial assurances”, Stu is right, are you not just shit stirring? Or is it just any excuse to have a pop at Ashcroft?. Shakespeare apparently remains as the chairman, Ashcroft merely an investor with no control. Why were you not worried when it was Steven Shakespeare – another tory? Why is everyone dodging that question?

PS what are you guys going to obsess about when Ashcroft’s personal and private tax situation is eventually exposed as being completely above board and legit?

“PS what are you guys going to obsess about when Ashcroft’s personal and private tax situation is eventually exposed as being completely above board and legit?”

His business affairs?

I believe the post should end “a hold of.”

“And it’s not just that he’s deputy chairman of the Tory party, is it?”

He’s also the proprietor.

@22

It depends where the burden of proof is.

Martin Bright, who signed up most of the people on the left (including me), is also resigning from it. He says he will blog about his view of this tomorrow. Now Martin blogs for The Spectator, is not a hyper-tribal partisan, and did a lot to get the thing up and running, so if he doesn’t have sufficient confidence in it, then I think that is good enough evidence for me that the efforts made to make it viable at the outset are no longer in place.

So hanging on to see if it works doesn’t seem to me to be viable.

Why were you not worried when it was Steven Shakespeare – another tory? Why is everyone dodging that question?

I addressed this point directly, hours ago:

http://badconscience.com/2009/09/22/totalpolitics-bought-by-ashcroft-are-you-suprised/

But forget about what I wrote on another site, Sunder @ 12 explains exactly why the Ashcroft ownership is different from Shakespeare (in his opinion)!!

Wouldn’t it be best to wait and see if Ashcroft attempts to interfere with the editorial position first?

If PoliticsHome remains neutral over the next few months, will Sunny and co rejoin?

ToryBear

I answered the question which you @22 say we are all dodging back @12 … I had good reasons to be confident in it then, and those are no longer in place.

Tom Harris has resigned too – see his blog.

I think almost everybody agrees that Tom Harris is independent-minded and doesn’t slavishly follow anybody’s line.
http://www.tomharris.org.uk/2009/09/22/email-to-freddie-sayers-at-politicshome/

There are puppets and there are puppets, Mr Cole:
http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/2008/07/20/harry-cole-not-open-not-transparent/

But to answer your questions:

1. For starters, he is Deputy Chairman of the Conservative Party, and now a serial investor in political publications. Other people have given wider explanations in some detail, but you appear to be more interested in the opportunity to throw a few casual ‘mental’ smears around.

2. I just don’t know what I’ll do. Life will seem bleak from that point on, I’m, sure. Why don’t you ask him when he plans on revealing this data that is certain to reveal his innocence and cause us jealous lefties to feel an empty longing for schadenfreude that wll never be?

Ashcroft owns a large share of Total Politics. Is that magazine neutral? I’m not a reader. If it is then there may well be hope for PoliticsHome.

So that’s who he is.

So when is this financial information that Guido promised in August going to be published? Will you come clean before Ashcroft?

But the same structure is in place? Same chairman? same site editor?

If there had been a spontanious eruption of outrage fair enough but this whole thing smacks of an organised hatchet job…. shit, maybe I’ve been reading bloggerheads to long. Beginning to see everything as a big conspiracy…

Bet that rogue Jenvey is involved in this somehow.

Cole, you should’ve chosen a dog with a bone as your mascot instead of that bear.

(FACT: Iain Dale is the source of what Patrick Mercer has been telling people who ask questions about Wightman and Jenvey. I have him on tape, admitting it. You want to question that? Go ahead if you must, but you’ll look like a liar or an idiot, and regardless, you’ll want to keep it out of this thread.)

With Tom Harris gone that really is the end.

On some levels I can see why you did it, but I just think it’s a shame. Mainly because I so want more non-partisan stuff to come out and work in the future, and it wouldn’t surprise me if this ended up becoming a poster child for how it’ll always end in tears.

Never mind, eh.

@35 No. Have you even read the story? The editor in chief has resigned, expressing concern about the site’s independence.

With Tom Harris gone that really is the end.

Agreed. Fale may even blog about it now.

EDIT: I shouldn’t bother, Larry; you’re clearly mental, and imagining things.

Tom going might have actually made Politics Home sit up an pay attention rather than just casual indifference to the usual suspects. will be interesting to see how that plays out. Right though Stu, this is a spanner in the works for any sort of collaboration.

Tim, was winding you up, quite successfully it seems, I buy that story up to a point, but lets save that chat for another day. Have fun stroking your puppet. Can I be in the CCC video again please?

Harry Cole (aka ‘Tory Bear’):

You were doing a little more than that, and you know it. You also cast doubt on my claims, then decided to go running off when I made it clear that I could prove what I claim.

Enough of the mud-slinging and water-muddying, please. I know it seems like a real time-saving combination, but that’s because you never stick around long enough for the clean-up.

“Can I be in the CCC video again please?”

Just let him know when you’re serving the claim.

The 14 days ran out today yes?

35

I don’t think it was an organised hatchet job, though Sunny can take the credit for one if he wishes too.

Even after Andrew’s statement today, I myself wasn’t sure about what would happen. When Sunny Hundal told me he personally was thinking of pulling out of it, and in fact I suggested that it was worth taking a bit of time and that getting a sense of what the independent civic society/journalists on the panel thought would be important as I didn’t feel it should be a partisan or Labour party political response, and wanted to get a broader view. So I was in favour of sounding people out over a couple of days, rather than jumping out, and not myself even sure whether that was necessary.

So, at about 7.45pm I wrote “A couple of other panellists have suggested, since my previous post, that Andrew Rawnsley’s resignaton is leading them to question whether they should continue to participate, though I have no information that anybody has yet decided to withdraw”.

What I didn’t know is that people who had themselves decided (before then) that they couldn’t stay on it included Matthew Taylor, Charles Clarke, Martin Bright, Nick Cohen and others. They aren’t really conspirators by nature, and no doubt simply felt they had to decide about their own position and reputation, though more power to Sunny’s elbow if he does in fact control them all.

But that rather ended for me any discussion about whether other people could stay in and claim it remained a credible insider panel. I rather doubt Tom Harris spoke to anybody else about it either.

In short, there wasn’t really enough time to conspire.

Tim Ireland (aka Manic):

Yes that’s right, that is my goal, am i that obvious?

Or could it be that I am just really bored this evening, so bored i even bothered to engage in some baiting. Seems like a more likely answer.

Never round long enough?

You know where to find me.

On your paper round?

It’s very important and official don’t ya know.

Cole/Bear: You’ve just told everyone that you came here to waste your time and ours. Why should we take anything tou say seriously? (Rhetorical question; we’re done here. Oh, and I may use a nickname, but I don’t hide behind it one day and campaign for transparency the next.)

Sundar: Are you saying that someone has just floated a conspiracy theory? I am truly shocked. :o

Question: Do we believe that the panel was generally A Good Thing? (or rather, do you the ex-pannellists think so?)

if so, then a non-partisan and constructive next step would be to help set up a similar panel elsewhere. Prospect or Standpoint, perhaps?

Huh… quite right really. “100 opinion formers” – who made you lot “opinion formers”. About time this onanistic self-gratification society disbanded.

I’m sick of the Westmonster bubble claiming “opinion forming” capacity. The rest of the counrty couldn’t give a flying fuck!

48. LondonStatto

So the PHI just became a whole lot less lefty.

A bit like the country, really.

Here is Martin Bright’s post on this at The Spectator
http://www.spectator.co.uk/martinbright/5355236/politics-home-a-very-sad-development.thtml

Catherine Mayer of Time is in fact still thinking about it.

“Am listed as having resigned from the PoliticsHome panel, which I have not, as yet. (My fault, tweeting late at night.)”

She had earlier written that she was … “kissing PoliticsHome goodbye. For now. Reserve final judgment until fully informed”

I’m not especially bothered about Politics Home if truth be told. I don’t read it and it’s an aggregator in any case, although I can understand why people wouldn’t want to be associated with it any more.

What’s more worrying for me is the fact that the two leading UK Conservative bloggers are now directly in the pay of the man bankrolling and chairing the Conservative party.

Dale has been in Ashcroft’s pocket for a long time, but Conservative Home have been genuinely critical of the leadership and even questioning of Ashcroft himself. What’s the chances we’ll see more of these surveys any time soon?

More importantly, why should the public take blogging seriously when some of the biggest players are now little more than paid stooges? Isn’t the whole point of blogging that it is made up of independent voices?

Congratulations to all reaffirming their left wing credentials by running away from something without debate.

@53 – I’m sure we’re all grown-up enough to understand where everyone is coming from.

To be honest I’m not bothered whether any partisan blogger is paid or not.

Never read PH. Just amused by the concept of “opinion formers”.

Having been on the Panel for about two weeks, I have now also resigned!

A new post on this: The Ashcroft mystery
http://www.nextleft.org/2009/09/ashcroft-mystery.html

55. the a&e charge nurse

[55] yes, have to agree with cjcjc.

‘Opinion-formers’ – surely the concept makes everybody else seem a bit feeble minded?

If you have got anything to say – run it up the flagpole and see who salutes it.

Sunder is always unfailingly courteous in his posts.

The other possible Ashcroft motive (as in many media proprietors) is simply vanity.

It’s a pity that so many of the Dale/Ashcroft dittoheads choose to contribute anonymously or with multiple/non-descript names and profiles. It’d be interesting to compare how many of them thought it important to falsely accuse me of taking money from Derek Draper, the Labour party, and assorted ‘leftists’ during the week when ‘smeargate’ was hot.

60 – Tim, it’s really not always all about you

61 – Didn’t say it was, but thanks for the damning attempt at distraction.

Nick Assinder has resigned from the Politics Home board this morning.

Assinder was the founding news editor and then lobby correspondent, and his presence on the board was being invoked yesterday afternoon as a sign that independence was still guaranteed in the PolHome statement.

Assinder has had a long career with the BBC and with the Express. His presence alongside Rawnsley’s helped to establish its reputation for professionalism and engagement across the spectrum. And he is nobody’s patsy.

The “don’t be such stupid lefties” objection does not address the fundamental point about independence and trust, which is that it is now clear that the professional journalists and independent voices who were convinced of its political independence in the past are not confident this will remain in the future.

Clearly, the site’s reputation depends on dealing with this challenge. I am not a fan of enormous mud-slinging fights but In the meantime, it is hardly surprising if those of us who were asked to play a very small role within the site don’t feel that is viable to do so.

PS: cjcj – thanks, that’s v.courteous of you also.

Let’s not forget his Lordship’s previously demonstrated position on freedom of speech (h/t to our host)

I’ll try this again

Let’s not forget his Lordship’s previously demonstrated position on freedom of speech (h/t to our host)

I was not on the PH100 panel, and am therefore unable to resign from it, but I would hereby like to endorse the decisions of those who have. Andrew Rawnsley and Nick Assinder are top journos and nobody’s fools – they know a rat when they smell one.

BIG YAWN!!!

I really think it’s best to resign when you know there’s a problem and that an owner is going to intrude. Resigning due to an expectation is a little vague.

66. Chris Baldwin

This is the first time I’ve heard of PoliticsHome…

@Nina: Jump now, and appear overly cynical. Jump at the first (probably minor) sign of trouble, and appear petty. Wait till a major breach of journalistic integrity, and appear both naive for not anticipating it, and collaborative with all the minor breaches.

To badly stretch an analogy, Nelson Piquet Jr. had three choices: not crash, get fired and possibly blackballed; crash but admit it soon after; or crash and hide the fact for long enough to appear at least partly guilty. The first seems the superior option.

68. Kitty Ussher MP

I’ve just logged on and got the email from Politics Home explaining their position to people who still remain on the panel.

I was recruited by Martin Bright and have huge respect for him and for Andrew Rawnsley, not to mention many of the other members of the panel who have also resigned.

I dont want to spend time each day helping out a bunch of people I don’t respect. And I dont trust Lord Ashcroft as far as I can throw him. So I’m out too.

It’s so good to have you around again Manic, esp, over here.

Talking of conspiracies – were Rawnsley, Bright and Assinder lured to join PolHome with shares or options?

If not their resignations makes the original decision to join look very foolish, especially considering their experience.

I’m suspicious that this row may give them cover for making a chunk of cash by pretending to take a principled stance when they are really looking out for number one and I’m not prepared to make a judgement until I know the facts.

Matthew Taylor of RSA has explained his reasons for withdrawing from the panel in the discussion on Iain Dale’s website, writing

“My position is similar to Sunder’s. I only joined the panel because friends asked me. Those friends – who I assume know a lot more than I do about what is going on have now withdrawn. I have no problem about writing for Conservatives (I have just written a long piece for Crossbow). I also recently appeared at a commercial event organised by Conservative Home (it seemed interesting and I respect Tim M). But I don’t really have the inclination to spend a few minutes every day indirectly helping Michael Ashcroft make money which he can then spend trying to influence British politics. And in as much as the panel does contribute to political insight I don’t feel particularly keen to provide this to a business which now seems so closely aligned with one Party.

It’s a matter of where I want to put my energies. The panel no longer feels like a useful commitment”.

Sir Jeremy Beecham, ex-leader of Newcastle council, has also resigned from the PoliticsHome insider panel.

This merely shows the idiotic smallmindedness of the left.

This merely shows the idiotic smallmindedness of the left.

Really? How so?

Or was that just a lazy, throw-away statement?

With respect to those who think the “insider panel” was always an absurd waste of time, I have a very boring post pointing out that there are some methodological issues with continuing it in the light of a significant departure (10% of the panel, presumably 20-25% of the liberal-left participants), and that replacing these people to give a large enough “Labour/left” “quota” doesn’t address these in itself.

I have tried to be constructive, and to suggest that independent expert polling voices might scrutinise this question. And I have invited a response.

My personal view is that ploughing on with it – during a Labour conference particularly – could be difficult for the question of editorial integrity and professionalism under the new ownership.
http://www.nextleft.org/2009/09/should-politicshome-suspend-its-insider.html

Sunny

Could you add Stryker McGuire of Newsweek, who has resigned from the panel, to the “others we have heard about” list.

(Hopi S is a mistake on there surely, as he wasn’t on it)

I don’t know that I’m prepared to join a Club (eg Politics Home) that would have me as a Member

Well done, Jock. Onanistic is the mot juste for the batch of them.

Paul Webster, newspaper executive, has resigned from the panel

Andy McSmith of The Independent resigned from the panel last Tuesday, when he received Andrew Rawnsley’s statement.

But he wasn’t aware of any plans by others to quit as well, and his resignation hadn’t been made public.

Nick Cohen writes in The Observer about the Ashcroft takeover and his own decision to resign:

Many honourable Conservatives, for instance, deplore David Cameron’s weak refusal to insist that a party official, who was granted a peerage on the understanding he pay taxes, publicly declares that he is also domiciled in Britain for tax purposes. His failure to confront Ashcroft proves that the prime minster of Belize has more backbone than the man who would be prime minister of Britain. Until Ashcroft says differently, we must assume that he expects working- and middle-class taxpayers to pick up his bills.

But even those Tories who are wary of Ashcroft admire him. They say that while many Conservative officials cannot see beyond today’s political blogs and tomorrow’s newspapers, Ashcroft can follow a long-term strategy ….
It is worth noticing that political journalism is becoming a small world of its own. It is now written for a tiny audience, but that audience includes the rulers of the country. In the fragmented media future, I doubt if anyone will be able to make money out of Westminster reporting. But dominating rich men prepared to subside websites and newspapers, as their predecessors in the 18th century oligarchy patronised political writers, will find that what they lose in profits they gain in political influence.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/sep/27/michael-ashcroft-nick-cohen

Here are 12 or 13 further resignations reported publicly in various outlets over the last week. I think that makes about 38 names publicly reported as withdrawing. I am aware of a couple of resignations by those who did not want to make the decision public (known unknowns) while there may well be others who have pulled out without making any public statement.

John McFall MP, Chair, Treasury Select Committee
Richard Reeves, Director, Demos
Jean Eaglesham, Financial Times
Andy McSmith, Independent
http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/2009/09/28/more-resignations-from-politics-home/

Alan Milburn MP
Jim Knight MP
Gisela Stuart MP
Chris McLaughlin, editor, Tribune
Stephen Twigg, chair, Progress and Labour ppc
http://www.nextleft.org/2009/09/alan-milburn-joins-politicshome-exodus.html

Chris Huhne MP
Stephen Tall, editor, LibDemVoice
Norman Lamb MP
http://www.libdemvoice.org/two-more-lib-dems-quit-politicshome-panel-16350.html

Peter Facey, Director, New Politics Network
http://www.unlockdemocracy.org.uk/?p=2103

Sunder makes a good point about Cohen and the Tories.
What it does show is the fight for power between Ashcroft’s fraction and the Policy Exchange boys, including Cohen and Bright for the heart of the Tory party.
I doubt those two would have resigned if Murdoch had taken over the blog


Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. Sunder Katwala

    @libcon has list of those who have withdrawn from PolHome panel so far after Rawnsley statement on independence http://tiny.cc/rzUJH

  2. Sunder Katwala

    @sianberry … yes, we’re out, are you too? http://tiny.cc/rzUJH

  3. brianamc

    RT @libcon Article:: We hereby resign from PoliticsHome… http://bit.ly/1TFtMD (via @wesstreeting)

  4. Richard Lane

    Bravo! RT @libcon Article:: We hereby resign from PoliticsHome… http://bit.ly/1TFtMD

  5. Rory Lawless

    Reading: "Liberal Conspiracy » We hereby resign from PoliticsHome…" ( http://bit.ly/g3GAk )

  6. Mick Fealty

    RT @nextleft @libcon has list of those who have withdrawn from PolHome panel after Rawnsley statement on independence http://tiny.cc/rzUJH

  7. Mick Fealty

    Liberals and lefties jump ship after Ashcroft comes in and takes a controlling stake in ‘independent’ PoliticsHome… http://bit.ly/n1vRa

  8. Paranormal Guru

    Liberal Conspiracy » We hereby resign from PoliticsHome…: About the author: Sunny Hundal is editor of Liberal Co.. http://bit.ly/PSdqM

  9. Tweets that mention Liberal Conspiracy » We hereby resign from PoliticsHome… -- Topsy.com

    [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by CathElliott and Liberal Conspiracy. Liberal Conspiracy said: Article:: We hereby resign from PoliticsHome… http://bit.ly/1TFtMD [...]

  10. Lord Ashcroft, PoliticsHome | Tom Watson MP

    [...] See also, Sunny at Liberal Conspiracy. [...]

  11. Sunder Katwala

    @libcon has list of those who have withdrawn from PolHome panel so far after Rawnsley statement on independence http://tiny.cc/rzUJH

  12. Sunder Katwala

    @sianberry … yes, we’re out, are you too? http://tiny.cc/rzUJH

  13. brianamc

    RT @libcon Article:: We hereby resign from PoliticsHome… http://bit.ly/1TFtMD (via @wesstreeting)

  14. Richard Lane

    Bravo! RT @libcon Article:: We hereby resign from PoliticsHome… http://bit.ly/1TFtMD

  15. Rory Lawless

    Reading: "Liberal Conspiracy » We hereby resign from PoliticsHome…" ( http://bit.ly/g3GAk )

  16. Mick Fealty

    RT @nextleft @libcon has list of those who have withdrawn from PolHome panel after Rawnsley statement on independence http://tiny.cc/rzUJH

  17. Mick Fealty

    Liberals and lefties jump ship after Ashcroft comes in and takes a controlling stake in ‘independent’ PoliticsHome… http://bit.ly/n1vRa

  18. Paranormal Guru

    Liberal Conspiracy » We hereby resign from PoliticsHome…: About the author: Sunny Hundal is editor of Liberal Co.. http://bit.ly/PSdqM

  19. Naadir Jeewa

    Reading: We hereby resign from PoliticsHome… (updated): Following Andrew Rawnsley’s resignation today fr.. http://bit.ly/PSdqM

  20. Death to the politicshome panel! « Hopi Sen

    [...] longer will Tom Harris, Sunder Katwala, Tom Watson, Charles Clarke, Martin Bright,  Sunny Hundal and a host of others be filling in forms for the man every morning. To which I say: Thank bloody God.  I hated those [...]

  21. Ryan Bestford

    PoliticsHome becomes PoliticsHomeless – http://bit.ly/12Ba1Y (via @libcon)

  22. Six of One and Half A Dozen of the Other: On The End of PoliticsHome | Sharpe's Opinion

    [...] on in the day, Liberal Conspiracy announced resignations en masse from the site’s daily survey and opinion tracker2. And Tom Harris also withdrew from the [...]

  23. Charlie Beckett, POLIS Director » Blog Archive » PoliticsHome: a small new media mess with bigger significance?

    [...] it is the smaller media stories that have more resonance. The current row at the politics news aggregator and polling website PoliticsHome is small beer, but it should [...]

  24. Naadir Jeewa

    Reading: We hereby resign from PoliticsHome… (updated): Following Andrew Rawnsley’s resignation today fr.. http://bit.ly/PSdqM

  25. FT.com | Westminster Blog | Rawnsley resigns from politicshome

    [...] Another 30-odd contributors to PoliticsHome have decided to walk. Here is their statement. [...]

  26. Charlie Beckett: PoliticsHome resignations – the story so far | Journalism.co.uk Editors' Blog

    [...] Numerous contributors to PoliticsHome, including editor-in-chief, Andrew Rawnsley, have resigned from the news aggregator and polling website in a row over its new owner – Michael Ashcroft, the deputy chairman of the Conservative Party. [...]

  27. Ryan Bestford

    PoliticsHome becomes PoliticsHomeless – http://bit.ly/12Ba1Y (via @libcon)

  28. Charlie Beckett: PoliticsHome resignations – the story so far | DAILYMAIL

    [...] Numerous contributors to PoliticsHome, including editor-in-chief, Andrew Rawnsley, have resigned from the news aggregator and polling website in a row over its new owner – Michael Ashcroft, the deputy chairman of the Conservative Party. [...]

  29. Liberal Conspiracy » What the left has to fear from Ashcroft / PoliticsHome

    [...] / PoliticsHome by Sunny H     September 24, 2009 at 10:30 am A lot of the reaction to the resignations from PoliticsHome, listed on LibCon, has been interesting a> and entertaining. It has also missed [...]

  30. Clegg and Cable resign from PoliticsHome panel in protest at Ashcroft takeover

    [...] Dem MP Lynne Featherstone took the decision to quit earlier this week, along with 24 other members of the PH100 (which despite the name in fact numbers c.200). And now Nick Clegg and Vince Cable [...]

  31. Joni Hardin

    Liberal Conspiracy » We hereby resign from PoliticsHome… (updated) http://tinyurl.com/yfjf4as





Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.