The report came up with a scenario for growth if the UK had stayed inside the EU, and compared it to forecasts the Office for Budget Responsibility made in March last year.
I don’t think these stories are “designed” to do anything in particular; they’re just reporting on reality.
It’s no more than a story about “a building has burned down” is “designed” to make arsonists think about what they’ve done. Sometimes it’s just about reporting the facts.
And in any case, Leave voters aren’t a monolithic group. They run the gamut from “die hard UKIP hardcore eurosceptics” to “I just wanted to give David Cameron a bloody nose”. There’s a significant group of Leave voters for whom “Brexit has cost us lots of money” is an interesting story with cut through.
I push back against this idea because many of those people that voted for Brexit were already being left behind financially. If you were getting repeatedly punched in the face, maybe you’d be willing to vote to get kicked in the stomach instead.
Yes, I voted remain but certain stories - not necessarily this one - is just pandering to remainers. There was an article a few years ago which drew out loads of spurious correlations from surveys to make leave voters look stupid, i.e. “Leave voters are less likely to wear fresh underpants”.
Maybe it was supposed to be light hearted but it looked like punching down to me.
I don’t think it’s punching down as much as it’s just reporting stuff that’s happening. Pointing out the Brexit is a disaster isn’t calling people stupid it’s calling the whole idea stupid. Which it was, and which it is.
Writing an article highlighting that Brexit voters were less likely to change their underpants when statistically they are going to be from poorer demographics is punching down.
If these type of stories are designed to try and get Leave voters to think they’ve made a mistake, it won’t work.
Leave voters knew there would be an economic hit and were willing to take that hit personally, so much was their dislike of the EU.
I don’t think these stories are “designed” to do anything in particular; they’re just reporting on reality.
It’s no more than a story about “a building has burned down” is “designed” to make arsonists think about what they’ve done. Sometimes it’s just about reporting the facts.
And in any case, Leave voters aren’t a monolithic group. They run the gamut from “die hard UKIP hardcore eurosceptics” to “I just wanted to give David Cameron a bloody nose”. There’s a significant group of Leave voters for whom “Brexit has cost us lots of money” is an interesting story with cut through.
I think they’re designed to help everyone who thought it was a dumb idea feel smug.
Nothing I like better than economic collapse.
I push back against this idea because many of those people that voted for Brexit were already being left behind financially. If you were getting repeatedly punched in the face, maybe you’d be willing to vote to get kicked in the stomach instead.
Yes, I voted remain but certain stories - not necessarily this one - is just pandering to remainers. There was an article a few years ago which drew out loads of spurious correlations from surveys to make leave voters look stupid, i.e. “Leave voters are less likely to wear fresh underpants”.
Maybe it was supposed to be light hearted but it looked like punching down to me.
I don’t think it’s punching down as much as it’s just reporting stuff that’s happening. Pointing out the Brexit is a disaster isn’t calling people stupid it’s calling the whole idea stupid. Which it was, and which it is.
Writing an article highlighting that Brexit voters were less likely to change their underpants when statistically they are going to be from poorer demographics is punching down.