The Kneecap row makes our cultural elite look like brazen hypocrites
Although Kneecap insist that they've 'never' supported those two proscribed terrorist organisations, say they 'reject any suggestion that we would seek to incite violence against any MP', and claim that the footage has been 'taken out of all context', it seems not everyone's convinced. They've been dropped from a music festival in Cornwall, and seen several gigs cancelled in Germany.
Thankfully for them, however, they've now had some good news. More than 100 of Britain's leading pop stars – including Paul Weller, Brian Eno, Thin Lizzy and Primal Scream – have signed an open letter, stoutly defending Kneecap's 'artistic freedom of expression'.
'This past week has seen a clear, concerted attempt to censor and ultimately deplatform the band Kneecap,' proclaim these brave and principled musicians. 'The question of agreeing with Kneecap's political views is irrelevant: it is in the key interests of every artist that all creative expression be protected in a society that values culture, and that this interference campaign is condemned and ridiculed.'
These sentiments are of course wonderfully noble. I wonder, however, if I might ask these courageous artists to consider the following hypothetical scenario.
Imagine there were a rap trio that loudly supported causes that were unmistakably Right-wing, rather than Left-wing. And now imagine that, in a piece of concert footage, a member of this trio appeared to declare, 'The only good Leftie is a dead Leftie. Kill your local Labour MP!' And that, in another piece of concert footage, a member appeared to shout, 'Up the KKK!'
In response, would these same 100-plus pop stars rush to sign an open letter, stoutly defending the Right-wing trio's 'artistic freedom of expression'? Would they say that 'the question of agreeing with' the Right-wing trio's 'political views' was 'irrelevant'? And would they dismiss criticism of the Right-wing trio as an 'interference campaign' that must be 'condemned and ridiculed'? Indeed, would they do all this even before the Met's counter-terrorism officers had finished investigating the footage?
I wonder. But, since we're on the subject, I can't help remembering that, in 2023, the singer Roisin Murphy saw two of her concerts cancelled after she argued that puberty blockers should not be given to children who are confused about their gender identity. I don't seem to recall many open letters from celebrities leaping to her defence. Or many open letters in defence of another singer, Louise Distras, when, that same year, she said that she'd been dropped by her booking agent for refusing to agree that 'trans women are women'.
Of course, pop stars are very busy people, so it probably isn't possible for them to sign an open letter every time a fellow artist's free expression is under threat. Thank goodness they've at least managed to find the time on this occasion, when the artist just happens to be anti-Tory, anti-Israel, and Left-wing.
For a good two months, Adolescence – the Netflix drama about a boy who stabs a girl to death after watching sexist videos online – appeared to drive our liberal elite absolutely potty. Indeed, their hysteria rose to such a frenzied pitch that, at one point, two scandalised BBC interviewers asked Kemi Badenoch why on earth she hadn't watched it yet.
Given that they were referring to a piece of TV fiction, their indignation was extraordinary. I'm fairly sure that, in the 1990s, there were no editions of Newsnight in which Jeremy Paxman barked, 'Secretary of State, I'll ask you once again. Have you, or have you not, watched last night's Brookside yet?'
'Jeremy, I'm afraid I—'
'It's a simple yes or no question.'
'But I just don't see why—'
'Secretary of State, Brookside is regularly watched by as many as seven million British people. Are you really telling us that you're so out of touch, you don't know that Julia (Gladys Ambrose) was pipped at the post for the job in the flower shop, while Peter (Robert Black) had to rescue Anna (Kazia Pelka) from a tricky situation?'
Still, it wasn't just BBC types who were obsessed with Adolescence. Sir Keir Starmer was, too. He even said it should be shown in every school.
Since the PM is so anxious for pupils to learn about vital issues of national debate, I wonder whether he's seen a new programme aired this week by Channel 4. Groomed is a documentary about the grooming gangs scandal. And unlike Adolescence, which is about fictional events, Groomed is about events that are all too horrifically real.
I'll be impressed, therefore, if Sir Keir announces that Groomed is to be shown in every school. I suspect, however, that he won't, bearing in mind his deep reluctance to hold a full national inquiry into its subject matter. Frankly, we're more likely to get a full national inquiry into why Kemi Badenoch hasn't watched Adolescence.
'Way of the World' is a twice-weekly satirical look at the headlines while aiming to mock the absurdities of the modern world. It is published at 6am every Tuesday and Saturday
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
4 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Students face new cellphone restrictions in 17 states as school year begins
Jamel Bishop is seeing a big change in his classrooms as he begins his senior year at Doss High School in Louisville, Kentucky, where cellphones are now banned during instructional time. In previous years, students often weren't paying attention and wasted class time by repeating questions, the teenager said. Now, teachers can provide 'more one-on-one time for the students who actually need it.' Kentucky is one of 17 states and the District of Columbia starting this school year with new restrictions, bringing the total to 35 states with laws or rules limiting phones and other electronic devices in school. This change has come remarkably quickly: Florida became the first state to pass such a law in 2023. Both Democrats and Republicans have taken up the cause, reflecting a growing consensus that phones are bad for kids' mental health and take their focus away from learning, even as some researchers say the issue is less clear-cut. 'Anytime you have a bill that's passed in California and Florida, you know you're probably onto something that's pretty popular," Georgia state Rep. Scott Hilton, a Republican, told a forum on cellphone use last week in Atlanta. Phones are banned throughout the school day in 18 of the states and the District of Columbia, although Georgia and Florida impose such 'bell-to-bell' bans only from kindergarten through eighth grade. Another seven states ban them during class time, but not between classes or during lunch. Still others, particularly those with traditions of local school control, mandate only a cellphone policy, believing districts will take the hint and sharply restrict phone access. Students see pros and cons For students, the rules add new school-day rituals, like putting phones in magnetic pouches or special lockers. Students have been locking up their phones during class at McNair High School in suburban Atlanta since last year. Audreanna Johnson, a junior, said 'most of them did not want to turn in their phones' at first, because students would use them to gossip, texting 'their other friends in other classes to see what's the tea and what's going on around the building.' That resentment is 'starting to ease down' now, she said. "More students are willing to give up their phones and not get distracted.' But there are drawbacks — like not being able to listen to music when working independently in class. 'I'm kind of 50-50 on the situation because me, I use headphones to do my schoolwork. I listen to music to help focus,' she said. Some parents want constant contact In a survey of 125 Georgia school districts by Emory University researchers, parental resistance was cited as the top obstacle to regulating student use of social and digital media. Johnson's mother, Audrena Johnson, said she worries most about knowing her children are safe from violence at school. School messages about threats can be delayed and incomplete, she said, like when someone who wasn't a McNair student got into a fight on school property, which she learned about when her daughter texted her during the school day. 'My child having her phone is very important to me, because if something were to happen, I know instantly,' Johnson said. Many parents echo this — generally supporting restrictions but wanting a say in the policymaking and better communication, particularly about safety — and they have a real need to coordinate schedules with their children and to know about any problems their children may encounter, said Jason Allen, the national director of partnerships for the National Parents Union. 'We just changed the cell phone policy, but aren't meeting the parents' needs in regards to safety and really training teachers to work with students on social emotional development,' Allen said. Research remains in an early stage Some researchers say it's not yet clear what types of social media may cause harm, and whether restrictions have benefits, but teachers 'love the policy,' according to Julie Gazmararian, a professor of public health at Emory University who does surveys and focus groups to research the effects of a phone ban in middle school grades in the Marietta school district near Atlanta. 'They could focus more on teaching,' Gazmararian said. 'There were just not the disruptions.' Another benefit: More positive interactions among students. 'They were saying that kids are talking to each other in the hallways and in the cafeteria,' she said. 'And in the classroom, there is a noticeably lower amount of discipline referrals.' Gazmararian is still compiling numbers on grades and discipline, and cautioned that her work may not be able to answer whether bullying has been reduced or mental health improved. Social media use clearly correlates with poor mental health, but research can't yet prove it causes it, according to Munmun De Choudhury, a Georgia Tech professor who studies this issue. 'We need to be able to quantify what types of social media use are causing harm, what types of social media use can be beneficial,' De Choudhury said. A few states reject rules Some state legislatures are bucking the momentum. Wyoming's Senate in January rejected requiring districts to create some kind of a cellphone policy after opponents argued that teachers and parents need to be responsible. And in the Michigan House in July, a Republican-sponsored bill directing schools to ban phones bell-to-bell in grades K-8 and during high school instruction time was defeated in July after Democrats insisted on upholding local control. Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, among multiple governors who made restricting phones in schools a priority this year, is still calling for a bill to come to her desk.
Newsweek
5 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Zohran Mamdani Remains 'Candidate to Beat' as Cuomo, Adams Slide: Poll
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Democratic mayoral primary winner and New York State Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani remains "the candidate to beat" in the battle to lead New York City, according to Dustin Olsen, lead pollster and managing partner at American Pulse Research & Polling, in a survey shared with Newsweek Wednesday night. Why It Matters Mamdani's surge to become the potential face of the Democratic Party in The City That Never Sleeps has intensified debate over the future direction of the party as a whole, as his platform sharply contrasts with those of more centrist and establishment-aligned figures. Mamdani has taken a more aggressive approach than many traditional Democrats—who have historically championed incremental reforms and avoided expansive tax policies targeting high-earners. The New York City mayoral front-runner has proposed increasing taxes on residents earning more than $1 million annually, raising corporate tax rates and implementing a citywide rent freeze. These positions are central to his campaign, which he has framed around affordability, housing justice and public investment in services like free child care, city-owned grocery stores and public transportation. As Mamdani awaits critical Democratic backing from party leaders like House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, he sat down with business leaders in July, where he said he would discourage the phrase "globalize the intifada," according to The New York Times, citing three people familiar with discussions. New York mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani attends a campaign event August 17 in Prospect Park in New York City. (Photo by) New York mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani attends a campaign event August 17 in Prospect Park in New York City. (Photo by) What To Know In the poll taken from August 14 to August 19 among 638 likely voters, Mamdani received 36.9 percent of the vote, an uptick of 1.7 percent from a poll in July. Former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo landed 24.6 percent of the vote, a 4.4 percent drop since last month. Republican candidate Curtis Sliwa received 16.8 percent of the vote, a slight rise of 0.7 percent since the July survey. Mayor Eric Adams garnered 11.4 percent of the vote, a drop of 2.4 percent. The poll has a margin of error of 3.9 percent. "Zohran Mamdani remains the candidate to beat," Olson said. "However, this new survey also indicates that he can still be beaten." "Mamdani's support is real and durable, but not overwhelming," he continued, adding: "When crime and public safety enter the conversation, his ceiling shows." In a potential three-way race, Mamdani leads with 38.3 percent of the vote compared to Cuomo's 32.3 percent and Adams' 20.4 percent. In a potential three-way race with Sliwa, Mamdani received 38.5 percent to Cuomo's 30.3 percent and Sliwa's 23 percent. The survey also shows that 58.4 percent of respondents are "less likely" to vote for Mamdani after hearing his previous remarks about defunding the police. The survey shows that 23.8 percent are more likely. Mamdani's views are "too extreme," 45 percent say, while 33.9 percent say they are "about right" and 6.7 percent say, "not progressive enough." Following a deadly mass shooting in New York City in July, Mamdani addressed his prior comments on law enforcement, saying, "I am not defunding the police. I am not running to defund the police," according to CNN. The state assemblyman added that he is a "candidate who is not fixed in time, one that learns and one that leads, and part of that means admitting as I have grown." Mamdani is campaigning on a policy that would implement a "Department of Community Safety," which would "invest in citywide mental health programs and crisis response" as well as deploy outreach workers in subway stations. The survey also shows that Mamdani is the only candidate with a net positive favorability rating, with 47.8 percent favorable versus a 43.6 unfavorable rating. Then-New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, left, and then-Democratic nominee for New York City mayor, Eric Adams, hold a joint news conference in Brooklyn to discuss the rising rates of gun violence in The Big Apple... Then-New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, left, and then-Democratic nominee for New York City mayor, Eric Adams, hold a joint news conference in Brooklyn to discuss the rising rates of gun violence in The Big Apple on July 14, 2021. (Photo by) More What People Are Saying Columbia University Professor Robert Y. Shapiro to Newsweek via email Wednesday: "What we are seeing in the poll numbers that have him ahead reflect his strengths with eye-opening ideas and a style that is energizing supporters. What we are not seeing are the possible effects of his weaknesses--where he is perceived as too extreme in his policies or positions. "This is where the debates, assuming there may be more than one, will matter in that his opponents can focus on these extreme positions. This can undercut Mamdani's support but not lead to a surge in any one candidate unless at least one of the other candidates with noticeable support drops out, since the vote is being divided." Mamdani posted to X on Wednesday: "When police are made to respond to every single failure of the social safety net, this is the result: forced overtime, declining quality of life, an exodus of officers. Our proposal for a Dept. of Community Safety will allow police to do the jobs they actually signed up for." Vermont independent Senator Bernie Sanders, who has backed Mamdani, posted to X on Tuesday: "The most remarkable reality of the Mamdani campaign is how much the financial and political establishment fears him. They know that when he wins, people nationwide will be motivated to end oligarchic control of our economy and politics. We can do this! Please support Zohran." Cuomo on X Wednesday: "Public safety is job 1. The NYPD is losing officers at a record level. Rebuilding it must be a top priority. The NYPD are NY's finest. It's past time to reverse this dangerous trend to protect our city My plan will add 5,000 officers, 1,500 in the subways, with incentive bonuses to attract the best." Sliwa on X Tuesday: "Crime isn't down. You don't feel safe because you aren't. Every New Yorker deserves a safe commute. Here's my plan to make it happen as your Mayor: Adams posted to X on Tuesday: "This is the time for experience—not experiments. Not upstart political candidates, nor their short-sighted policies and platforms, but a proven track record. With record total jobs, improved housing, and our historic crime declines, New York is back—and stronger than ever under my administration. So get out and vote to re-elect me as New York City mayor to continue on our proven pathway toward safety, affordability, and dignity for all New Yorkers" What Happens Next The general election is scheduled for November 4, and analysts say the race could most likely hinge on whether independent or third-party bids by figures like Cuomo or Adams persist or whether national involvement alters turnout or vote allocation.
Bloomberg
5 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
The Nightmare Battle of Fallujah Still Has Lessons to Teach
On Aug. 7, the Israeli war cabinet made a controversial decision to continue Israel Defense Forces (IDF) ground attacks against Hamas in Gaza, despite intermittent ceasefire efforts and the ongoing danger to the remaining hostages. The decision has been condemned by many nations, including some — like France, the UK, Canada and Australia — that are generally more sympathetic to Israeli policy. The security cabinet's plan specifically targeted Gaza City as part of five objectives: rescuing the hostages; establishing complete security control of the city; demilitarizing all of Gaza; disarming Hamas; and creating a civil administration that excludes both Hamas and the Palestinian Authority. Within Israel, the plan has sparked significant opposition and triggered large-scale protests.
