Partisan prophet proves himself right by quoting himself – magic!

PARTISAN JOURNALISM, or propaganda as it’s better known, has one overriding objective – a systematically one sided attitude toward every problem that has to be dealt with. Sometimes that means its practitioners have to bend the truth so far that the truth breaks and becomes a misleading lie. AhDinnaeKen investigates the alleged truth bending of Stuart Campbell of Wings Over Scotland in his previous and present incarnation:

Misleading and unethical. What we've come to expect.

Stuart Campbell used these two quotes to reinforce the authority of his Fairplay campaign. The Edge quote was allegedly written by Campbell as was the CTW one. We’re awaiting verification of the first. AhDinnaeKen verified that the second (CTW) is indeed Campbell’s handiwork.

By Longshanker aka @ergasiophobe

“SCRATCH THE surface at any point, and it would seem that much of the rhetoric of the FairPlay campaign is based on some completely unfounded assertions that have never been backed up by facts or research.” stated a report into claims raised by the then Fairplay campaigner and videogames reviewer, Stuart Campbell – the present editor of the Wings Over Scotland blog.

The report from 2002 further informed its readers of Campbell’s deceitful manipulation of attributed quotes to lend a false authority to his campaign’s spurious claims.

Most damaging was the allegation that Campbell had quoted his own writings and attributed them to the publications they were written for as if the two were somehow separate.

At no time did Campbell mention or let on that he was the author of the quotes.

If true, the report was a damning insight into the dishonest practice and unethical actions of a self professed “professional journalist”.

In short, Campbell was effectively treating his target audience/readership with cynical contempt using unethical journalistic practise.

Predictably, Campbell called the claims a lie and countered with a classic Tu Quoque riposte:

“..tame industry lapdogs like have been quick to condemn the campaign with ill-researched and blatantly untrue claims (ironically while accusing FairPlay of poor journalistic standards).”

AhDinnaeKen can exclusively reveal that Campbell was indeed guilty of the charges raised against him by . Click the links supplied to see Campbell’s initial CTW feature and how the quotes were further abused.

The most blatant manipulation concerned a quote attributed by Campbell to trade magazine Computer Trade Weekly (CTW):

In a CTW feature from 1996 entitled “The Price is Wrong”, Campbell said:

“The price of games is crippling innovation – with people buying so few games, they take very few risks, so publishers play safer and safer, so sales slip further downwards (how many driving games and beat-’em-ups do you need?), so games get more expensive to recoup the losses, etc etc.”

It’s the very same quote used by Campbell’s Fairplay campaign and attributed to CTW with no other allusion to Campbell.

Oh dear! Quoting yourself to prove yourself right, in this instance, is like a particularly incestuous form of the Circulum Probando logical fallacy. What a swiz,

Oh dear! This is a screen grab from Campbell’s original CTW feature. Quoting yourself to prove yourself right is a particularly onanistic form of the Circulus in Probando logical fallacy. What a swiz.

CTW, at the time, served the games industry and associated retail trade, keeping them abreast of news , developments and features. At its height it commanded a unique perspective on the burgeoning games industry and spoke with an unchallenged authority.

Campbell’s unattributed attribution hoped to tap into that authority. Except, embarrassingly for him, he was exposed by despite his counter claim they were lying.

The World of Stuart blog has a large archive of Campbell’s work for various publications over the years, including CTW. The link to the original piece written by Campbell is here and an archive copy is here.

Readers can make their own mind up as to what this tells them about Campbell’s ethics and integrity in order to further his one sided interests.

Scottish Television journalist and Wings acolyte by proxy, Stephen Daisley, in pre-referendum praise of the Wings Over Scotland blog said:

“Mainstream media need not embrace Stuart Campbell but it cannot afford to ignore him or the challenges he poses to journalistic practice”

AhDinnaeKen agrees wholeheartedly with the sentiment of Daisley’s statement. Such journalistic practice highlighted above, shouldn’t be ignored, it should be exposed.

The main challenge Campbell poses to journalistic practice is one of ethics, integrity, credibilty, honesty, hypocrisy and trust.

It’s why if the MSM were to “embrace” Campbell, as some MSM journos such as Daisley, Kevin McKenna and Iain MacWhirter appear to be doing, then it could feasibly be claimed that they were undermining their own credibility – for the simple reason that they’re legitimising an inauthentic cheat and liar who abuses journalism for his own ends.

Campbell’s readers trust him enough and believe in his credibility enough to donate “as much” as they can afford to the upkeep of his lifestyle.

Apologists for the Wings blog might point out that the Fairplay campaign was a long time ago and imply that that somehow lessens the impact of Campbell’s deception.

It’s worth noting that the CTW feature was written in 1996 but the quotes were used to add authenticity to the Fairplay campaign six years later in 2002 .

You need only look at the back of the Campbell authored Wee Blue Book to see the same “misleading” attribution principle in action:

Wings is arguably the most exciting, invigorating, and innovative entrant to the Scottish media world in recent years. – STV News, 20 June 2014” screams the blurb on the back of the Wee Blue propaganda pamphlet.

To the uninitiated it implies endorsement by the mostly impartial broadcaster Scottish Television. The source of the quote was Stephen Daisley, something that should have been alluded to by Campbell because the quote implies that STV News endorsed Campbell when, of course, it was merely the “manlove” rhetorical foreplay by proxy of the Wings besotted STV journalist.

According to Ross McCafferty, also quoted on the Wee Blue Book – he referred to Wings Over Scotland as “The mumsnet of the independence movement” – Campbell’s attribution of his quote to the Mirror Online was a “bit harsh” due to the salient fact he hadn’t written it there. Yet, curiously, it was still attributed as such by Campbell. So much for fact checking, accuracy and truth etc.

Campbell has a history of basic factual and “misleading” errors – never corrected – which further his solipsistic interests.

Acolytes, supporters, donators, endorsers and apologists can take their excuses elsewhere. Anyone who donates to Wings in the belief that they’re funding professional journalism is a schmuck. Stuart Campbell, though they choose not to see it, is treating them and journalism with the contempt they probably deserve.

And that’s the real problem with Wings Over Scotland. For all the bluster and polemic about journalistic integrity and credibility and the alleged “fact checking”, “citing” and “sourcing” of his propaganda stories, it can never quite be believed as being “authentic”. From spending to readership to status to credibility all that’s required with Wings is to “scratch the surface” to find that its rhetoric is unfounded and its basic argument is built on a lie.


Attributed to Mirror Online except the quote doesn't come from the Mirror Online. Well done Wingsy. Yer a tryer at least.

Attributed to Mirror Online except the quote doesn’t come from the Mirror Online. Well done Wingsy. Yer a tryer at least.



Filed under Media, Wangs Watch

6 responses to “Partisan prophet proves himself right by quoting himself – magic!

  1. See Above

    To be fair to poor Wingsy, is it not just that he’s a bit dense and/or unwell?

    He doesn’t seem to understand the difference between news reports and comment pieces and operates under the assumption that everything published can be used like a quote on a movie poster as representative of a paper’s or broadcaster’s views. Is he confusing them deliberately or is he just addled? I actually think it may be the latter.

    It’s clear from the blog he has no real understanding of how newspapers actually work – hence his belief the Herald being biased and Labour were being all Machiavellian when Jim Murphy was interviewed after the bin lorry crash.

    His problem is, ultimately, that he’s a games reviewer who has confused subjectivity with truth to quite an alarming degree.

    Take his infamous Hillsborough piece. We have to assume he actually *believes* his crackpot theory despite everything saying he’s wrong. This week he was retweeting Channel 4 Alex Thompson from the enquiry as he was reporting on evidence saying some fans were pushing, as if this proved the Rev’s entire crackpot thesis. Is he this mendacious or is it that he is so blinkered he cannot see or cope with anything that contradicts his worldview?

    • He does find it hard separating fact from opinion.

      There are numerous examples of him now, and through the years, quoting conclusions as facts.

      And he often comes to his own conclusions.

      Circulus in probando a go-go.


    • Indeed there’s definitely something of the political charlatan about him, and to that extent he does know precisely how newspapers work, but he manipulates things like the attributions to enhance their status rather than be truthful about their provenance.

      But the subjective opinion/objective truth dichotomy and his conflation of the two is where he underlines his sleekit nature on occasion. But it’s perhaps not born of dishonesty as much as his overweening conceit, which leads him to believe he’s the ultimate arbiter of truth regarding what are really matters of opinion.

      However, it’s often hard to discern whether he’s all about dishonesty regarding the portrayal of objective facts or delusion relating to his portrayal of mere opinion as incontrovertible truth. Most probably a mixture of both.

      • “’s perhaps not born of dishonesty as much as his overweening conceit..”

        I disagree with you here Stuart. Anyone who could quote themselves to prove their own point without attributing themselves as the source of the quote is acting in a “misleading” and wilfully dishonest fashion.


      • Indeed the juxtaposition of the more accurate (but still misleading) Ross McCafferty attribution with the other inaccurate ones underlined that it wasn’t just sloppy/unprofessional journalism, but a deliberate attempt to misrepresent precisely who was lavishing praise on Wings.

        On the other hand, in more general terms I think there’s a large element of delusion as well as dishonesty in his approach, and the two are often difficult to disentangle.

      • On the other hand, in more general terms I think there’s a large element of delusion as well as dishonesty in his approach, and the two are often difficult to disentangle.

        True. There are three main logical fallacies which are done to death in his blogs: damnning the alternatives; ad hominem; ad nauseum.

        Those fallacies are all friends of the snake oil politician, the extremist and the propagandist. Campbell is arguably all three. The delusion certainly kicks in with his inability to separate fact from opinion and conclusion. It amazes me that people who should know better don’t see it.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s