There has only been one story in town in the UK – Peter Mandelson’s links to Jeffrey Epstein and the consequences for Sir Keir Starmer. The prime minister admitted yesterday that the friendship between the peer and the disgraced financier was flagged in vetting documents, as he appointed Mandelson the UK’s ambassador to the US. Starmer used a speech today to apologise to Epstein’s victims.
From the BBC news to the front of Private Eye, the British media has been dominated by the furore. Starmer conceded in his speech that “tomorrow’s front pages are unlikely to be about the Pride in Place project [that he was launching]… Of course I’m angry and frustrated about that.” The story is hugely serious, but no doubt some of the coverage has been fuelled by embarrassment at how chummy many in the media were with Mandelson. (See the picture of News Agent Emily Maitlis draped over him at some event years ago.) As I mentioned in another post, whether it is Mandelson or Pep Guardiola, people don’t like to ask the charming ones tough questions.
This is not one of those stories where you can say the Lobby is interested in it but the public don’t care. A poll by YouGov revealed that 44% of Brits are following the saga “very” or “fairly closely”. A further 28% said they were following it “not very closely”, with 23% saying “I am aware of the story but am not following it”. That left just 5% unaware of the story. That’s what you call cut-through.
About the Author
