PoliticsHome - All today's politics in one place The backlash: voters defend Gordon Brown on Jacqui Janes dispute | PoliticsHome

Wednesday 11th November 2009 | 11:54

The backlash: voters defend Gordon Brown on Jacqui Janes dispute

Poll reveals that sixty five percent of voters think the Sun's reporting on the letter sent to Jacqui Janes became an inappropriate attack on Gordon Brown. About half of voters are now more inclined to defend the Prime Minister.

In a new nationwide PoliticsHome poll of over 1,300 UK adults, sixty five per cent of say that the Sun’s criticism of Gordon Brown regarding a letter he sent to the mother of a dead soldier crossed the line into an inappropriate attack.

Under a quarter (twenty three per cent) disagreed, thinking that the reporting constituted legitimate and valuable journalism.

Furthermore, the story - which many saw as part of a political campaign to undermine the Prime Minister – appears to have backfired, with just under half of voters saying they are now more inclined to defend Mr Brown.

In addition, more than three times the percentage of voters (thirty one per cent) say that this episode has made them think more of the Prime Minister than think less of him (9%). A comparable proportion (twenty eight per cent) say that the episode has made them think less of the Sun.

PoliticsHome interviewed 1343 voters by email between 10-11 November 2009. Results are weighted by party ID to reflect the UK at large.

Leave a comment...

Madman

13:08 |
11 Nov 2009
Recommended
13

100% of this public disagrees with Brown and his cabal of sycophants

Another cynical self serving bit of acting yesterday. He deserves an Oscar not sympathy

Steve

13:16 |
11 Nov 2009
Recommended
10

The Sun exploited the situation for their own gain. What happened to being told that the phonecall was being recorded. his is a legal requirement for companies and surely must be for what was thought to be a personal call.

Anna

13:18 |
11 Nov 2009
Recommended
14

I am sorry but you are wrong - forget the forums.

I had some sympathy for him (it lasted a second) but having watched Mrs Janes interview and heard the phone conversation I am more angry with Brown than the Sun.

Mrs Janes actually said that even today soldiers were having to buy some of their kit, such as heavier boots, and thicker jackets which is outrageous

Listening to Mandleson complaoining about the Sun is laughable.

Paul

13:20 |
11 Nov 2009
Recommended
12

Mrs Janes was controlling events not the Sun - she went to them - she taped the call - listen to her interview - she is a very brave, angry woman.

Quite rightly so IMO

David Evershed

13:25 |
11 Nov 2009
Recommended
9

I think we can be fairly sure that Brown's outward phone call to Mrs (Ms?) Janes was recorded by Downing St but he did not point that out before speaking. Does that also have implications as to whether the transcript or recording should be broadcast?

Angela

13:41 |
11 Nov 2009
Recommended
15

Sympathy for Brown - NO.

Paul

14:37 |
11 Nov 2009
Recommended
5

I think it is disgusting that people are used in this way by politicians to show support for a war which is ill-defined and improperly managed. The letter was shabby and inappropriate. It is far better to leave condolences to those who knew the brave lad than to have sickly politicians jumping on the band wagon with 'widow' medals and mis-spelt letters and then try to tell the grieving mother she was wrong to challenge them.

Better that we used intelligence led special forces rather than try to fight a conventional war that puts soldiers in harms way. The tacts are wrong and a surge will not work in the mountainous region of Aghanistan, it was designed for Urban fighting.

Disgusted

14:44 |
11 Nov 2009
Recommended
12

Absolutely disugusted by The Sun and the whole affair.

GB took the time and trouble to write a personal, handwritten letter. OK his handwriting is a bit untidy, but he certianly did not deserve this sort of coverage.

david dee

15:22 |
11 Nov 2009
Recommended
10

Yes, the SUN has well and truly blown it with even SUN readers themselves being critical of the paper's involvement and that is even before we find out just how much money changed hands !!!

john

16:25 |
11 Nov 2009
Recommended
6

Sun readers critical of the papers involvement Mr Dee, or Labour stooges flooding the site with comments?. I see the Labour toadies and trolls have their priorities straight, smearing a grieving mother whilst making out the their beloved leader out to be the victim. I remember Campbell and co werent so choosy all those years ago when they used the Sun in their little propaganda battles to promote wars (45 minutes anyone?) and to smear the Tories.

Forge Lindin

23:45 |
11 Nov 2009
Recommended
5

So, is your argument that 'labour toadies' flooded the poll as well?

You're smearing trolls man. Nobody is dissing the woman, I think they sympathise. Noone is suggesting prosecuting someone for recording the conversation. They just don't have to 100% agree no matter how much they sympathise.

Silent Hunter

18:48 |
11 Nov 2009
Recommended
5

Apparently the Sun have confirmed that "no money changed hands".

I seem to remember the Sun using dirty tricks in favour of Labour once upon a time . . . presumably that was all right then, but not now.

anon

23:02 |
11 Nov 2009
Recommended
5

The Torygraph said that when they stole the expenses claims too! At least brown takes the time to write to bereaved families, which is more than other leaders in the world!

Chris

17:00 |
11 Nov 2009
Recommended
8

The Sun was right to publish. The transcript, without spin, enable me to make up my mind and two things emerged: Gordon Brown failed to acknowledge that he had made mistakes in his letter, and he failed to acknowledge that the troops in Afghanistan were short of equipment and helicopters. Only when the letter and transcript of the telephone conversation were out in the public domain did he apologise for the shortcomiings of the letter. Now let us see some evidence on the ground and in the air regarding equipping our troops properly. Mrs Janes was a brave lady, and used her knowledge and experience to point out the shortcomings and to push for improvements. What are the MOD and advisors paid for?

james

18:13 |
11 Nov 2009
Recommended
8

Brown's govt went to court to try and stop funding for troops who were further injured in their treatment. I wish the public had been outraged by this.

Labour should have been outraged about this but no they are outraged over a letter to the SUN.

To see pictures of injured troops who are maimed and the MOD go to court to to fight against them. To see troops who bleed to death on the battlefield because of lack of helicopters. To see troops maimed because of the lack of funding for armored vehicles.

There were no IED's in afghanistan before the iraq war. Brown was in favor of the decision to go to war in the cabinet. In 2001 and 2002 troops didn't have to face any IED's in afghanistan. Iraq ignited the whole region. IED"S and suicide bombings were unheard of before the iraq war. Militants that went to iraq to fight then went to afghanistan and trained the taliban on IED's and plastic explosives.

Because of the Iraq war which Brown supported afghanistan is now a quagmire with thousands of IED's going off. And Brown can't see that it is a qaugmire. No wonder the mother is so upset.

Yet Brown is portrayed as the victim in all this. Not the maimed soldiers who see how pointless afghanistan is.

Now Brown who has been incompetent in his support of iraq war and his handling of afghanistan will be kept in power for 5 more years because he is portrayed as the victim in all this.

Roberta

18:14 |
11 Nov 2009
Recommended
6

The right whingers really are out on force of late on here, even the idiot magnet of Have Your Say agrees with it comes to this issue. About the only issue in over two years where Brown has actually getting backed by the public. You can all calm down, he's not suddenly going to win the election now

james

18:23 |
11 Nov 2009
Recommended
5

I'd be mad as hell if I was this mother who died in Afghanistan from an IED.

There were no IED's in Afghanistan before the iraq war. Our troops faced ZERO IED's in Afghanistan in 2001 and 2002 before the Iraq. Since the Iraq war and copying the tactics our troops have faced tens of thousands of IED's in Afghanistan. Suicide bombings and car bombings in afghanistan were unheard of before the iraq the war. Go look it up there were no suicide bombings and car bombings in afgahnistan before the iraq war. The afghan people were welcoming to our troops before the iraq war.

Brown supported the worst foreign policy blunder in the last century in the Iraq war.

The mother lost her son because of incompetent politicians who have created IED land in afghanistan.

Gordon Brown supported the iraq war in the cabinet. He and the govt created a nightmare situation in afghanistan where every step troops take they have to be worried about being maimed. Brown can't see this quagmire. No one confronts him about the stupidity of keeping troops in this situation.

But somehow Gordon Brown who has made a disaster of a situation for our troops is viewed as the sympathy figure and this poor mother is viewed as the villain.

I can't think of a worse thing for a mother than have a son die from an IED in afghanistan when there would be no ied's in afghanistan if it wasn't for the iraq war. Yet Brown is now getting wave after wave fo sympathy. Politics is sick.

james

18:28 |
11 Nov 2009
Recommended
5

The troops are still traveling around in unarmored vehicles where IED's leave them maimed in a brutal fashion.

The lack of funding for armored vehicles should be the issue not editorial after editorial over how people are feeling sorry for Gordon Brown over this SUn incident.

Can there be just a little perspective here. This poll is outrageous. All common sense has been lost. Labour's spinning has won the day.

james

18:31 |
11 Nov 2009
Recommended
5

There is a story in the dailymail today about a soldier who can't speak anymore because of an IED blast in afghansitan and now uses a electronic device to communicate.

That is where the sympathy should be. There was another story a few days ago of a soldier who lost an arm and both of his legs who sees the pointlessness of war. I wish the focus was on that instead.

Mary Mackay

20:49 |
11 Nov 2009
Recommended
6

I have been disgusted to watch the unrelenting attack on Gordon Brown over the badly spelled letter of sympathy he wrote to Mrs Janes following the death of her soldier son. Surely anyone can see that their was no malice in his letter, Gordon Brown is possibly one of the busiest, most stressed politicians in the world yet he took the time to hand write a personal letter of sympathy to Jamie's mother. Gordon Brown could have delegated the writing of this letter to one of his aides and could simply have signed the letter but no ...he wrote it himself from the heart. Please give this man a break and don't allow this to turn into a political issue.

james

21:05 |
11 Nov 2009
Recommended
4

Every prime minister has written to soldiers who were killed. Blair wrote to them. There are just so many of them because the Iraq war created IED land in afghanistan. It ignited the whole region including pakistan.

I don't know how Brown sleeps at night knowing without the iraq war soldiers wouldn't be losing their legs, eyes, and arms in blasts.

Damn the sympathy to Brown I have a friend who was terribly maimed in afghanistan because Brown and Labour decided to go to war in Iraq.

Brown is not the victim in this. The mother who lost her son is the victim because Brown and Labour decided to go to war in Iraq which ignited the whole region and brought suicide bombings which were unheard of before the iraq war to afghanistan.

ZERO ied's suicide bombings in afghanistan in 2001

ZERO ieds's and suicide bombings in afghanistan in 2002

Since the Iraq war tens of thousands of ied's in afghanistan.

End the war and bring our troops home. Instead Brown is determined to look tough and keep our troops in this quagmire where every day they are maimed.

There are more traumatic injuries in afghanistan of our troops than of all of the uk on a daily basis now.

Brown is keeping our troops in a quagmire booby trapped hell hole. How dare people have sympathy for him.

Have sympathy for my friend who is now maimed now for GORDON BROWN.

james

21:11 |
11 Nov 2009
Recommended
5

My friend was maimed because this govt supported the iraq war which made afghanistan become IED land just like iraq.

Foreign troops that fought in iraq then went to afghanistan and trained the taliban in IED's.

So brown makes a mess of afgahistan by supporting the iraq war.

The vehicle my friend was in was not armored Brown has refused to support the funding so all the troops have armored vehicles. He was in a light vehicle.

So it is bad enough that Brown put them in this nightmare then he doesn't even give them armored vehicles.

How Brown is still in power six years after he supported the worst foreign polciy blunder in the last century in supporting the iraq war is a disgrace.

The suicide bombers in the underground trains who massacred those innocent people said they were motivated because of the Iraq war.

How does Gordon brown sleep at night when he supported the iraq war and now every day UK soldiers in afghanistan are being maimed and he just leaves them there. Now we are hearing we will be in the afghanistan quagmire for the forseeable future. Brown puts them in this nightmare and now won't take them out. That isn't courage. He doesn't deserve sympathy.

The mother deserves sympathy not Brown.

Johnny Norfolk

08:23 |
12 Nov 2009
Recommended
5

I remember when John Major came under this kind of media attack. So it was ok for John Major but not Gordon Brown.

I think the Sun was quite correct to lead with this story. It just shows what kind of man Brown is, means well but has no idea how to carry things out. That reflects how he has done his job. and I think I am being kind to him.

Factoid

10:13 |
12 Nov 2009
Recommended
4

As the comments below indicate, people have strong views about Gordon Brown - these are however irrelevant to the question of whether the Sun has acted inappropriately. The survey results show Rupert and James that they crossed the line here and manipulate our democracy at their peril.

Phil

16:06 |
12 Nov 2009
Recommended
1

It was absolutely disgusting and the conservatives are behid this.

len

17:30 |
12 Nov 2009
Recommended
1

this so-called "backlash" is highly dubious, as is this poll. It's pretty obvious why Lab and Lib Dem voters will back Brown against the Sun.

Since when has 65% of the public had anything but deserved contempt for Brown?

There is ONE person who feels sorry for Brown more than any other person - Gordon Brown.

Michael

21:06 |
12 Nov 2009
Recommended
2

I have great sympathy for Mrs Janes. I can't imagine what it must be like to lose your son at such a young age, it is the greatest fear of any parent that they will outlive their children.

However, the Sun's standard of "journalism" on this issue has been disgusting. Gutter reportage at its very worst.

The Live Wire

Latest from The Green Box

Today's Storys

Latest

New today

New this morning

MSM Catching up

PoliticsHome Polls

Public opinion today

The backlash: voters defend Gordon Brown on Jacqui Janes dispute

Poll reveals that sixty five percent of voters think the Sun's reporting on the letter sent to Jacqui Janes became an inappropriate attack on Gordon Brown. About half of voters are now more inclined to defend the Prime Minister.

Leave a comment...

Madman

Steve

Anna

Paul

David Evershed

Angela

Paul

Disgusted

david dee

john

Forge Lindin

Silent Hunter

anon

Chris

james

Roberta

james

james

james

Mary Mackay

james

james

Johnny Norfolk

Factoid

Phil

len

Michael

More about this story

Recommended

Latest

Video and Audio

Sections

News Front Page

Pro Dashboard

Research

About Us

Search PoliticsHome

Download