THERE are only two pro-independence newspapers in Scotland: The National and the Sunday Herald. The other 37 – let that number sink in – are Unionist.
Apparently, men writing letters to The National outnumber women by about three to one and the letters editor has asked why.
First up: I don’t know why this is. I came to The National fairly recently, once it became clear that The Herald was going down the same road as English-based Unionist newspapers like the Telegraph, the Mail and the Express – with headlines every day that became more and more anti-Scottish – and rejecting letters from people like me.
It has taken me a while to settle in as a National reader. I like the Gaelic page and the Scots page. I like the columns by people like the Wee Ginger Dug and Mhairi Black. I would like more articles by big thinkers. But what about letters?
My big complaint about the Herald letters page was always that almost all of the contributors were men. The same wee group of men. Nit-picking men. Good on political theory but not so hot on the everyday issues affecting the future of our country.
I have to be honest and say that while The National has more letters pages than The Herald, my issues are much the same.
And this really worries me because it looks to me as if we’re not offering a suitable opposition to the Unionists, who are already organised for indyref2: the trolls are out in force (one followed me to a Welsh friend’s Facebook page to harangue me about the Scottish Government’s minimum pricing of alcohol, much to my Welsh friend’s confusion); the Unionist press are already in action, telling idiotic lies about what’s happening in Scotland’s education system, the police and NHS, as are the BBC and STV, which confuse what’s happening down south with the situation in Scotland; and the Unionists are building up a war chest that those of us who are pro-independence could never hope to have.
But do women write letters to newspapers that are more personal, and do they write less because they take criticism personally? That’s one suggestion by The National. I write two blogs. One is about health issues (mine) and the other is about whatever gets up my humph day-to-day. The first is obviously personal. Posts on the second tend to start with a personal angle but then I try to widen the scope – otherwise folk wouldn’t bother to read it.
When I wrote to The National about poor service at RBS, I started as usual by describing a personal experience but then – at least I thought I had – I widened it out to include pretty general statements. I was surprised that readers of The National online thought I was annoyed that I couldn’t withdraw a fiver from the RBS cashline and then I realised that’s what the online headline-writer had suggested and some people hadn’t actually read what I’d written – just the headline. The same thing happened when a reader replied to my RBS letter in the newspaper. He suggested what I wanted was a bank branch dedicated to me personally where I could draw out a fiver. In fact, I had complained about poor service by RBS right across our communities – and I’m pleased to see Ian Blackford has now taken up the fight and is on his way to winning the argument.
None of this is as bad as people telling you off for being old or not being good-looking – and both of these have happened to me on Facebook, believe me. I’m not sure how we encourage people – not just women – to get involved in the independence discussion, but I’m pretty sure it doesn’t consist of telling us off when we do try to get involved.
I’d also love to know how many young people – say, under-35s – write to The National. That’s the other missing generation we have to reach.
Jean Nisbet
Glasgow
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel