This is the bit I can't get my head around (like I couldn't when William Boyd and John Le Carre signed a letter condemning Corbyn's and Labour's "antisemitism"): McGough is a bright chap, must read a fair amount, including current affairs and media analysis, yet just like Boyd and Le Carre he seems woefully naive and ill-informed and tamely accepts the prevailing and bogus corporate media view of the world. I can't decide if he really knows the score -- that Kuenssberg is a lackey and mouthpiece for corporate propaganda and the most sickening example of well-paid hypocrisy we have -- or is a totally credulous naif who never strays outside his aesthetic bubble of media luvviedom and floats along on cloud of make-believe.
I mean, can he be so innocent and unworldly as to believe the bias and pernicious underhand slanting without suspecting the truth? Or is he in on the scam but knows if he's to keep his safe and cosy berth with the BBC (for his poetry slot) then he has to pay homage to establishment icons and keep his trap shut about the real issues?
I honestly don't know the answer. As a scouser I'd have thought McGough would have more savvy and backbone than this. They're usually such a bolshie bunch.