Corbyn: all singing from the wrong hymn sheet

Just three days into the new job and Jeremy Corbyn has already had his donkey jacket moment. That boy isn't hanging around.
The Labour leader is in trouble for wearing a jacket and trousers that didn't match to the Battle of Britain service at St Paul's yesterday. Not only that, but the top button of his shirt was undone and his red tie was not knotted right to the neck.
Oh yes, and he didn't sing the National Anthem.
These are the things you need to know about Jeremy Corbyn's activities yesterday.
He also made a speech to the Trades Union Congress, but for today's newspapers, that was almost insignificant when set against his monumental sins earlier in the day. 

The response to Corbyn's silence during the singing - especially when he had been in good voice for the Red Flag on Saturday - was predictable. Guess who popped up to denounce him as rude and disrespectful? Good old Nicholas Soames, descendant of the sainted Sir Winston; reliable retired military folk including Admiral Lord West, Colonel Richard Kemp and a couple of ninety-something war veterans; Nigel Farage, who must miss being on the front pages; and media tart Simon Danczuk and some mostly unnamed fellow Labour MPs.
Did anybody in the real world care? Will the non-singing of a song cost Labour a single vote? Or gain one?

And what if Corbyn had sung? Well, he'd have been a hypocrite. Look at what the Sun had to say yesterday when it was disclosed that he would kiss the Queen's hand etc etc when inducted into the Privy Council.
Damned if he did, damned if he didn't.
Honouring those who served the country at war is a tricky business for Labour leaders. Consider the flak Michael Foot took over his choice of coat for the Cenotaph in 1983. How dare he pick something warm from his wardrobe instead of trotting off to Aquascutum for a classic number in navy serge?

---

Clothes do matter. Dressing appropriately is an expression of courtesy to those around you. Gordon Brown was guilty of a repeated insult to his hosts when he refused in 1997 and subsequent years to don formal dress to deliver the Chancellor's Mansion House speech. Foot would have done better to have buttoned up, but the coat itself wasn't scruffy. Corbyn could have gone the extra half-mile and done his tie up properly, but did anyone beyond a hostile Press notice or care that his smart jacket and trousers didn't constitute a suit?
If Corbyn's attire and attitude were disrespectful to Queen and country, how disrespectful to the country were this morning's newspapers?  "You don't need to know about his policies, take it from us they're laughable. So rather than report what he had to say, we'll just mock the way he said it and concentrate on his bad manners."
The Times splash did at least give a fair chunk to the TUC speech, even though the intro and heading were anthem-related and the overall emphasis - as with the Independent - was on a "day of chaos". The Express gave the address a page lead a few pages behind the St Paul's scandal, albeit in "look what he's come up with now" style; the Mail reported it straight in a box on its "Labour Earthquake spread" - and then gave Quentin Letts four columns to lampoon the delivery.
This, however, was the entirety of the Telegraph's reporting of what its splash described as "the first major speech of his tenure":

Mr Corbyn yesterday travelled to the TUC conference in Brighton where he delivered a rambling speech that called for people to be given unlimited benefits. Just before he took to the stage, the string quartet played a rendition of Hey Big Spender, an apparent reference to his "people's quantative easing" policy.
Mr Corbyn also said the unions would write his manifesto for the next general election, and compared the Government to the fascist leadership of General Franco in Spain.

The story also said that he had forgotten his lines, but the paper forgot, in its outrage over the anthem snub, to say what he had forgotten. The Times let us into the secret -  Corbyn had "forgotten" to say that Thatcher had once described the miners' union as the "enemies within" - but are we sure he forgot? Maybe he just edited it out?
Corbyn's campaign and election bypassed the conventional relationship between politicians and the media and thus enhanced the sense of there being something fresh about him.
There was much Twitter joy over the fact that an aide had put the phone down on The Sun's Harry Cole, but how wise it is to refuse to communicate with the country's biggest selling paper remains to be seen.
Corbyn's win may have been a landslide, but it still came from just a quarter of a million votes from politically engaged people. The Sun is seen by 24 times as many people every day and, much as Corbyn and his deputy Tom Watson may wish to declare war on Murdoch, it would be folly to ignore such a huge constituency if they hope to attain power.
They cannot expect to speak to packed halls week in, week out. Social media are just echo chambers where people follow or interact with like-minded souls and jeer at those with a different outlook. As several commentators, including those on the Left, point out today, Corbyn needs to get to grips with the mainstream media. Shunning Andrew Marr and the Sun is not a strategy that will lead to electoral success.

But the Press, too, must rethink. If people are offended by Corbyn's singalong choices or dress sense, it is fair that they are reported. If his oratory leaves something to be desired, it is fair that that, too, is commented upon. But let's get this into perspective. Those are side issues; the first job of the Press is to report the news, so when a new leader makes his first important setpiece speech, it would be good if newspapers told us what he said rather than what they thought. One paper did that. Yes, that red rag the Morning Star. You can read its dead straight reporting here.
Now let's see what the rest of them make of Prime Minister's Questions.

---