There is real cause for concern when the persuasiveness of a story depends more on public attitudes than the facts

What does the recent public shaming and subsequent exoneration of Jack Straw and Malcolm Rifkind over accusations of ‘cash for access’ tell us about British democracy? Nothing good, certainly. But did the investigation by Channel Four and the Telegraph lift the lid on the secret world of British politics as intended? Phil Parvin suggests not, and argues that the readiness of the public to believe negative stories about politicians means that these ‘stings’ can damage perceptions of British democracy far beyond what is justified by the facts of the case at hand.