Crisis? What crisis? For SNP politicians, the message seemed to be Keep Calm and Carry On.
Except, of course, for those who didn’t and instead set about briefing their contacts in the media about the damaging and frustrating fissures emerging in the wake of Salmondgate.
The only evidence of unity on show over the whole affair has been across Thursday morning's news-stands where the near-universal message was that the SNP is divided.
It was "Fury Over Eck Cash Please – SNP CIVIL WAR" from the Daily Record, the paper which broke the story about misconduct allegations being levelled against the former First Minister.
"SNP faces split over Salmond Sex Claims" thundered the Scottish edition of The Times of London, with its tabloid sibling The Scottish Sun splashing with the headline "SNP ministers told … Stay Away from Eck".
The Daily Telegraph, meanwhile, proclaimed "Split in SNP as MPs back Salmond’s legal fund".
The i – sister paper of The Scotsman – claimed there was a "Backlash as Salmond raises £85,000 for legal fight".
The Scottish Daily Mail's coverage described a "bitter civil war" which the paper said was threatening to "split the party in two".
And the Scottish Daily Express, following suit, ran the headline "SNP DESCENDS INTO CIVIL WAR" on its front page. Just in case it wasn't clear, the sub-deck added: "Sturgeon hits back over Salmond’s cash appeal."
Our own front page said the SNP was "on the brink of civil war", as political editor Tom Gordon set out the background to the story about Salmond's legal fight and provided insights from those at the top of the party.
The National, however, chose to go against the grain and quote Ian Blackford, the SNP’s leader at Westminster, in a front page which said: "Party is ‘Pretty United’ over Salmond."
Read that again – "Pretty United".
Maybe there’s a split of opinion even on that?
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel