A YouGov poll today said that a large majority of people – 73% – thought Andrew Marr was wrong to ask Gordon Brown whether he was taking prescription pills and/or anti-depressants.

They thought the Prime Minister had a right to privacy.

Only 22% said the public had a right to know Brown’s medical details.

Anthony Wells at UK Polling Report said:

I was actually rather surprised by that result – my expectation was that the general public attitude towards politicians is that they should jump through whatever humiliating hoops we demand. Looking at the queston wording, YouGov did specificy that the Prime Minister had a right to privacy on medical matters “that do not materially affect their work” and I suppose Andrew Marr would have said that the rumours, if true, could affect Brown’s work.

That said, 73% to 22% is pretty clear opposition to this sort of questioning.

Will The Sun loudly proclaiming a shift to backing the Tories have any actual impact on voting patterns? Or will they simply reinforce people’s prejudices / sense of loyalty?

Will Straw points out that the Sun’s circulation is down 35% from mid-1990s peak.

Sunder Katwala at Next Left quotes this paper by John Curtice that summarises:

There was little evidence that newspapers had much impact on the aggregate outcome of elections. Between 1987-92 and 1992-5 the net movement of voting preferences amongst the whole electorate was very similar to what happened amongst those who did not read a newspaper at all … when it comes to the outcome of elections, the disposition of the press does not make much difference at all.

The FT’s media correspondent Ben Fenton thought it was more an attempt to damage Brown:

Timing of the Sun abandonment hints this was done to damage Brown rather than serve Sun readers. Presages a long run of anti-Labour stories.

After all, if the Sun was so enamoured by Cameron – why not back it in Scotland too?

The Independent’s Westminster correspondent Michael Savage said:

Surely Sun declaring so early means it has lost influence over Cameron – he can do whatever he likes until election. Paper can’t change mind

A Google AdWords war also seems to have broken out. While The Sun started pushing out Google Ads if you searched for ‘Labour’ stating: “The Sun backs the Tories”, someone bought Google ads stating: “You can’t trust The Sun – Wrong on Hillsborough, Wrong on Labour”.

Paul Sagar at Bad Conscience thinks it time the party cut Rupert Murdoch down to size:

When Parliament reconvenes on October 12th, there should be one priority for the final months of this government: to break up Murdoch’s control of key British media. After all, there’s nothing to lose anymore. The Sun will not volte-face and switch back to Brown; hostility from it – and eventually, The Times and Sky News too – is now inevitable. The election will be affected – and possibly dictated – accordingly. So Labour has absolutely nothing to lose by biting back.

The retaliation should go like this. The top legislative priority from October onwards must be to pass laws which make it impossible for one person – or better, parent company – to own more than one major national media outlet in the UK.

Peter Kellner, the YouGov pollster told Sky News: “Although The Sun newspaper is a great weather vane, it doesn’t decide the direction of the wind.”

At the New Statesman, James Macintyre says Good Riddance:

First, Sun readers are human beings too, and must occasionally wonder in amazement at some of their paper’s pronouncements such as those against the very rich paying 50 per cent on income tax.

Secondly, as my colleague Mehdi Hasan just said on Sky News, it was never “the Sun wot won it”, and it is patronising to assume that because Murdoch and a few executives have decided to back who they think are the winners of the next election, millions of readers will — sheep-like — follow suit.

Thirdly, progressives in the party should rejoice that it is rid of this fair-weather friend. The damage done to progressive politics over the past ten years by Blair and Brown operating within the restraints of seeking to please the right-wing media, is untold.

and finally, Matt Buck has produced this excellent cartoon.

The Sun newspaper’s front page today, and an inside editorial, will declare that it has switched support from New Labour to Cameron’s Conservatives.

The Sun Says: Labour’s lost it

TWELVE years ago, Britain was crying out for change from a divided, exhausted Government. Today we are there again.

In 1997, “New” Labour, shorn of its destructive hard-Left doctrines and with an energetic and charismatic leader, seemed the answer.

Tony Blair said things could only get better, and few doubted him. But did they get better?

This may work out better for Labour strategists and the left if the hierarchy feels less need now to constantly appease the Sun and keep it on side.

Many readers are also now likely to see its political coverage as coming from a partisan Tory perspective and therefore be more skeptical of its new reporting.

But what’s more interesting about this is that we’ve had an email from The Sun press team highlighting the switch and with a picture of the front cover.

The Sun now courting political bloggers? Who would have thought…