THE Scottish independence referendum campaign produced more than a few memorable moments in the media, with front pages and tense encounters on air sticking in the mind.
Here are five media moments we have selected from 2014.
The Vow
The Vow appeared on the front page of the Daily Record on September 16, just two days before Scots went to the polls.
It involved a pledge made by the three English-based party leaders – David Cameron, Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg – that in return for voting No, further powers would be devolved to Scotland.
The move was seen by many as a major turning point in the campaign, especially as it came a few days after a YouGov poll had suggested for the first time that Scotland would vote for independence. Many felt The Vow tipped the scales back in the Unionists favour.
However, despite being credited with helping the Better Together campaign secure 55% of the vote, academics at the Scottish Election Study last year suggested polling data did not point to it having had any significant impact.
Their book The Referendum That Changed A Nation states The Vow did not lead to any dip in support for Yes. In survey responses of those who switched from Yes to No, only a tiny number of whom mentioned the promise of more powers as their reason for doing so.
Sunday Herald backs Yes
In May 2014, amid a sea of Unionist media in Scotland, a memorable moment came when the Sunday Herald came out in support of independence.
READ MORE: How would Glaswegians vote on Scottish independence 10 years on?
The paper declared its editorial position with a front page designed by artists and author Alasdair Gray.
The paper stated at the time: “Scotland is an ancient nation and a modern society. We understand the past, as best we can, and guess at the future. But history is as nothing to the lives of the children being born now, this morning, in the cities, towns and villages of this country.
“On their behalf, we assert a claim to a better, more decent, more just future in which a country's governments will be ruled always by the decisions of its citizens.''
It was the first time a paper in Scotland had come out in support of Yes. The Sunday Herald had previously backed the SNP in the 2007 and 2011 Holyrood elections, but said it would not automatically favour the party in its news reporting of the Yes campaign during the referendum.
Nick Robinson and Alex Salmond spat
One of the stand-out spats of the campaign was one between Alex Salmond and the BBC's then-political editor Nick Robinson which ultimately ended up in an angry protest outside the BBC Scotland headquarters over perceived bias from the broadcaster.
Protesters objected to what they perceived to be pro-Union bias from the BBC and called Robinson a liar, suggesting he should be fired.
It came after Robison (below) was accused by the then-first minister of “heckling” after he pressed Salmond to answer further questions about the threat of Scotland-based banks to move their registered offices to London.
Salmond said he did not believe Robinson was a liar or that he should be sacked, but he said the BBC had been unfair and unreasonable in the way it edited a tense exchange between the pair at a press conference.
Robinson was later accused by Yes campaigners of producing a report that wrongly claimed Salmond had ignored his question.
Asked whether he supported the protesters, Salmond did not directly answer the question but said: "I think there's real public concern in terms of some of the nature and balance of the coverage.
“We must allow people to express a view in a peaceful and joyous fashion, that's part of the democratic aspects of politics.
“My view of this referendum campaign, if we leave to one side the handful of idiots on either side of the debate, [is that it] has been a joyous empowering campaign; a lesson, a model in the exercise of true democracy. "
In 2015, Salmond launched an outspoken attack on the BBC and Robinson for the corporation's coverage of the referendum, calling it a "disgrace" and "embarassing".
Good Morning Scotland report
In June 2014 a report by Professor John Robertson, of the school of creative and cultural industries at the University of the West of Scotland, claimed there was pro-Union bias on the BBC’s Good Morning Scotland.
Robertson said a study of the programme throughout April 2014 suggested it was "balanced in crude numerical terms but, in every other respect, unfair to the Yes campaign and favouring the Better Together campaign”.
READ MORE: Scottish independence would be won on one condition, poll finds
"Broadcasts began too often with bad news for 'Yes' and, too often, featured heavy repetition of such messages over several hours,” he said.
Alex Salmond vs Andrew Marr
Alex Salmond got into another dispute with a BBC host when he attacked Andrew Marr (below) and accused him of bias.
Salmond appeared alongside then-chancellor George Osborne on Marr’s BBC One politics show and was asked about EU membership after European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said “it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible” for an independent Scotland to join.
Salmond disputed the view and said Barroso was “sucking up to London” because he wanted UK support for him to become NATO secretary general.
But Marr said he had also spoken to Barroso after the show went off the air and he had stuck to his line.
Marr added: “I think it would be quite hard to get back in I have to say.”
Salmond erupted in response saying: “This is what? The Andrew Marr analysis? As opposed to the weight of evidence presented to the Scottish Parliament’s committees at the present moment.”
He added: “I don’t know, is that an individual expression? Is that the expression of the BBC?”
Marr replied: “I’ve got no views on this. Nor does the BBC. I was simply reflecting on what Mr Barroso told us.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel