Last week we sniggered as Janet Daley well and truly lost it over the Tories' grammar school debate.  I look forward to reading her next missive on the issue - but it seems she has lost the battle with her own paper.  The Telegraph today backs Cameron. ("Cameron must win grammar war")

The Independent link the row to their Communicate Research poll - Con 35 (-1) Lab 31 (+4) LD 19 (-3).  For the best analysis of the Independent's figures, though, turn to PoliticalBetting.com.

Three other articles that caught our interest this morning were:

• Following up on the French elections, Sarkozy is proving to be popular, helped mainly it seems by ditching many of his policies.  As suggested by the CentreForum seminar on the results of the French poll, The Times reports that Sarkozy is not acting as the iron man he presented himself as ("Tough guy melts into soft-show shuffler")
  

• If you're feeling more cerebral, Chris Dillow in The Times suggests four reasons why the structure of Government dooms most of its initiatives to failure ("We put up with terrible, inept government. Why?")
• Finally, and on a related vein, Jonathan Freedland writes about the impact of the internet on politics ("The internet will revolutionise the very meaning of politics") .
  

Technology is cool and fast, but it still tends to be about sending men to sit in wood-panelled parliaments and marble-floored senates. Does the internet really promise no greater change than that?

Eric Schmidt [Google CEO] says no; the old structures of representative democracy will endure. "They survived world war two and they will survive this." Besides, he says, no one wants mob rule, even if direct democracy was possible - say through regular electronic voting.'

Freedland disagrees.

'If Wikipedia can assemble nearly 6m entries in 100 languages with just five employees, why would it not be possible to draft "wikipolicy" through a similar process, one that would then be voted on by elected representatives?...  I wonder too about the very units in which we now participate. Currently, geography matters a lot: we vote in the areas we physically inhabit. But if millions of people are linked by MySpace, why is that not a political community?'

Wikipolicy is an intriguing prospect.  Wikipedia works pretty well in the main, even though people have to form consensus around facts.  Can people also form consensus around opinion?  It should be put to the test - and on FreeThink we have the apparatus to do this.  But what should the subject be?  Let us know if you have any suitable ideas and we can try it out next week.