Penny Little (Letters, 18th July), argues that it is left to social media to “present the truth” regarding politics and Jeremy Corbyn, following the LSE's report that the UK press “distorted or failed to represent (Corbyn's) actual views”.

In my experience social media is a very good way of finding opinions you agree with, and perhaps perceive to be true, but not such a good way of actually reaching the truth. One look at my twitter feeds or the Google News app an my phone will provide countless articles from sources and friends with near identical political views to my own, much of it provided through algorithms designed to keep me reading, and engaged with the advertisers Google funds its business upon.

Newspapers can certainly be guilty of distorting statistics and facts to support a particular viewpoint; however we should celebrate the fact that we live in a free society where we can go to the newspaper stand and purchase any one of around ten daily papers, many with differing political views and demographics.

Regarding the Independent’s coverage of Corbyn, I have found the coverage to be balanced and fair, but my view of where the “truth” sits may be different to Penny Little's, as my view would be that Corbyn is a terribly ineffective leader, whom is letting down the millions of people in our society who need a strong opposition to this Conservative Government.

James Shepherd

Lincolnshire

Our outdated voting system confused voters during the referendum

I think my mum and her bridge club were a good barometer for why many voted to leave the EU. They wanted to make a point of protest but, quoting my mother, “we didn't think our vote would matter”.

Maybe the electorate is so used to their vote not counting under the present electoral system that many people assumed the referendum adhered to the same rules – it certainly was a very basic point not spelled out clearly enough by the remain camp.

Jonathan Allen

Address supplied

A solution to the Brexit debacle

It was said at the time of the Scottish independence referendum that if Scotland left the UK it would automatically be out of the EU and would have to reapply for membership. This suggests a solution to the Brexit problem.

England and Wales (who voted for Brexit) should secede from the UK, leaving a United Kingdom consisting of Scotland and Northern Ireland (who voted to remain) inside the EU. The Royal Family move to Balmoral. England and Wales are now a new country, outside the EU, called, I suggest, Lesser Britain.

Bob's your uncle, everybody is happy – no Article 50 required.

Oh yes, and I move to Edinburgh.

David Watson

Goring Heath

Trident will become outdated as scientific discoveries grow

In a perverse way, the non-detection of flight MH370 reminds us that if a large passenger jet is impossible to detect under the sea, then a Trident submarine ought to be equally invisible. Now consider this. Less than 25 years ago, there were no planets detected outside of our own solar system and today there are at least 3,472.

We now have the discoveries at CERN. In 2013, physicists confirmed that they'd found a Higgs Boson with a mass of roughly 126 protons. Without a PhD we can probably still appreciate that science is moving forwards at a phenomenal rate and therefore the challenge of detecting objects underwater (particularly hunks of metal more than 150 metres long) is not as formidable as it once was.

Even by conservative estimates, the Trident Replacement programme will cost in excess of £30bn plus £10bn in contingency and will not come into service for at least another 14 years. Once in service, we expect it to fulfil its role as a deterrent for another 10-15 years.

So let’s hope, with all fingers crossed, that the inexorable progress in science's discovery of small objects comes to a halt and remains in limbo for the next 30 years, to allow this one-trick pony to justify the huge national sacrifice that the Trident programme represents.

Robert Walker

Cornwall

May will be tested by her claims on company takeovers

The proposed takeover by ARM, the UK's only world leading hi-tech electronics company, by SoftBank of Japan, is the first chance to test Theresa May’s claim that she opposes the takeover of strategic British companies.

In a speech made just over a week ago she was totally unambiguous that she opposed foreign companies buying our strategically important businesses.

In the speech she highlighted Cadbury, which was acquired by Kraft of the US, and AstraZeneca, which narrowly escaped takeover by Pfizer. Both would have been blocked by her, she suggested. Yet, just a matter of days later, she has welcomed the takeover of ARM by SoftBank, valued at around £24bn.

No other UK tech company has ARM’s reach or reputation. It is at the heart of Cambridge's hi-tech research and manufacturing cluster, supporting jobs and knowledge well beyond the 3000 plus it directly employs there.

What's more, one very important reason why the UK is economically fragile post-Brexit is our unsustainably large current account deficit which is due – in part – to decades of selling off our prized industrial assets to other parts of the world. This has witnessed the relentless siphoning off of profits and dividends earned here.

If the government simply waves through a stream of opportunistic takeovers of our great companies while sterling is through the floor, our capacity to ever again pay our way in the world will be fundamentally holed below the waterline.

Alex Orr

Edinburgh

We all want a government that knows what it is doing

Ben Chu questions the Brexit vote. The overarching reason is that only a diminishing number of voters want to live in this country. Some want a country with more certainty. Some want a country with more individual license. Some want a country with a future that includes them. Some want a past when they felt included.

Everyone wants a government that knows what the hell it is doing.