In this excellent piece in today's Independent on Sunday, Brian Cathcart, professor of journalism at Kingston University, is caustic in his criticism of the coverage of right-wing newspapers over the past week.

As Nick Clegg's surge in the polls continued to prove anything but fleeting, 'like children in a tantrum, reporters and commentators reached for every movable object and hurled it at Clegg and his party', he writes.

The article also has a sprinkling of humour: "Clegg has dodgy donations; he fiddled his expenses; he is posher than Cameron; he is only one-quarter British; he is part of a Euro-plot against the country; he is concealing a pact with Lord Mandelson; he employs an unpleasant person as his media adviser; he eats babies and he is a fully-paid-up member of al-Qa'ida."

Underneath this combination of indignation and comedy Cathcart addresses some fundamental questions that have arisen since the first Leaders Debate.

How much has the political landscape shifted as a result of the debates, which give the Liberal Democrats an equal footing with Labour and the Conservatives? Have they made people realise that a vote for Clegg and co. is no longer a 'wasted vote'? Do we now have a truly three-party system?

This could prove to be what the Daily Mail called a 'holiday romance' - an exciting but brief fling that fades away along with your tan.

At the moment the electorate is batting its eyelids at Nick Clegg, and some in the media clearly don't like it.

The right-wing press won't decide this election. You will.