It makes sense. While we have used the example of UKIP, you could easily do the same if it was Labour, Tory or Lib Dem. The point is this; any party that wants to be taken seriously, would not stand for being associated with such as website. A website such as Wings over Scotland, that has strong links to the SNP and has been endorsed by members, candidates, Councillors and MSPs. It has also not been condemned by Sturgeon or any other high profile figure.
Wings over Scotland fits the description of a nasty, overzealous, conspiracy filled, bile loaded fringe website. It demonizes Scottish media, politicians and any opponent of the SNP. As I write, twitter has erupted after it smeared an NHS nurse who 'allegedly' appeared on a Labour lefleat, claiming she was not a nurse at all, but an actress instead. Not for the first time Wings went over the line.
Now it is true, that it is not a part of the SNP; however there are several in the party who happily endorse and defend Wings. Even when challenged, to disown it and distance her party from it, Sturgeon was less than convincing. That means that whenever Wings does something dreadful, some of the mud smudges the SNP brand name and undermines its credibility. Unionists make the link between the two time and again. Damage is done to the SNP's reputation and the cause takes a hit.
So why on earth does the party not scream at the top of its lungs about the fact that it has nothing to do with Wings and put open water between themselves and the website? As tactics go it is staggeringly naive and reckless. As image goes it further confirms the idea that large swathes of the party are happy to intimidate and smear opponents. The whole affair makes it clear that the SNP needs a serious detox in terms of attitude, tactics and culture. Sturgeon could have made that part of her mission as leader. She hasn't and it could cost her very dearly indeed.