PDA

View Full Version : The Grauniad Newspaper


Sir Herbert Gussett
5th Aug 2010, 22:57
The good old Guardian newspaper. It's the only one I buy and it seems a bit of a stretch at 1. Very good journalists, brilliant graphs, terrific photographs and sensible editorial... along with an excellent 'G2' section.

But there is one thing many over look with The Guardian and that is where it really is in a world of it's own... at Latest news, comment and reviews from the Guardian | guardian.co.uk (http://www.guardian.co.uk) - apparently the 2nd most visited news website in the world.

The 'Comment Is Free' section is very good, but I love the data blog. They employ some poor bloke full-time who sits and changes all the Government's PDF data into easy to understand spreadsheets, charts, infographics etc. It is excellent - all available at the Data Blog. Datablog | News | guardian.co.uk (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/)

But the sad thing is I can't really see this newspaper sticking around for a while... they seem to be in terrible debt and I don't think their print readership is that great.

Still a good read. Better than The Express.

cattleclass
6th Aug 2010, 00:42
I believe that the Guardian is the best paper in the world. When I returned to Melbourne from London I was appalled at the state of local press, and it's lack of world news,and was happy to pay $13.00 for a copy of the Sat. Guardian on the following Wed. from a shop in Elizabeth St, now sadly closed, But I will always buy the International Guardian on a Thursday from my local newsagent in Carlisle St , and the first click of the day is the guardian website. Now... if I could only get an Observer in Paper form for my Sunday Lunch...Aaahh! life would be better again!
:ok::ok:

sitigeltfel
6th Aug 2010, 05:17
But the sad thing is I can't really see this newspaper sticking around for a while... they seem to be in terrible debt and I don't think their print readership is that great.

The paper is heavily reliant on public sector jobs adverts for its income, seen as an indirect state subsidy by those who do not share its political philosophy. Many of the departments were accused of giving the paper exclusive adverts in order to ensure the candidates were of the "correct" mindset. A government spokesperson said that they were going to force departments to use web based advertising in the future to save money, which is no bad thing.

Krystal n chips
6th Aug 2010, 05:49
:ok:

Read by the main occupant of Penn. Ave. more or less since from its launch ( with one notable exception of course, no prizes for guessing who and probably not, if fantasy becomes reality..heaven forbid, when Ms Mom gets elected..although she has a problem with newspapers anyway, so this would be more than a quantum leap....:E ) and by others around the world in positions of power due to its quality and pragmatic reporting.

G2 is a section that never fails in the variety of topics and information and for those who have missed it, the recently introduced centre page photo feature is comparable to the Spectrum feature in the ST for the diversity of subjects.

One has always taken the comment "f39king Guardian reader" as being the ultimate compliment therefore. :):E

Captain Stable
6th Aug 2010, 06:52
Read by the main occupant of Penn. Ave. more or less since from its launchBlimey! I didn't know Obama was THAT old! ;)

Blacksheep
6th Aug 2010, 07:12
Since The Times became an Australian Tabloid, the Guardian is the only proper newspaper left. Though its biased, so am I, so we cancel each other out.

Saintsman
6th Aug 2010, 08:11
I didn't realise how good it is. In reply to someone seeking advice about a sexual problem, some one wrote:

Can't you just bend her over the kitchen table and give her a damned good rogering? That's what we did in Borneo during the insurrection.
Modern psycho babble rubbish. Never happened in my day. Be a man sir. Stand proud and think of England.


Brilliant.

MadsDad
6th Aug 2010, 08:15
It is somewhat biased (although ALL reporting is biased anyway) but they do quite often print articles from writers who have opposite bias - not something a lot of papers, let alone tv news channels, are noted for.

One section they used to do in the Saturday Grauniad (but stopped some time ago) was a review of the weeks news, as covered in various other world newspapers of various leanings. It gave an excellent, balanced, view on what was happening. (When t'Lad was training they were expected to keep up to date on the news and we used to send it to him every week. Very useful it was apparently).

Tankertrashnav
6th Aug 2010, 08:31
Blimey, I thought the OP would get absolutely savaged for his post, knowing the political leanings of many on JB, but Ive been surprised by the well-balanced remarks from many who would not describe themselves as "Guardian Readers". Always been a Times man myself and I've quite often had letters published, so I tend to stay loyal, but I acknowledge it's gone downhill over the years (The Sunday Times is a tabloid rag in all but paper size) but I sneakily read The Guardian when my daughter's home. Maybe I'll switch to it in my declining years!

Btw Madsdad - "The Week" fulfils the function of the Saturday review you mention, being a selection from all newspapers from the previous week. Once had a letter in The Times and had it picked for inclusion in The Week's selection. Talk about kudos!

Parapunter
6th Aug 2010, 09:02
It is a damn shame what has become of the Sunday Times. I still buy it every week out of habit & rage at the rubbish within.

I don't know why I do it to be honest, the Grauniad is a much better read. Although it does get bogged down under the weight of it's own polemic, maybe that's what puts me off. Truth is, there ain't a great newspaper in this country anymore & what with the internet, rolling news & rank stupidity amongst the population in general, it doesn't look like we'll get one anytime soon.

MadsDad
6th Aug 2010, 09:08
Didn't know about that bit of the Times, Tanker - I'm afraid my prejudices do not let me have any dealings I can avoid with any Murdoch organisation. And t'Lad stopped needing the news bit (as opposed to merely preferring to know what is going on). Not sure what paper he reads now.

And I did get mentioned in the Grauniad Diary column once.

Sir Herbert Gussett
6th Aug 2010, 10:09
I've just came out of my bunker.... thought it would be needed after my original post though I am glad to see so many supporters. :ok:

OFSO
6th Aug 2010, 10:19
As a disgusted reader of the "Sunday Times" I was thinking of having a competition on PPRuNe to see who can spot the most unlikely story in that paper linked to a stock photo of a pretty girl.

Not that I'm adverse to photos of pretty girls, far from it, but *BANK RATE STAYS AT 0.5%* or *NURSING HOME FOR THE ELDERLY CLOSED DOWN* or *FEWER MEN DYING OF PROSTATE CANCER* illustrated by a photo of some teenage bimbo in a bikini is par for the course in the "Times" these days.

Viola
6th Aug 2010, 10:27
they do quite often print articles from writers who have opposite bias


I like this in the Guardian - there are several different points of view. It makes up for the fact that some of its own columnists can be a bit smug.

The website, especially the archive, is good and easy to use.

The Guardian is owned by a Trust, unlike most newspapers, so there is no pushing of the owner's other businesses.

'The Week' is very good too.

Sir Herbert Gussett
6th Aug 2010, 12:31
Got today's paper from the shops. :)

What weird nonsense passes as 'art' on the photo feature spread in the middle.

Ancient Observer
6th Aug 2010, 12:47
I think it is time for a dissenting voice. Maybe even a rant?
I have no desire to read left wing rubbish from millionaire columnists with a distinctly trot/pinko perspective who live in Hampstead, Highgate and Notting Hill, and who dine out with their fellow trots from the BBC and the NUT..
It is written by very rich Socialists of the "Don't do as I do, do as I say" school.

The incredibly privileged upbringing that many of its contributors have had enables them to percieve them selves as being "above" anyone that actually has to work to earn money.
Bell would be funny if it were not his ultra-rich background which enabled him to escape doing real work.
Has any edition of the Grauniad ever been printed that did not use the word "cuts" in one of its stories?
I could go on, but it is not worth it.
Murdoch's Times is becoming too much like his Sun. However, it remains a long way ahead of the Grauniad.

Metro man
6th Aug 2010, 13:06
I'll stick to The Torygraph thanks. Guardian is a bit too left wing for me.

HKPAX
6th Aug 2010, 13:39
Methinks Ancient Observer should just read the Spectator washed down with chardonnay and prozac.:)

...right wing millionaire columnists etc etc. LOOK: do you read to learn / absorb other peoples' opinions OR do you read to get fed back to you what you already think? If the latter, save a few bob by talking to a mirror - not Daily sort of course.

Me can read Grauniad and Torygraph and enjoy them much the same.

Gertrude the Wombat
6th Aug 2010, 14:21
The Guardian was just about the only news web site that worked throughout 9/11.

Cacophonix
6th Aug 2010, 14:31
I enjoy reading both the Guardian and the Telegraph even though they should be poles apart in their opinions.

The Times has degraded to the point that I don't purchase paper and am happy to see it lurking impotently behind its internet pay wall.

As far as the foreign press goes on the internet I enjoy reading the Haaretz news as well as the New York Times.

As ever with the Guardian it still good to see the occasional mangled message or word despite the availability or word processors and the death of old style typesetting.

vulcanised
6th Aug 2010, 15:04
The one that surprised me recently is the Daily Mail.

I had always assumed it was a bit like the Telegraph, but when I saw their website I wondered if I was looking at the Sun by mistake.

sea oxen
6th Aug 2010, 22:12
I'd never read the Guardian just on a matter of principle. One thing I do not understand is how they are haemorrhaging money given their sinecure over the last thirteen years, and the number of people who've piped up here in its support. Readers of the Eye will be acquainted with the cost-cutting measures they have adopted - for the proles, that is. :)

As for news and comment, any newspaper is old by the time that I buy it. It's only used for the crosswords and Kakuro now. Even the poor old Telegraph with the execrable Mary Riddled in Tuesdays ("If you are reading this you are a Tory toff and will be first against the wall"), Boris on Mondays ("I am quite comfortable with having no British people in London by MMXX, what?") and the agony aunt column on Tuesdays (I had the thought that I might write "I am really depressed. I have been in prison for a couple of months and my girlfriend has left me. She is the mother of my child - actually, she might be the mother of two of them. There is another but that is ire irrell irela doesn't matter. She taunted me telling me it was a bastard copper and that make me really mad and angry and I wanna )

The media have blurred, as vulcanised pointed out. The Mail used to be read by curtain twitchers and the aspiring middle class. No change there, then.

SO

corsair
6th Aug 2010, 23:04
I don't buy any newpaper anymore. I use that term in it's broadest sense. Either they've changed or I have. I don't think I've changed much. So it must be them.

As soon as newpapers go back to being newpapers as opposed to journals for the dissemination of the publisher's and his acolyte's otherwise known as journalists viewpoint. Then I will go back to reading them. I would be glad to see the Guardian go as it no longer represents what it purports to be. The same for most be the right or left wing, liberal or conservative.

I cannot walk into a newsagent without having an urge to buy a newpaper like a pervert in sex shop seeing the glossy magazines. But like the pervert I feel the guilt afterwards. Well I hope they do.

It annoys me how bad newspapers have become. Is there actually a good one out there anymore?

TURIN
6th Aug 2010, 23:52
The incredibly privileged upbringing that many of its contributors have had enables them to percieve them selves as being "above" anyone that actually has to work to earn money.


Could say that about one or two on JB.;)

Metro man
7th Aug 2010, 00:17
Try this website PressDisplay.com - Newspapers From Around the World (http://www.pressdisplay.com/pressdisplay/viewer.aspx)

It will allow you to download newspapers from all around the world in exactly the same format as the printed version. Viewable on a laptop or iphone.

At about 11.30am local time here I'm going to read todays Telegraph, before the UK newsagents are even open.

Mods, please do not delete the link as advertising. many people would find this site very useful.:ok:

parabellum
7th Aug 2010, 08:13
The Guardian was just about the only news web site that worked throughout 9/11.


Probably the only web site that people wouldn't bother with!;)

(I think the Gruniad is just a heap of left wing crap, by the way).

Tyres O'Flaherty
7th Aug 2010, 08:21
It's mostly good, except for that smug little self satisfied pr*ck George M*nbi*t.

I'd really like to give him a slap

Captain Stable
7th Aug 2010, 08:46
(I think the Gruniad is just a heap of left wing crap, by the way).Even were it without the context of all the other posts on this thread, that says rather more about you than it does about the Guardian.

Vercingetorix
7th Aug 2010, 09:11
The Guardian is worth it just for Marina Hyde's writing alone.

Cheers:ok:

etrang
7th Aug 2010, 09:18
The good old Guardian newspaper. It's the only one I buy and it seems a bit of a stretch at 1.

I read the Guardian on-line for free and consider it excellent value for money.

Krystal n chips
7th Aug 2010, 10:05
One of those whimsical little articles that bring a smile to ones face....:E:ok:

The Sun backed the wrong Russian donkey, owner claims | Media | The Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/aug/06/the-sun-russian-donkey-stunt)

It would be an insult to donkeys to make any further comparison with the rag involved..but it would be nice to see Sun "reporters" suspended under the same canopy....and the cable cut thereafter.

Cacophonix
7th Aug 2010, 10:15
it would be nice to see Sun "reporters" suspended under the same canopy....and the cable cut thereafter. Personally I would prefer to see the Russian 'businessman' Mr Gorobets attached to the boat by his wedding tackle and dragged along as he ascended for a closer look at the sun.

"Donkeys aren't afraid of heights. I put her into the sky to give her a richer life."

With my technique Gorobets would just end up with a very disappointed wife.

Krystal n chips
7th Aug 2010, 10:35
I'm sure you can get tandem harnesses....BOGOF so to speak...nice thought however ...one which I suspect many of us will concur with....:E

parabellum
7th Aug 2010, 12:48
Even were it without the context of all the other posts on this thread, that says rather more about you than it does about the Guardian.


You just can't resist the personal insult stuff, can you Stable?

Gertrude the Wombat
7th Aug 2010, 14:26
I enjoy reading both the Guardian and the Telegraph even though they should be poles apart in their opinions.
Another difference is that the Torygraph always[#] have a story about a dead baby on page 2.

I don't know quite what sort of audience this regular spot is aimed at but I personally find it a bit sick.

[#] I can't actually guarantee that this is "always" meaning "every paper they've ever published". I only know for sure that it's "every paper I've ever seen".

Ancient Observer
7th Aug 2010, 14:33
HKPAX,

Nice of you to offer, - I'll have a glass of Sauvignon Blanc, please. Hold the Prozac!!

cavortingcheetah
7th Aug 2010, 14:58
I think that with columnists of the ilk of Mary Toynbee, Marina Dudley-Williams and Andy Becket, the Guardian may quite reasonably be described as a bigoted production. Frequently it resembles not so much a newspaper as a political broadsheet of extreme bias. It's a sort of Tony Benn product isn't it? A by product of seething privilege dedicated to the furtherance of the ideas of the far left with limited rational thought as a defining characteristic.

Captain Stable
7th Aug 2010, 15:13
parabellum, if you consider that an insult, I would be glad if you can point out exactly how it fits that description.

cavortingcheetah
7th Aug 2010, 15:27
'The incredibly privileged upbringing that many of its contributors have had enables them to perceive them selves as being "above" anyone that actually has to work to earn money.'
(I corrected the deliberate spelling error in this humorous piece of Caesarian literary largesse.)
Which brings me to the point,a slight sidetrack perhaps, which is that in the UK today The Financial Times must surely rate as being a serious contender for the title of the best of not the only newspaper. It is a journalistic product that reports news in a matter of fact way. Of course the bias is towards matters financial but that tendency is in reality more of a slant than a prejudice. The Lex column is usually excellent and the editorials are, in my opinion, what newspaper leaders should be. Of course, it can be boring to read and it errs from the sensational but it is a newspaper of importance and integrity.

Home (http://www.pearson.com/)

Captain Stable
7th Aug 2010, 16:07
It's a very long time since I've read the FT, I'm ashamed to say. It used to have quite a good Bridge column at the weekend. Nowadays I like Zia Mahmood in G2, on Thursdays if memory serves...

flash8
7th Aug 2010, 17:40
I have known a well known Guardian Journalist since School and arguably know him pretty well. He is the bastion of integrity and decency (for a Journo :)) having spent at least 15 years on the paper I like to think that the paper values those attributes )

For that reason alone I read the Guardian. However I am a great supporter of the Indy for having the balls to stand up against the Iraq War. That took some courage and has paid off big time in the papers credibility stakes.

Sir Herbert Gussett
7th Aug 2010, 17:50
I applaud The Indy for standing up against Murdoch!

Parapunter
7th Aug 2010, 18:25
Didn't do it any good did it? Lost so much money that lebedev snapped it up.

Still, I always admired A.W.S. for refusing to lead with tedious & irrelevant stories about the royal-sodding-family.:)

cavortingcheetah
7th Aug 2010, 19:03
Here's an article written about the much abused Rupert Murdoch, who for all I know deserves everything that is said about him, by a Guardian correspondent.

Of course Rupert Murdoch's evil, but that doesn't mean he's wrong | David Mitchell | Comment is free | The Observer (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jul/11/rupert-murdoch-guardian-paywalls)

It is an excellent example of Guardianismo, biased, vulgar and badly written.

Sir Herbert Gussett
7th Aug 2010, 19:30
I don't like David Mitchell at all - he appears on a heck of a lot of TV shows being branded as a "posh boy" but he says some really daft things at times and just seems to jibber for the sake of it. Oh, and his own TV sketch on BBC Two is pants.

Here is a better take from some arrogant, stuck-up Blogger guy: Will Murdoch Lose Britain? (http://www.newser.com/off-the-grid/post/448/will-murdoch-lose-britain.html)

Still a good read

Ancient Observer
7th Aug 2010, 20:12
They are all posh and rich boys who delight in telling teachers, the "working class" and social workers what they ought to think.

If I were that rich, I might be tempted to do the same, but right now I couldn't afford their house/nanny/babysitter/lunches/dinners in Notting Hill.

Sir Herbert Gussett
7th Aug 2010, 23:28
That sounds more like eejit Giles Coren from The Times. :)

Parapunter
8th Aug 2010, 07:18
David Mitchell is clearly fiercely intelligent, but hopelessly over exposed lately. In fact without Peep Show, which he doesn't write or direct, I doubt either him nor Robert webb would have anything like the media profile they do now.

Peep Show is however, a beautiful thing.

sitigeltfel
8th Aug 2010, 07:46
Perhaps this sums up all that is unrepresentative and self-serving about my circle of acquaintance: like a smug and insular cult predicting the end of the world and having sex with each other's children, we're holed up with our certainties and only ever indulge in self-affirming conversations.You said it Dave.

V2-OMG!
8th Aug 2010, 07:56
Haven't been privy to said publication, but have read (and enjoyed) a couple of books by one of The Guardian's former columnists, Julie Burchill.

Burchill's bio of Princess Diana was mesmerizing.

Sir Herbert Gussett
9th Aug 2010, 10:36
Does anyone buy The Observer on Sunday's and is it worth it? I don't but any paper on a Sunday though maybe I should.

Krystal n chips
9th Aug 2010, 10:47
" Burchill's bio of Princess Diana was mesmerizing"

Mesmerizing and Burchill is not the usual term used to define her....:E

Talentless..for starters

Viola
9th Aug 2010, 18:27
I buy the Saturday Guardian and the Financial Times weekend edition and spend the weekend reading them (plus The Week) so I don't bother with a Sunday usually.

The FT assumes its readers are intelligent and doesn't push the owner's point of view, and the Guardian is owned by a Trust so has no 'owner's point of view' to push.

They both print different points of view to the editorial.

The FT tends to excuse bankers a bit too much - but that is understandable as that's their readership, and some Guardian columnists, as I've said, tend to be a bit too smug IMO.