OT: It couldnt happen to a nicer newspaper..

Sep 30, 2016 79 Replies
Saved reading
Jump to replies (79)

"Since you're here ...



... we have a small favour to ask. More people are reading the Guardian than ever. But far fewer are paying for it. And advertising revenues are falling fast. So you can see why we need to ask for your help. The Guardian's independent, investigative journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce. But we do it because we believe our perspective matters - because it might well be your perspective, too.



If everyone who reads our reporting, who likes it, helps to pay for it, our future would be much more secure. You can give money to the Guardian in less than a minute."



Obviously no one likes their reporting or is prepared to pay for it, and no one want to advertise with them either.



Oh dear oh dear.



Perhaps they can get EU funding...


Not so different to the Wikipedia model. Telegraph OTOH is behind a paywall.

The Guardian loses money hand over fist. If it weren't for the fact that they own the Exchange & Mart, they would have gone down years ago.

Not so as you would notice.

Simply get the delete site cookies plugin and exercise it every half dozen articles...if you actually get to a half dozen articles.

Frankly the DT is all advertorials these days. There is no independent opinion in it. It has suppressed dissent by removing the comments which were the best part.

Its not even worth reading, let alone buying.

The Telegraph's new online layout is horrible on a PC.

As part of the print edition's revamp last year, it tones pictures with a yellowish tinge. I cancelled my subscription with the newsagent as it was getting too pricey for diminishing news content and the sickly photos made my toes curl.

Once upon a time the Telegraph was heaving with news. Now it's full of lifestyle itemas and news-you-can-use. Ugh!

She should have been reading the Express. Would never have dared to come here in the first place.

Interesting. I take it then you'd be in favour of controlling the salaries of all 'in charge' of companies?

That smacks of communism to me.

I'm assuming the Express is at the other extreme? I've never read it. I've bought very few newspapers in my lifetime.

I really can't remember when last I bought a newspaper. But did see most at work before I retired. And they were all written to suit the prejudices

- or special interests - of those who bought them.

Express is a bit tit-and-bum tabloid, and a bit 'brave Sir Nigel' but it does actually contain real news*, and its editorial bias is so obvious and blatant its very easy to correct for it.

*though don't go near its 'science' section as its plastered with conspiracy theories presented as fact.

My identity there has been banned for being politically incorrect. So its not as far right as you might think.

E.g. today the lead is this:

formatting link

It contains very little 'opinion' and seems to be factual. The bias of course is why it is the main lead story at all...

BUt since you can 100% say that the BBC and the Guardian won't run the story, someone has to..

In fact I just googled 'bulgaria bans burkah' and it's on breitbart, the express, the independent, the telegraph, the daily mail and the mirror., and a plethora of other minor news sites.

No BBC No Guardian.

The purpose of the comments after articles is to find out what the readers want to hear. & then print more of it.

The story of Elvis found alive and well on the moon was true as well.

Why can't people see this?

Would that be the Mactoons? - I've almost certainly got the spelling wrong, but that's what it sounded like to me.

It's not the control, it's the hypocrisy. The Guardian constantly advocates for fairer wages but does do what it preaches.

formatting link

Maktoum family.

Um, "doesn't" but I'm sure you saw it was a typo. :-)

Because he has gone over to the dark side?

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required