The Guardian is in trouble

Arcade_Tryer · 07-08-2016 07:12PM

Henry94 wrote: »

It is now in the process of alienating the left with an unpopular stance against Corbyn. So who will buy it? Hipsters?

They are alienating the same left who most people on boards refer to as the "loony left" and "liberals gone mad".

Every single comment below an article criticising Corbyn is about Blair and Iraq. It's entirely tiresome. It must be great to have the luxury as a Labour supporter to bring everything back to Blair and Iraq. While the Labour party sinks further and further into the shadows of history. A history that was only re imagined and reignited by Blair. And which can only be repeated by someone of his ilk. A winner. Someone who is willing to sink to almost the same level as the opposition and beat them at their own game solely to gain power.

marienbad · 07-08-2016 09:08PM

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

They are alienating the same left who most people on boards refer to as the "loony left" and "liberals gone mad".

Every single comment below an article criticising Corbyn is about Blair and Iraq. It's entirely tiresome. It must be great to have the luxury as a Labour supporter to bring everything back to Blair and Iraq. While the Labour party sinks further and further into the shadows of history. A history that was only re imagined and reignited by Blair. And which can only be repeated by someone of his ilk. A winner. Someone who is willing to sink to almost the same level as the opposition and beat them at their own game solely to gain power.

Blair didn't need to sink to the level of the opposition - he used up all his hard earned credit on a stupid vicious war .

Arcade_Tryer · 07-08-2016 11:37PM

marienbad wrote: »

Blair didn't need to sink to the level of the opposition - he used up all his hard earned credit on a stupid vicious war .

My problem is with those who deem Blair's early years and the Iraq war to be mutually exclusive. It's infuriating. And incredibly tiring reasoning. Tony Blair circa 1997 is exactly what the Labour Party in Britain needs. Only a fool or a blind liberal cannot see this.

ancapailldorcha · 08-08-2016 12:34AM

Please take the Political talk to an appropriate forum. This thread is for discussing the current state of the Guardian from the perspective of this forum. Thanks.

Arcade_Tryer · 08-08-2016 01:46AM

Sorry for going off topic. But really, when every single comment under a Corbyn article on the Guardian concerns "Blair the war criminal" and pesky "Blairites", it's not hard to see why the Guardian is losing followers. Stupid liberals have proved themselves to be just as stupid as anyone else. Stupidity is stupidity is stupidity.

Bob24 · 08-08-2016 09:57AM

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

Sorry for going off topic. But really, when every single comment under a Corbyn article on the Guardian concerns "Blair the war criminal" and pesky "Blairites", it's not hard to see why the Guardian is losing followers. Stupid liberals have proved themselves to be just as stupid as anyone else. Stupidity is stupidity is stupidity.

Yes - as ancapailldorcha was saying there is not point talking individual politic opinions of posters in this thread, but having said that the editorial line of the Guardian (very much linked to politics) certainly has to do with their issues.

They are in a tricky position IMO. If they want to stop alienating many readers they need to tone down what is probably seen as a hardcore libertarian/liberal left line by many members of this forum who have a problem with the Guardian. But on the other hand doing so would definitely anger what is becoming their core readership (and a good part of their editorial team), which is expecting exactly that editorial line and would probably see a softening of tone as a sacrifice of moral values in the name of profit.

In my view, this is what happens when you try to sell too much ideology over pragmatism (which I think is the trap The Guardian fell into). At first it works well as you are selling nice ideals, but eventually ideology hits reality and starts causing you trouble. The problem you then have is that the many people who have been convinced by your ideology will not let you change course and adapt it easily as they would see it as a betrayal (so these now core supporters are kind of forcing you to get more and more extreme to keep justifying everything you have said in the past, in spite of a growing number of people who start to disagree with it and to stop buying your paper). And of course when part of the ideology you are promoting tends to imply a great new world is coming whereby quality information is something tech savy people are entitled to for free as technology makes it cheaper and easier to distribute it, it can also be challenging to at the same time convince your readers to buy a newspaper or pay for an on-line subscription).

Just my 2 cents but I think the Irish Times is following the same path (though it is at an earlier stage).

LostinBlanch · 08-08-2016 10:53AM

Bob24 wrote: »

Just my 2 cents but I think the Irish Times is following the same path (though it is at an earlier stage).

Very true IMO. I can't understand why they are so slavishly following a blatantly failing model. Cognotive dissonance I suppose.

Joe_ Public · 08-08-2016 01:21PM

I suppose it's a consequence of the digital age that the comments, in all their weird and lurid glory, posted below articles are now considered a proper constituent part of the modern newspaper. People complain ceaselessly about over-zealous moderation and even censorship, but if a paper is going to be judged on the tone and quality of those comments, can you entirely blame them if they are tempted to control what's for public view to that extent?

It seems to me from general observation that the articles themselves barely drive the course of the commenting anymore. I'm sure some people, maybe many, don't even bother reading the actual articles, or at most skim them, before wading in with both barrels below the line. Strange world we live in if you ask me.

Elliott S · 08-08-2016 06:09PM

I'd be so sad to see it go. Yes, it has its ludricious leftist fringe but it also has oodles of interesting articles that have nothing to do with all that.

Arcade_Tryer · 09-08-2016 01:12AM

Joe_ Public wrote: »

I suppose it's a consequence of the digital age that the comments, in all their weird and lurid glory, posted below articles are now considered a proper constituent part of the modern newspaper. People complain ceaselessly about over-zealous moderation and even censorship, but if a paper is going to be judged on the tone and quality of those comments, can you entirely blame them if they are tempted to control what's for public view to that extent?

It seems to me from general observation that the articles themselves barely drive the course of the commenting anymore. I'm sure some people, maybe many, don't even bother reading the actual articles, or at most skim them, before wading in with both barrels below the line. Strange world we live in if you ask me.

The problem with comments sections on pages like The Guardian and the BBC is people are more concerned with trying to catch these renowned bastions of British news reporting out rather than accepting the argument or point put forward in an article and offering a critique. Comments sections are crap essentially. Except for The Onion. Best comments sections on the web.

InTheTrees · 09-08-2016 04:15AM

So am I missing something here... They lost about 70million pounds in a year. They still have 750million in trust.

It seems the trust fund isn't making as much money as it should but it will still be a few years before they're in serious trouble.

aphex™ · 09-08-2016 05:15PM

For me, and from an Irish perspective getting rid of RTE is more important.

The org loses money hand over fist.
Their news outlook is extremely bleeding heart lefty leaning.
We have a tax on almost every household in the country to pay for it.
They never questioned Fianna (Economic) Failure or the banks.
Their highest paid staff have no colour or wit to their personalities and most shows are akin to watching civil servants reading the news.
The put the best shows on very late at night.
Their talk shows are outdated.

Forget the guardian we need to shut down RTE now.

nc6000 · 10-08-2016 09:20AM

aphexâ„&#162 wrote:

Forget the guardian we need to shut down RTE now.

Never ever going to happen.

LorMal · 29-08-2016 07:53PM

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Its a huge pity. It is one of the few places online where you can still get high quality journalism. The long reads are great and the digital version is rally well put together.
Its left leaning but that is a good counter to all the right leaning papers in the UK.
Hope it stays around.

ancapailldorcha · 29-08-2016 08:25PM

LorMal wrote: »

Its a huge pity. It is one of the few places online where you can still get high quality journalism. The long reads are great and the digital version is rally well put together.
Its left leaning but that is a good counter to all the right leaning papers in the UK.
Hope it stays around.

It's definitely one of the better newspapers but that's not exactly a stringent set of criteria sadly.

Permabear · 29-08-2016 08:47PM

This post has been deleted.

marienbad · 29-08-2016 08:56PM

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I have to say I never give a toss about the columnists once I know where they are coming from , I just factor that in as I am reading and make up my own mind .

Same with the Irish Times , I always scroll down if it is someone I don't know before reading and see who they are and then read away .

I would be a bit of a lefty anyway but I would say The Guardian is less left wing that The Telegraph is right wing , if that makes sense .

ancapailldorcha · 29-08-2016 09:00PM

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

It's the nastiness I can't stand. Don't even mind the SJW thing too much. It's when they get vile for no real reason that puts me off.

JRant · 29-08-2016 11:11PM

I've been reading the Guar for a long time now, going on nearly 20 years and it's fascinating to see how much it has changed over this past couple of years.

It really is a great place for sport, world news and proper investigative journalism.

A noticeable change has occurred in it's editorial slant though. I'm all for differing opinions and will often read articles that I may not agree with but give an different view on events. What seems to be happening is that there are now fewer differing opinions in its Op Eds and it's all about feminism and minorities = good versus the big bad white person. Why they are trying to alienate a large proportion of their readership is an absolute mystery to me.

Still buy it at the weekends as it's easliy the best paper available in the shops and covers a huge number of areas but I have avoid it's opinion pieces for about 2 years now as they are in the main just clickbait.

Hope it continues and if they bring in subscription I'll definitely buy.

RDM_83 again · 30-08-2016 09:16PM

JRant wrote: »

I've been reading the Guar for a long time now, going on nearly 20 years and it's fascinating to see how much it has changed over this past couple of years.

It really is a great place for sport, world news and proper investigative journalism.

A noticeable change has occurred in it's editorial slant though. I'm all for differing opinions and will often read articles that I may not agree with but give an different view on events. What seems to be happening is that there are now fewer differing opinions in its Op Eds and it's all about feminism and minorities = good versus the big bad white person. Why they are trying to alienate a large proportion of their readership is an absolute mystery to me.

Still buy it at the weekends as it's easliy the best paper available in the shops and covers a huge number of areas but I have avoid it's opinion pieces for about 2 years now as they are in the main just clickbait.

Hope it continues and if they bring in subscription I'll definitely buy.

One thing I think I have noticed over the last few years, I'm not sure if its just I'm more aware of world events or have gradual moved Right (or the Left has moved and I have stayed the same), is that it seems like the editorial line has seeped into the main Factual news reporting rather than the Editiorials or Opinion pieces, I can't think of any exact examples but AFAIK it was obvious in some of the migrant crisis related stories, it can be similarly seen in their treatment of some of the Corybn stories (and I'm definitely not a Corybnite)

pwurple · 30-08-2016 11:00PM

This is bringing me right back... When I was a young un, my mam had been advised by someone, that the best way to prepare children for leaving cert english was to have them read 3 papers a week. So she got us, the irish times, the times (english one) and the guardian.

I have to say, I've a lingering fondness for all three of those ever since. Nostalgia maybe. And while I'm generally right to far-right leaning , I also enjoy reading the same story being retold from different angles in different papers. A loss of either side is a shame.

It also reminded me that i hadn't flicked through the online version in a while... This is my favourite column in the online guardian , the kitchen gadget review guy. Combines two of my loves.. Food and gizmos. That line about the robots in the sausage one... Haw.
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/series/inspect-a-gadget

LorMal · 31-08-2016 10:56PM

pwurple wrote: »

This is bringing me right back... When I was a young un, my mam had been advised by someone, that the best way to prepare children for leaving cert english was to have them read 3 papers a week. So she got us, the irish times, the times (english one) and the guardian.

I have to say, I've a lingering fondness for all three of those ever since. Nostalgia maybe. And while I'm generally right to far-right leaning , I also enjoy reading the same story being retold from different angles in different papers. A loss of either side is a shame.

It also reminded me that i hadn't flicked through the online version in a while... This is my favourite column in the online guardian , the kitchen gadget review guy. Combines two of my loves.. Food and gizmos. That line about the robots in the sausage one... Haw.
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/series/inspect-a-gadget

He's excellent. Why can't Irish jounos write like that?

Pepe LeFrits · 13-09-2016 09:36AM

I found it interesting to see this published in the Guardian - Lionel Shriver's scathing condemnation of 'cultural appropriation'.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/13/lionel-shrivers-full-speech-i-hope-the-concept-of-cultural-appropriation-is-a-passing-fad

The felony of cultural sticky fingers even extends to exercise: at the University of Ottawa in Canada, a yoga teacher was shamed into suspending her class, “because yoga originally comes from India.” She offered to re-title the course, “Mindful Stretching.”

hahaha.

More seriously:

I would certainly think twice – more than twice – about ever writing a whole novel, or even a goodly chunk of one, from the perspective of a character whose race is different from my own – because I may sell myself as an iconoclast, but I’m as anxious as the next person about attracting vitriol. But I think that’s a loss. I think that indicates a contraction of my fictional universe that is not good for the books, and not good for my soul.

Writing under the pseudonym Edward Schlosser on Vox, the author of the essay “I’m a Liberal Professor, and My Liberal Students Scare Me” describes higher education’s “current climate of fear” and its “heavily policed discourse of semantic sensitivity” – and I am concerned that this touchy ethos, in which offendedness is used as a weapon, has spread far beyond academia, in part thanks to social media.

kunst nugget · 13-09-2016 10:20AM

Pepe LeFrits wrote: »

I found it interesting to see this published in the Guardian - Lionel Shriver's scathing condemnation of 'cultural appropriation'.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/13/lionel-shrivers-full-speech-i-hope-the-concept-of-cultural-appropriation-is-a-passing-fad

hahaha.

More seriously:

They probably had to print it in full after this ridiculous article…

As Lionel Shriver made light of identity, I had no choice but to walk out on her

I have never walked out of a speech.

Or I hadn’t, until last night’s opening keynote for the Brisbane writers festival, delivered by the American author Lionel Shriver, best known for her novel, We need to talk about Kevin.

We were 20 minutes into the speech when I turned to my mother, sitting next to me in the front row.

“Mama, I can’t sit here,” I said, the corners of my mouth dragging downwards. “I cannot legitimise this …”

My mother’s eyes bore into me, urging me to remain calm, to follow social convention. I shook my head, as if to shake off my lingering doubts.

As I stood up, my heart began to race. I could feel the eyes of the hundreds of audience members on my back: questioning, querying, judging.

I turned to face the crowd, lifted up my chin and walked down the main aisle, my pace deliberate. “Look back into the audience,” a friend had texted me moments earlier, “and let them see your face.”…

My own mother, as we walked away from the tent, suggested that perhaps I was being too sensitive.

Easily one of the worst pieces of excrement I have read on the Guardian.

Letree · 13-09-2016 10:40AM

101027511 wrote:

Quote:
The felony of cultural sticky fingers even extends to exercise: at the University of Ottawa in Canada, a yoga teacher was shamed into suspending her class, “because yoga originally comes from India.” She offered to re-title the course, “Mindful Stretching.”:

I find changing the name worse. At least when its still called yoga it is paying homage to the art that came from india. If you change the name its more like stealing an idea.

two wheels good · 14-09-2016 02:02PM

Pepe LeFrits wrote: »

I found it interesting to see this published in the Guardian - Lionel Shriver's scathing condemnation of 'cultural appropriation'.

Lionel Shriver's was condemning those who complain about 'cultural appropriation' (CA) e.g. the woman who walked out of the lecture. So Shriver was arguing in favour of CA. (That's probably what you meant)

Newsnight ran an interview with the two woman last night. Shriver made the better case there too.

According to Snopes that sombrero\ tequila party controversy and allegation of CA isn't true - or at least dubious.

Sleepy · 14-09-2016 02:10PM

Can anyone else take a grown woman calling her mother "mama" seriously?

I can't.

two wheels good · 14-09-2016 02:11PM

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I expect the erection of some kind of pay-wall is inevitable. I wonder if it is waiting to for its 'global' expansion - north America and down under - to become more established first.
The G is currently promoting its membership options. €49 per annum actually seems like good value.

mzungu · 14-09-2016 03:01PM

two wheels good wrote: »

I expect the erection of some kind of pay-wall is inevitable. I wonder if it is waiting to for its 'global' expansion - north America and down under - to become more established first.
The G is currently promoting its membership options. €49 per annum actually seems like good value.

Are paywalls the way to go? A risky move when you consider that the vast majority of news sites would need to adopt that policy too. Otherwise people will just go to wherever the free news source is on the web.

Although €49 is a reasonable amount, but it's hard to tell what way things will go.

Bob24 · 14-09-2016 03:07PM

mzungu wrote: »

Are paywalls the way to go? A risky move when you consider that the vast majority of news sites would need to adopt that policy too. Otherwise people will just go to wherever the free news source is on the web.

It really depends on the quality and depth of your content, and your target audience.

I think a good approach is to show all generic daily news for free (people will find them elsewhere anyway), and only show a teaser for more in-depth analysis (only show the first paragraph most of the time and show the full content once in a while so that readers are aware of what kind of premium content they could get if they paid).