The Guardian's U-Turn... why?

Do we have any circulation figures for The Guardian vs The Times?

June 2018

The Guardian does of course ask its readers to make regular donations, but that's slightly different.

No, it also asks people to front up monthly.

Print circulation is less than 150k but they have 500k making monthly payments (to include print subscribers). So at least 350k making monthly payments. Plus another 300k making at least one one-off payment.

www.theguardian.com/gnm-press-office/2017/oct/26/guardian-reaches-milestone-of-500000-regular-paying-supporters

That's in October 2017. So I was wondering if theirs had gone down while Times online subs had gone up.

It's a fake display of "balance", carefully timed to be too late to have any actual effect, there simply so they can point to it after the event to say "look, our coverage was balanced..."

I wouldn't be so sure. I think you're attributing a degree of sophistication and forward-planning to the Guardian editorial team that they don't necessarily possess. I think it was much more likely a panicked response to the belated realisation that yes, there are issues here (see eg Karen White) and Oh, quite a lot of our readers are women, and they might have views on this, and Oh Christ, perhaps we have come down too strongly on the other side. Maybe taking little OJ's word for it wasn't such a good idea after all. Is it too late in the day for a reverse ferret, and will anyone notice?

Oh noooooo: Link fail!! Here Lisa is:

Lisa Muggeridge's take:

Guardian: Permission to speak has been granted.

seen Little OJ recently? Or has he self-combusted in a cloud of righteous woke champagne socialist ire?

waspsnest has it. Totally cynical. It's a fake display of "balance", carefully timed to be too late to have any actual effect, there simply so they can point to it after the event to say "look, our coverage was balanced..."

There are rumours circulating that little OJ has parted company with the Graun...

howard97A I think so, too. Now they have found that threats and violence won't cow women into silence they are going the route of 'appealing to women's kindness', while eroding women's rights.

I think that most TRA’s - including those in Govt, BBC and Guardian - have come to realize over recent weeks that the ‘no debate’ strategy has failed.

So they are adopting a new strategy. They will say, “Yes, we recognize that there are differences of opinion; we will listen to women’s concerns; when the GRA is reformed it will retain provisions to safeguard women.”

As the fuss dies down a little the steady erosion of women’s rights will continue ‘under the radar’, backed by deep pockets, intimidation of individuals, strategic litigation.

This is what the “U-turn” amounts to.

It's so when it goes through the TRAs can say "we'll everyone's POV was publicised, and the right side has won".

Completely ignoring that info was suppressed by TRAs bullying the GC with their battle cry of "suck my lady dick" until the 11th hour.

Graham Linehan
‏*@Glinner*
Has Owen Jones resigned from the Guardian yet? He’s spent the last few years calling women bigots for saying the same thing that his editors just said. Presumably he doesn’t want to work for bigots? Or is he just an unserious person who you shouldn’t take seriously on any matter?

Yeah - it's all a bit late isn't it. This should have been happening last week at the very latest.

Anyone seen Little OJ recently? Or has he self-combusted in a cloud of righteous woke champagne socialist ire?

Don't know. I searched for him along all the shores of the right side of history, but could not find him here.

Anyone seen Little OJ recently? Or has he self-combusted in a cloud of righteous woke champagne socialist ire?

Another one!

Now. A couple of months of abuse of women by TRAs for speaking up later. Tzzzz.

Another one!

www.theguardian.com/society/2018/oct/19/david-gauke-priority-should-be-protecting-women-when-placing-transgender-inmates-karen-white

It's absolute bollocks. The BBC have ignored it too and the day before the consultation is due they discuss it on QT and on various radio/TV programmes. Utterly, utterly disgusting.

Fuck them, I'm going to Murdoch, the Times and Sky. At least we fucking know there is an agenda there.

I'm done with the BBC and the Guardian.

A leopard doesn't change its spots. (Ab)normal service will resume shortly.

I think (hope) they're seeing the writing on the wall....that the tide has turned, that the consultation won't go the way they thought it would. They don't want to be on the wrong side of history and are jumping ship.

Off topic a bit, but the Mail, who were the early adopters and had some surprisingly good articles by the likes of Richard Littlejohn and Sarah Vine, seem to have stepped right back, leaving coverage to The Times and Speccie.

I wonder whether the priority is Cabinet cohesion. Do not attack Penny Mordaunt till Brexit is sorted. (Though fine to allow Kate Hoey to have a go at Bercow and her female colleagues www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6288657/Labour-MP-Kate-Hoey-calls-speaker-John-Bercow-resign.html.) In the meantime allow David Davies to stick his head above the parapet and say things others are thinking, in part so that there are lots of good reasons to drop Mordaunts approach before an election.

The last minute Guardian coverage has really just been a face saving exercise. The editorial comment showed that there is still no real recognition of the very real issues that would negatively impact upon single sex spaces as the result result from even easier Self ID.

The Guardian, and everyone, needs to recognise and accept that gender and sex are two separate things.

Women are women because of their biological sex, and all that arises from that female sexed body. Trans women are a separate category from women; and women's ability to name their own experience, and to have access to single sex spaces is paramount. Trans people are admitted to single sex spaces when that is deemed acceptable by women themselves. Not just on the say so of trans women.

Trans women are not women, no matter how they identify or what they feel. Sex and 'gender identity' must remain separate categories, each with their own protections in law.

It coincided with the letter in Pink New from transactivists (and some MPs ) saying that media coverage had been unfair and one-sided. Since there has been restraint across the board on the KW issue (just imagine the old News of the World style coverage that could have got) it might have ruffled a few feathers in the newspaper rights world. Or they may have been going to let a few GC bits through at the last minute. Who knows.

People don't pay online subs to the Guardian, though - it's free. Whereas the Times is behind a paywall.

The Guardian does of course ask its readers to make regular donations, but that's slightly different.

Times 428.03k
Grauniad 138.08k

That's print though, right?

I wonder if there's been trouble at t'Guardian rapidly depleting trust fund mill with decreasing online subs compared to The Times increasing?

I think the turn around might have coincided with the news stories saying that misogyny might be made a hate crime. Was that Mon or Tues?

I think they are being led toward siding with who looks like they are going to be the winner but also there's the pincer movement by those who are susceptible to the gaslighting plus the big bully voices, but also some want to cover their arses. There is bound to be an internal power struggle. Same as in RL.

Argh! Just refreshed and seen cross post with Ekphrasis re misogyy hate crime!

It's not a u-turn it was a strategy. They knew full well what they were doing, promoting trans ideology propaganda at all costs, knowing women were getting ignored, and knew they should be publishing GC articles. But there was not a hope in hell of doing that while the consultation was on. They've left it till basically the day before, knowing hardly anyone will pick up on it then go on to fill out the consultation based on GC views.

If they, that's the Guardian, BBC and the Independent, had covered the Chanellors, Jess Bradley, Karen White when they happened more of their readership would have thought "fucking hell" but they kept with the fluffy sparkly poor vulnerable narrative in order to push their agenda until the last possible moment.

Now if anyone says they weren't balanced they can point to a couple of vague half-arsed references to GC articles and say they weren't.

They're cunts.