The Guardian left the comments on…

Coming back to this thread to share this rather good letter from Prof AM Celâl Şengör of Istanbul Technical University. Should be required reading for all at the Guardian.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2023/sep/29/sheer-stupidity-is-a-threat-to-our-scientific-progress

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/mar/10/russell-brand-politics-public-figures-responsibility

There. I don't think we can judge papers for printing positive things about people before any allegations have come to light, can we? They haven't deleted the article. They haven't supported him.

They have censored Lucy though.... I'm not saying they're not spineless.

Ah, it was George Monbiot- he wrote an article a few years later saying that it's a shame that Brand (who probably did some good encouraging young people to vote) had completely lost the plot. So effectively a 'correction' I'd have thought.

The article is still there - probably just a dodgy short url in that tweet that has decayed over time.

In praise of ... Russell Brand
Heroes of 2014: Russell Brand
George Monbiot 29 Dec 2014
The volatile comedian-turned-activist’s ability to be openly and honestly flawed sets him apart from the grand old men of the left

No one is better at attacking Russell Brand than Russell Brand. He takes the lavish criticisms aimed at him and, like Cyrano de Bergerac, shows his opponents how to do it properly.

He is volatile, vulnerable, troubled, mercurial, but unlike most people in public life, he makes no attempt to hide it. His emotional honesty helps to explain his appeal, and his ability to inspire people who had switched off from politics.

Yes, his politics are rough and inchoate, but he doesn’t claim to have all the answers. Sometimes he can be incoherent. But even that is a refreshing change from the stifling coherence of some of the grand old men of the left, for whom everything must conform to a rigid scheme of loyalties and enmities, and who appear unable to admit mistakes. This obnoxious and dishonest rigidity, often enforced by a cult-like following, is, I believe, one of the reasons why the left often struggles to build support.

Brand’s openness about his flaws makes him a good leader, and allows those who admire him to be good followers. He’s the best thing that has happened to the left in years.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/dec/29/russell-brand-comedian-turned-activist

Archived: https://archive.ph/Oeu1a

All the Guardian's "Heroes of 2014"
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=allintitle%3A+%22heroes+of+2014%22+site%3Awww.theguardian.com

Very brave of Lucy M. I hadn't read the review (I don't watch much TV anyway, and Sex Education's not my kind of thing) but I do like her writing.

I thought I’d have a look at that Guardian article in the tweet (apparently lauding Russell Brand as one of the Guardian’s heroes of 2014), but the Graun seems to have disabled it. 1984 is alive and well and history will be rewritten (or at least deleted).

I am finding it grimly amusing every time I'm seeing a comment about cheerleading of Russell Brand by The Guardian. An example of the genre:

https://twitter.com/guardian/status/549533037281959936

"If Sex Education were staying true to its early, far more radical roots, it might have questioned the idea of surgery on healthy bodies as a cure for anything, but although it hints later at the potential downsides of relentless positivity, here the rule remains absolute affirmation only."

https://archive.ph/dn9FI#selection-1429.665-1429.955

Pleasingly, you can “report” the community mod comment about comments being opened in error. Think we should all report for trolling.

Lucy is getting some shit for this on her most recent post (criticising Billy Bragg!) so I’ve left a supportive comment.

Its on https://archive.ph/ (just paste in the guardian link) but maybe better to make you own copy because if someone re-archives the censored version this will disappear.

There is gender identity representation via Abbi and Roman, with the latter seemingly there solely to offer Cal (Dua Saleh) the sight of someone further down the road to transition and fill in viewers on the length of waiting lists and the costs of private surgery. If Sex Education were staying true to its early, far more radical roots, it might have questioned the idea of surgery on healthy bodies as a cure for anything, but although it hints later at the potential downsides of relentless positivity, here the rule remains absolute affirmation only.

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2023/sep/21/sex-education-final-season-four-review-one-long-list-of-frustrations

Is the original article archived/screenshotted?
Brave of LM and clear show of support for Roisín Murphy

So happy about Lucy Mangan- I love her writing. And well done that rapid commenter!
The last series of sex education was interminable. I think the character I felt most sorry for was Ola who would quite have liked some sex with her girlfriend that didn't involve metres of tinfoil and alien role play but she didn't want to kink shame so opted to Be Kind and never do anything she enjoyed....

Disgustingly, the Guardian's explanation of the edit (at the end of the article) is dishonest, claiming that it was a 'clarification' rather than the removal of a sustantive part of the review:

This article was amended on 21 September 2023 to clarify a reference to Sex Education’s early radical roots.

Stunningly overt censorship of wrongthink.

It could have been a good show apart from the 'all teen girls love only the most enormous dildos/vibrators and all teen girls have screeching orgasms from piv performative sex' narratives. I'm glad not to have a teen dd that wants to watch this.

Mod Must have had a break; last two hours is along those lines 😆

LOL, I just found that.
They need a capable mod for their FB page...

I can’t believe the Guardian censored a television review, fml

It is often said that the Guardian US has a lot of influence on the state of things. Does the US side bring in much money compared to the UK and elsewhere? Assuming there is any money.

Comment there: You what now?

oooooooooops! I didn't actually look at existing comments. Looks like the Guardian on facebook is attracting a very strange group of followers!

Comment there: You what now?

I've never watched it but it sounds far to tedious based on that review

I did smile wryly at Emily Bell (ex of The Guardian and now a progressive media person of considerable influence) stand on her soapbox on the PM programme on Radio 4 and give a preachy lecture about how corrosive Rupert Murdoch had been to the media landscape in the UK.

For anyone who is on facebook you can add a comment about the article at https://www.facebook.com/theguardian/posts/pfbid0VJsSSLT7kuqV5h36kP8DceCdNypR3w8EWCp87GikmY1VQx4rAtDD2gxwqSGgZBdzl

If the Guardian were staying true to its early, far more radical roots, it might have questioned the idea of surgery on healthy bodies as a cure for anything, but although it hints later at the potential downsides of relentless positivity, here the rule remains absolute affirmation only.