'Congratulations on being one of our top readers globally'

[Random789]

Anyone else getting a bit fed up with this wheedling fake-frendly message from The Guardian, which appears almost every time I look at one of their articles?
For goodness sake, either put a paywall up or leave me alone. Don't shovel up free content and then try to guilt me into making a donation in return.

Actually I used to pay the voluntary donation, but these days their online content is so patchy, 'Lifestyle' pages that are just padding to draw us towards advertorials. Articles from the US version of The Guardian that are just lazily pulled over into the UK version, as if we should be happy to suck meekly on the teat of US culture. And of course the dishonesty and propaganda on issues of gender ideology.

Bleurgh. What would be a better go-to resource for left-of-centre news?

I think you're being quite unfair actually. They are desperately trying to avoid a paywall, but need income.

They're not trying to make you feel guilty, they're trying to persuade you to give them some cash to support their reporting.

I can understand their reluctance to put up a paywall - presumably they are afraid that not enough people will suscribe , and that it simply won't work economically. But it seems so bankrupt, the decision to offer a poorer-quality product for free, making themselves more dependant on advertisers and tribalist clicks. I can't think of any other area in my life as a consumer where I am asked to cough up donations for a second-rate product just because the provider isn't confident that enough people will pay them for a first-rate product.

The reason they don’t paywall isn’t because they’re not confident in the product. It’s because they believe high quality news is a public good that everyone in a democracy should have access to, not just the wealthy. Personally I completely agree with that.

They didn't seem to believe that in the era of print journalism, when high-quality news was a public good just as it is now. They were (quite rightly) happy to charge then, unlike the crappy 'free sheets', as they were called, that relied on advertising.
The only reason they have changed tack is that they aren't confident that paid-for online content will work for them as a business model.
There was nothing unprincipled about charging for a print newspaper, so why would it compromise public-good journalism if they charged for an online paper?

Surely news is news? Why does it need to be left or right or centre?

First time on the Internet??

Of course it matters which direction news is coming from,you need a look at it all really to work out who is closest to the truth.

Lol

I think you and I might have a different interpretation of high quality news.

Exactly. Blinkering yourself to only left of centre news is pretty fucking small minded isn't it. Which was my point, all news should be considered to get a complete view.

Not sure that’s relevant in any way here? Do you have a point of view on the free vs paid access to reporting - as that’s what’s being discussed

I will not give them a penny while they employ the likes of Owen Jones and drive out talented women line Hadley Freeman.

I thought they were independently funded and in no danger of running out of money.

I don't understand your dilemma - if you don't like the Guardian, read something else.

That is not why they don't have a paywall, they don't have a paywall because having one would not align with their values and history.

Print & online are fundamentally different. Their readership group is different to e.g
Mail. Their ethos is different. Their ownership structure is different.

But if you don't like them, shop elsewhere.

Facts are facts.

Which facts you emphasise and which interests you promote is where left-right comes into play.

Surely you understand this?

It's not high quality so why would anyone pay for it? That is exactly the point, surely?

I find it useful to read The Guardian, The Times and BBC news and see where I think the truth is.

A teacher in high school said to me "don't tell yourself you're reading the news, say 'let's see what the Guardian/Times/whatever thinks the news is today."

But yes, OP, I do find the fawning "you've read 1500 articles this year" stuff annoying. I used to have a subscription to The Guardian but I cancelled it when they pushed Suzanne Moore out.