to be glad that the Guardian is making enormous losses

[longfingernails]

www.pressgazette.co.uk/guardian-losses-reported-to-have-escalated-by-a-further-10m-to-68-7m-for-the-last-financial-year/

Great stuff. Their chatterati condescension, Islington moral vacuum and politically correct echo chamber has been a malignant blot upon our society for decades.

Let it wither upon the Viner.

Haybott - agree. Its quite frustrating.
I used to love that section in the Guide though where a person reported conversation's he'd overheard that week. Hilarious.

I was going to read this until I noticed the op was my least favourite Daily Fail Reader. Typical though, pleased that other people are losing their jobs, and worried about feeding their families and paying their mortgages.

one that regularly speaks up for the vulnerable and dispossessed.

The Guardian's definition of "dispossessed" if people who don't have a nearby Waitrose.

I don't regularly read the Guardian, so don't get things in real time.

But a quick search of the site shows it's not true to say it didn't report extensively and highly critically on Cologne. The first three results out of dozens:

Cologne inquiry into 'coordinated' New Year's Eve sex attacks: Scores of women say they were sexually assaulted and mugged by groups of men largely of Arab and north African appearance 5 Jan 2016

'I’ve never experienced anything like that': Cologne in deep shock over attacks: As police reveal that 18 of the 31 New Year’s Eve suspects were asylum seekers, the far-right is using the fear to fuel its anti-immigrant campaign 8 Jan 2016

The left must admit the truth about the assaults on women in Cologne 9 Jan 2016

And an invitation for people to publicly bear witness: Cologne attacks: how have you been affected? Do you live in Cologne or were you there over the New Year period? If so, we’d like you to share your experiences with us 8 Jan 2016

But I've seen this claim that it didn't cover the Cologne attacks repeated several times. Can someone explain this to me? Was the Gruaniad slower out of the blocks than other news outlets or something?

Any other industry and you'll get sympathy re job losses but not in journalism, oh no you're pleased that people will be without a job. These people have families and are not all evil. Without journalists we wouldn't have known about the MPs' expenses scandal, nobody would be held to account and corruption would be rife - look at the countries where they have strict controls on journalism. But no, of course, they're all just wankers.

Well, I like the Guardian, the fact that they have a Higher Education supplement and care about Development and real women issues.

Such newspapers are very important.

people see the guardian as 'the elite', the triumphalism over its losses is part of the great wave of disenchantment, anti-elite sentiment we are going through eg anti eu, anti banker, anti Obama/Clinton...

Why the people feel the alternative of unfettered Murdoch, farage, Johnson, capitalism without restraints, the right wing tories, the billionaire racist trump will be better for us is anyone's guess- but hey that's where we are right now...

"Viewpoints die out and disappear all the time."

I don't think - at least in my own experience - that there the demographic 'centre or left of centre; actual or potential 'broadsheet [in print or online] reader' is 'dying out'.

However, the broadsheets and associated online news sources that did serve this demographic ARE dying out. This means that a particular demographic does not see its views represented in the media discourse, and those who wish to be in this demographic (or are current teens / younger people who might naturally be recruited into this demographic in a democracy where all views are represented in the news media) may become relatively underinformed.

I mean, if I were to be looking at a country elsewhere in the world and discovered that it had NO balance in its broadsheet newspaper coverage at all, with all being from one wing of the political spectrum, I would make assumptions about informed democracy in that country....

The Guardian has its faults definitely, but when you compare it to almost any other paper - Daily Mail? - it is a shining bastion of truth and integrity.

I have already subscribed (before this thread) as I don't fancy a situation where there is no non-Murdoch/non-tabloid newspaper at all to choose from.

And, yes, the OP is extremely unpleasant, revelling in people being put out of work. Also if you really want to get rid of a "moral vacuum", albeit not specifically an Islington-based one, try looking at the Daily Mail first (not that I would want them to lose their jobs either, but maybe a bit more actual journalism would be nice now and again).

I'm a bit gutted. I've read since I was a girl. I don't know if I changed, or it did, but either way if represents what mainstream feminism and left leaning people think now... I don't think I fit either of those labels anymore.

I really enjoyed the article today on disgust/flies, well... as much as you can enjoy the subject matter, but I thought it was a really good piece. But by the same token I was cross eyed at the "a dog couldn't endure it" article. And 99% of people BTL seemed to agree with me. For a while now that crossed eyed sensation has become the rule rather than the exception.

Maybe the fear of disappearing altogether will instigate a reevaluation of deletion practices and the range of opinion/perceptive they will give space to ? Because it seems very narrow at the moment, and the losses might indicate that the demographic they appeal to has shrunk to the point where continuing in this vein is not sustainable.

People's lefty principles are evolving and the guardian has been left behind. The younger generation are moving towards equality and socialism and away from capitalistic leftism, which has shown itself to be inequal and beneficial to a smaller no. of people. The guardian needs to evolve with this change if it wants to retain readers.

I too like online papers and frequent a few but mainly the independent. Hate the ad pop ups on there tho.

How horrible when people are going to lose their jobs. My friend works there and is already struggling as they have been on a pay freeze for years.

There are things it does well, such as the investigative journalism into subjects that the right wing press bury.

However, it seems to be so conflicted in its attempts to avoid offence to particular groups that it often ends up taking a horribly misogynistic standpoint.

In an increasingly right-wing, hate-driven world it would be a shame to lose an opposing voice, but I don't feel able to support them directly via the subscription while they adopt a stance which writes off the rights and safety of women as a sex.

Their crossword section is excellent though.

Well Dawn Foster and Owen Jones were both educated at comprehensive schools.
Foster is one of the few reasons I go to the guardian nowadays. It became a sleb mag over ten years ago.

The problem is, Private Eye aside, what does one read? (other than everything!)
All British titles have gone massively downhill. Most of it is appalling tosh.

TBH I don't know who the Guardian is meant to serve?

I mean I am left leaning, highly educated. I live in Islington FFS ( for part of the time).

Yet I hate its view point and it certainly doesn't represent or speak to me and my life/ politics.

Yes, Inertia, I often find myself on the Guardian site from google, because it's investigated something I care about.

It's done substantial and sustained coverage of zero hours contracts, cuts to disability benefits and services, JobCentre staff being given targets to sanction people.

I don't think - at least in my own experience - that there the demographic 'centre or left of centre; actual or potential 'broadsheet [in print or online] reader' is 'dying out'.

But the Guardian is not just 'left' or 'centre left' is it? It's a particular niche which is largely irrelevant to all but a small subset.

As someone said earlier, it's very, very removed from the grassroots left wing movements, particularly the ones attracting young people.

Their readership is falling away. And it's highly unlikely to be falling away to the Mail, the Sun or the Telegraph.

The most likely explanation is that it's falling away to other news outlets, probably online, which actually manage to connect with a left wing readership and it's concerns, hopes etc.

Which probably don't involve the Astor Grill at Cliveden, Seaweed, Gin holidays in Northern Ireland, the best places to eat and drink in Normandy, homes with Tennis Courts or mansions in W Sussex (all recent stories) or people with designer tea sets especially to feed their chihuahua.

I mean, it amazes me that they've managed to get away with this shit for so long whilst claiming to be the voice of the left wing.

Marx and Engels would have told them to shove it up their arses in a nano-second.

OK, so if I wanted to recommend to my DS - centre-left (campaigns fior the Lib Dems in school mock elections but is to their left in terms of his actual viewpoints), passionate about politics - which online and print media should i recommend?

He would be looking for good quality, well-written, fact and data based, reviewed /edited/quality controlled in some way news and current affairs that discuss the things that matter to him currently (Brexit; education; conflict in the Middle East; the migrant crisis; exploitation of employees; the US elections) and introduce him to the things he is not yet aware of but should be? A decent sports section - another passion - would be a bonus.

"I often find myself on the Guardian site from google, because it's investigated something I care about."
But is that because Google knows you read the Guardian, rather than because the Guardian is leading the discussion.

(He is not looking to be 'connected to'. He is fully aware that anyone can write anything online, but is not yet old enough or experienced enough to always identify bias and the line between opinion and propaganda.)

No, Mimsy, not necessarily. I clear cookies or switch to private browsing if I want to make sure I don't get an echo chamber effect.

They need to ditch the lifestyle shite, which is beyond parody and stick to reporting of politics, society, education and science, much of which is actually very strong and has much more depth and coverage than other broadsheets. The proportion of opinion pieces also seems to have increased of late and seems to be unbalancing the ratio of reporting vs opinion.

pausingflatly well I remember the coverage of Cologne being shockingly bad - minimising, victim blaming shit. I've not bought it since. I would be very sorry to see it go under, but don't want to read it myself.