I will stop reading the Guardian now - anyone else like to join me?

[carlajean]

This is a spin off from the previous thread about Cologne. What has made me most angry (and many others, I believe) is the refusal of the Guardian and the BBC to deal with it adequately. I can't change the BBC, but I can, and have, stopped reading the Guardian. Perhaps if enough of is said they would do this it might damage their already poor selling figures, and make them listen to ordinary women.
Would anyone else like to join me in saying this?

I still read it out of interest. They have been bad for years, going on about tax avoidance but they used it when selling autotrader.

Strongly suspect that if a good left wing newpaper is wanted it would need 100 000s people to pay a weekly subscription rather than read it free online...

Meanwhile I am the idiot paying a subscription for the current Guardian!

On my to do list to cancel..

Strongly suspect that if a good left wing newpaper is wanted it would need 100 000s people to pay a weekly subscription rather than read it free online...

What? Paywalls have failed all over the place and the g could continue for decades even if no on bought it.

A parliamentary early day motion 953 has been proposed by Gregory Campbell of the DUP regarding minimisation of the events across Europe on NYE/NYD by the mainstream media.

You may wish to ask your MP to sign it.

How is that article rape-apologist? What was wrong with the Cologne articles? We're they not just suggesting that men aren't rapists because they're Arabic, Muslim, a refugee or whatever but because they are rapists.

I'm another who no longer buys. Cologne did it for me. I've noticed a further deterioration , sadly, under the new editor.

Dh is a dyed in the wool Guardian reader. Pays the subscription.

He is hacked off with the "victim Top Trumps" and seeing the editorial stance struggle with who is more worthy of their sympathy. Clearly at the moment women have gone down the charts and they should put up and shut up when their freedoms are threatened by a more "deserving" group.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/31/readers-editor-on-readers-comments-below-the-line

I read this.
They have closed down comments to articles referring to race, immigration and Islam. While saying they are against closing down debate . They suspiciously don't mention articles referring to women's rights where comment is often closed or LGBT where comments are often closed.

You'd think if certain topics, e.g. immigration, are attracting a lot of comments, the reasons for that need to be analyzed, not ignored.

Anyway the comments are usually quite shit but not as shit as the articles.

Fucking PC gawn mad!

I don't think it's 'PC gawn mad' its showing they are willing to stand by there political view point.

When that view point translates into Guardian picks being so out of kilter with the highest rated comments from seasoned and generally respected commentators whilst also ignoring data, then the argument of pressure on moderation is mute, especially considering they are just as guilty of publishing rage baiting/click bait articles and not checking sources just the same as any other publication.

Comments on news articles are generally a cesspit anyway, but when the majority of the reasoned responses are calling you out then its time to either look inwards or stick your fingers in your ears.

The guardian, being the guardian has decided to do the latter and invoke identity politics, any dissenting voices are the other, be that daily mail/red top reading (the mirror doesn't count for obvious reasons because they aren't as thick as the sun readers because of the team they support) or just trolls.

The culmination of not only accusing the initial 'Trojan horse' scenario in schools but also Rotherham/Oxford/Brimingham etc as being racist and to top it off with the initial reports and editorial line re the NYE attacks they are more prepared to die by their sword than admit the narrative has changed, that's all admirable and if they want to be as credible as huff po then so be it.

I will still read the guardian, I am using ad blocker when I visit now, but they do seem to be jumping the shark a little, trying to preach to the Corbyn supporters with the odd attack piece but also showing a lot of contempt for the adveredge left leaning person for nothing more than appearing or agreeing with some centre right ideologies (ignoring there centre right stance on btl and house prices).

It's become the embodiment of the champaign socialist slur used against it

race, immigration and Islam in particular – attract an unacceptable level of toxic commentary, believes Mary Hamilton, our executive editor, audience. “The overwhelming majority of these comments tend towards racism, abuse of vulnerable subjects, author abuse and trolling, and the resulting conversations below the line bring very little value but cause consternation and concern among both our readers and our journalists,” she said last week. As a result, it had been decided that comments would not be opened on pieces on those three topics unless the moderators knew they had the capacity to support the conversation and that they believed a positive debate was possible

No wonder they didn't want to report on Cologne. Their poor brains must have short-circuited.

They must have been hauling in every single moderator to protect the 'vulnerable' who might melt or implode at the sight of words they are not obliged to read in a free country where robust debate was once encouraged.

Still, at least they admitted they couldn't handle difficult grown up subjects, even if they are dressing it up as infantilising the 'vulnerable.'

so - comment on Guardian pieces becomes an echo chamber. Such a shame. I remember when it was a decent paper.

I'm done. Last week there was a photo gallery which dressed people from Merthyr Tydfil in high-end fashion clothing presumably so its readership could gawp at the hilarious juxtaposition - look at the poor people in fancy clothes! Then there was an article 'the NHS is only human so we must forgive it when it errs' I'm profoundly grateful for the NHS but I don't think it's an actual person.

Im starting to find the prolly tounbee stuff a bit poverty porn as well.

Thanks SonyaAtTheSamovar for that info, I've emailed my MP.

Trying to pteach to Corbyn supporters with the odd attack peice Longtimelurker

Pahaaa!
There's a daily attack peice on Corbyn. It's geting predictably repetitive.

Their latest article on the London mayoral race was a corker. Basically if Sadiq Khan wins it'll be a stab in the back for Corbyn and will prove his leadership disability, (somehow), and if SK loses it will be because Corbyn dragged him down.

There is a catch-22 Corbyn-loses-whatever-the-outcome article every day.

They are Blairite (Tory lite) and will always be thus.

(*preach not pteach)

Obviously most of us on this thread will not be aware of their daily attack on Corbyn because we have boycotted the paper

:-)

I admit I still read it, I just take an even more skeptical view than I did before, I never rely on them for stats (Owen Jones got debunked massively for his usual attack piece against the government a couple of weeks ago, and the least said about Toynbee the better)

I would like to say this is peak guardian, but as ever they keep lowering the bar and another peak will be along soon.

I think you people are missing out by not reading articles like the one below. Articles like this are also fantastic to show to teens etc to demonstrate to them how pathetic and entrenched a paper like the Guardian is and how they are incapable of reporting anything truthfully or in an unbiased way. Their circulation figures are so poor they will cease to exist soon so make the most of it whilst you still can.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/feb/03/this-is-a-radical-change-of-our-values-readers-on-denmarks-new-asylum-laws

whu???

I don't know if you linked to the wrong article, because that one's about some Danes not liking the way their govt is behaving

Did I miss something?